UEFA Competitions 2023-2024 Referee Discussions [Rs]

Surprised at this reaction. For two reasons.

First, I don't really see the comparison as useful. In this case, an arm is almost fully extended and it's into the back of the defender who is clearly affected by it. There's not a contested challenge with arms involved. The extended push is the "challenge." Unless you (or anyone else) thinks the force is so negligible that the contact is trifling, this is an obvious, obvious foul; he's deliberately pushing him to ensure that there is no contest for the ball. And even if you think it's trifling, you essentially have to tell the world that the defender is simulating rather than trying to stop an OGSO... which, isn't crazy, but it's also a very, very challenging sell. No goal seems like the expected call in 99.9% of cases here. With Newcastle-Arsenal, there's a challenge at the back post with two bodies in close proximity. They are both leaping for a header. The arms of the defender are up and they are on the attacker but there's always a question in those cases of how much is enough for a foul. Is it normal contact or a push? If the bodies were inversed and the attacker was goalside, would this really be a penalty? Reasonable people can disagree. And if a foul was called, then sure, it's a foul. But it seems like we are trying to compare a 95/5 or better case with a 55/45 case.

And that leads me to my second reason for surprise at your reaction. Plays like this, with potential APP fouls on aerial challenges, happen dozens of times every weekend globally in competitions with VAR. And the referees make judgment calls. We only want VAR intervention for the obvious misses. So unless you're of the opinion that there was an obvious missed foul in England but this was, somehow, obviously not a foul (or much less of a foul), I don't see a big deal here.

 

I do think clips 3 and 4 (and maybe even 5) are quite interesting and worthy of some discussion.

On clip 3... what is a natural movement there? I guess if you're going to head the ball like that, your arm has to be somewhere. At the same time, the ball doesn't deflect off his body. He just misses the header. And heading there instead of kicking is an obvious tactical choice. Should he face consequences when the ball hits his arm and he clearly benefits? Feels like a case where he took a risk and penalty is a just result. But I know the arguments the other way about "natural position as a consequence..." Seems like a really good example to illustrate you'll never be able to legislate handball law fully. Also, no way this goes uncalled at midfield or if an attacker did it; which, to me, kind of gives away what football expects the call to be.

On clip 4... that's offside. If offside position is confirmed (and I think the length of the check implies it was) then it's offside. I think this is an English VAR screwing up again.

Clip 5 is only interesting to the theoretical debate of whether or not that gets given in a huge EPL match. It's great Taylor goes red here. Even better he does it without VAR. But if that's Man City versus Chelsea and the guy's name is Sterling... what's he doing? I'm not convinced evidence shows the same conclusion is reached.

 

I was also surprised this decision stood.

Yes, Kane is playing for the penalty. No doubt about that. But the Maltese keeper fell for the bait. He took up every bit of space where Kane could plausibly put his leg as part of a natural running movement to pursue the ball. Kane would have to take extraordinary measures to avoid the challenge--to the extent that he might have to sacrifice successful pursuit of the ball. This wasn't a case where Kane unnaturally stuck his leg into the goalkeeper or dragged it from a previous stride to ensure contact.

I get what the referee felt he saw. And, based on instinct and appearance from his angle, I don't necessarily fault him. But that's a penalty in my book.

 

Kavanagh VAR:

https://dubz.live/c/bde7f9

There is zero chance in the world that this would be given in the EPL. Zero. Can there be negative zero?

And if this was a UEFA match of real consequence, I think it might be close to zero. Imagine this given in a EURO or UCL semi? But Gibraltar in an away match? No problem.

I will say that the “ankle buckled” seems to be the inverse of “glancing” in UEFA now.

 

Buckled ankle is everything now:

https://streamin.me/v/6bcd13ce

Not that it shouldn’t be, in a way (notwithstanding some extraordinary circumstances). I’m more worried that the absence of the buckled ankles is now an excuse to not sanction SFP.

 

Only the last 15 years or so of the sport.

Are red