Tokyo 2020 Olympic Referees & Discussion [R]

Discussion in 'Referee' started by MassachusettsRef, Apr 22, 2021.

  1. Scrabbleship

    Scrabbleship Member

    May 24, 2012
    I see hip-to-hip contact between the two. What foul is there by Canada though?
     
  2. kolabear

    kolabear Member+

    Nov 10, 2006
    los angeles
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    Soccer editor Michael Goodman tweeted this (although he does agree it probably doesn't warrant a VAR reversal... and maybe he'd think differently once he sees the attacker knocking Davidson off-balance and knocking into Davidson's leg to boot)

     
  3. MassachusettsRef

    MassachusettsRef Moderator
    Staff Member

    Apr 30, 2001
    Washington, DC
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    That’s a bit simplistic, no? Take a look at the game-tying penalty in the Vancouver match the other night. Does the same apply? There is a scale of seriousness here.

    And your statement supports my argument that it’s a defensible penalty call in real-time. In the old days, if this was given, we’d rightly be debating it. But giving this as clear and obvious when not awarded initially? That’s the point I can’t get to. It’s why I would vigorously object to @Englishref ’s application of “stonewall.” Yes, we’ve seen them given. But we’ve also seen these not given quite a bit (including in this match). I just don’t see this as rising the level of VAR intervention, once not given. Sort of like Mateu Lahoz’s with Sterling in the group stage.
     
    blissett, sitruc and kolabear repped this.
  4. NCChiFan

    NCChiFan Member

    NC Courage
    United States
    Feb 19, 2021
    Also, if you call a foul in the box, where was the yellow card?
     
  5. MassachusettsRef

    MassachusettsRef Moderator
    Staff Member

    Apr 30, 2001
    Washington, DC
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    Huh?
     
    JasonMa and USSF REF repped this.
  6. Pittsburgh Ref

    Pittsburgh Ref Member+

    Oct 7, 2014
    da 'Burgh
    You might be thinking of the YC now given for otherwise DOGSO PKs where the offense is in the realm of playing for the ball.
     
  7. allan_park

    allan_park Member

    May 15, 2000
    A caution is not required, and would be totally inappropriate here.
     
  8. code1390

    code1390 Moderator
    Staff Member

    Nov 25, 2007
    Club:
    Tottenham Hotspur FC
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    It wasn't DOGSO?
     
  9. code1390

    code1390 Moderator
    Staff Member

    Nov 25, 2007
    Club:
    Tottenham Hotspur FC
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    This was the big moment in the other semifinal.

    https://streamable.com/xfoeac

    I guess the decision is the impeding/holding from the two players who started out in an OSP.
     
    sitruc repped this.
  10. MetroFever

    MetroFever Member+

    Jun 3, 2001
    Club:
    New York Red Bulls
    Nat'l Team:
    Croatia
    He's right. Whenever a defender makes a makes a play for the ball and a forward jumps in from the blind side and gets kicked, the call seems to overwhelmingly go against the defender.
     
    Lloyd Heilbrunn and kolabear repped this.
  11. allan_park

    allan_park Member

    May 15, 2000
    I will go with (I think) MassRef and Mikael on this - regardless of whether you think this in an infringement or not (by either player), this is nowhere near a "clear and obvious error" and the VAR should have spent no more than a nano second on it to make that determination.

    I will happily listen to anyone making a case for an infringement here - there are legitimate arguments on both sides of this particular fence - but that almost by definition means that VAR should not get involved.

    We are not supposed to be micro-analyzing every challenge; we are supposed to be correcting glaring errors. The non-award of a PK here did not fall into that category.
     
  12. MassachusettsRef

    MassachusettsRef Moderator
    Staff Member

    Apr 30, 2001
    Washington, DC
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    Well that's just fascinating.

    I think many of us are aware of the instruction from a few years ago where if players deliberately took up position in an OSP on an attacking free kick for tactical purposes (obstruct the goalkeeper's vision, set picks, simply cause chaos by their presence, etc.) we were to whistle immediately once the kick was taken if it was a shot on goal or if the drop zone would be near the player(s) in question. It was a bit of a weird instruction, but it was accompanied by a direct warning to the player(s) concerned, so whatever. They had every chance to reposition themselves in an onside position before the restart.

    I watch this, and I think that's what is going on here. Borjas whistles immediately when the ball is put in play. And you rightly pick out, I believe, what the perceived offence is.

    The problem is the ball isn't going anywhere near the attackers in question. Another problem, possibily, is that it's hard to tell if you can say the attackers deliberately put themselves in an OSP. And a third obvious problem, if it didn't happen, would be the lack of a warning. I'm on a roll, so a fourth problem would be not holding the whistle until the ball was in the net and allowing VAR to help sort this out if necessary (though, the "wait for VAR" edict would be in direct contradiction to the "whistle immediately" one, so that's hard). Also, she seemed to call this a DFK instead of an IFK, which I don't think is inherently wrong, but I have to think about it a bit.

    In the end, she took away what should be a perfectly valid goal for anyone that plays or follows the sport, because any offence--if it occurred--is trifling here. But if the instruction I talk about above is still active for a FIFA tournament and she rightly warned the players they were in an OSP prior to the kick, maybe she did it all correctly and it's not her problem that the instruction too rigidly enforces the Law there. As is probably clear, I have my doubts.
     
  13. jarbitro

    jarbitro Member

    Mar 13, 2003
    N'Djamena, Tchad
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    This is alllllmsot right, except that the attacker initiated contact with the defender. The attacker hit the defender's leg first. That's the problem. I understand what kind of call you are thinking of, and this is close to being that kind of call. The only thing I can think of is that the VAR missed that first contact.
    However, It was lazy defending...that's true, and so I'm not going to call this a massive injustice or anything. But it also was a bad call.
     
    duality72, blissett, jayhonk and 3 others repped this.
  14. shawn12011

    shawn12011 Member+

    Jun 15, 2001
    Reisterstown, MD
    Club:
    DC United
    Nat'l Team:
    United States

    Wow, please never call one of my games.
     
    kolabear repped this.
  15. socal lurker

    socal lurker Member+

    May 30, 2009
    I only watched a recorded version this morning, so I'm late to the party. Like a couple of others have said, I don't see this as a careless foul--the kicking was caused by the contact from behind by the attacker. That said, I wouldn't have argued for VAR intervention had it been called on the field. But I don't see how to get to clear and obvious error on that play and think VAR should have stayed out of it. (I guess what we don't know is what the R said to the VAR as to why she didn't have a foul. That might have played in to the decision.) This intervention doesn't seem to me to rise to the level of what has been required for VAR to send down in international competitions.

    I don't think this would have been controversial if not called--no one would remember the play by the end of the game. But now it is the centerpiece.
     
  16. code1390

    code1390 Moderator
    Staff Member

    Nov 25, 2007
    Club:
    Tottenham Hotspur FC
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    The Olympics seems to have had a much lower standard for VAR intervention though.

    Still agree this was not a CaOE.
     
    kolabear repped this.
  17. socal lurker

    socal lurker Member+

    May 30, 2009
    I wonder if part of this can be a maturity of VAR thing? In many ways, it must feel strange to be VAR on a game and not send anything down.

    My ancient copy of Fair or Foul has a chapter titled "Don't Just Do Something . . . Stand There!" That always resonated with me--as referees we have to understand that the great call can be the no call.
     
    duality72 and kolabear repped this.
  18. code1390

    code1390 Moderator
    Staff Member

    Nov 25, 2007
    Club:
    Tottenham Hotspur FC
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    Maybe that's the key difference between the elite VMOs and the next tier. The WC/Euro guys can look at something like this and say "check complete" but the second tier guy says "looks like a PK". It probably explains VAR in leagues a lot. Maybe Attwell doesn't send this down in the PL but the 8th best VMO does.
     
    jarbitro repped this.
  19. balu

    balu Member+

    Oct 18, 2013
    Back to assignments, I wouldn’t bet against Yamashita for the Gold medal match and Alves Batista for the Bronze medal match now.
     
    blissett repped this.
  20. MassachusettsRef

    MassachusettsRef Moderator
    Staff Member

    Apr 30, 2001
    Washington, DC
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    There's so much that could be going on here.

    Raczkowski isn't exactly a slouch when it comes to VAR experience, though I would agree fully he's not top tier either. And let's not forget that Monzul has to agree with the recommendation. So is this just his (liberal) standard and she agrees because she's less experienced and reluctant to reject his recommendation? Is this the expectation at the Olympics or, specifically, the women's tournament? Did Raczkowski go through all the processes and look at every angle? Did Monzul tell him she saw something that was totally different than what actually happened, almost forcing his hand?

    Without the audio, there's just no way of knowing exactly how this went down. But to the larger point, yeah if people think FIFA is going to greatly expand the pool of VARs for Qatar, I think we're seeing in real-time why that isn't going to happen. We are going to be over five years into VAR come late 2022. And I think you have a couple handfuls of VARs that FIFA can trust from UEFA, CONMEBOL, North America and Australia (though I actually don't know who the Aussie VAR candidate is, if there is one, because we haven't seen one at a FIFA event yet as a main VAR, which now that I think about it strikes me as quite odd). Even in UEFA, the trust level doesn't go too far past the first half dozen or so guys (though, admittedly, some trusted VARs like Makkelie have graduated or are graduating to primarily referee duties, so there is turnover there).
     
    kolabear, lil_one and socal lurker repped this.
  21. mathguy ref

    mathguy ref Member

    Nov 15, 2016
    TX
    Club:
    Manchester United FC
    Something missed in all this was how the players reacted. The US players just lined up at the corner of the D to defend the penalty. There was no protest. No mass dissent. Can you imagine the level of shithousery in a men’s match at this level? Imagine this call being made in a match between Colombia and Brazil. The on field reaction would have been epic.
     
  22. Casper

    Casper Member+

    Mar 30, 2001
    New York
    I think approximately zero Canadian fans would be complaining about this as "that missed penalty call in the 72 minute" if it had stayed as a no-call. I cannot imagine calling a penalty on a defender when the attacker is coming from behind like that and makes contact, but I especially can't imagine calling it a clear and obvious error. Really, really bad.

    But this US team don't really deserve a gold medal anyway. However, neither do Canada.
     
    kolabear, duality72 and blissett repped this.
  23. law10

    law10 Member+

    Dec 26, 2007
    Anyone familiar with who is in the booth and what information is passed down to the ref on the field? Couldn't help wondering if it was impacted by 2012.
     
  24. allan_park

    allan_park Member

    May 15, 2000
    Sorry, but that is just so far off the mark.

    As we have covered many times on this Board, any Referee who aspires to get to the top tournaments, and do the top games, would never destroy their chances by making a decision that is based on some injustice, real or otherwise, from another game, far less another decade.

    To be brutally honest, top-level Referees are so wrapped up in their own careers, they have no interest in, and often no recollection of, things that have happened in the past. It is only about doing the best job they can in the game that is in front of them. That is what will advance their career, not some history that had nothing to do with them.
     
    refinDC, jdmahoney, JasonMa and 4 others repped this.
  25. law10

    law10 Member+

    Dec 26, 2007
    Oh I'm not talking about the referee, I'm talking about the decision being handed down to them. Sorry thought I was clear on that.
     

Share This Page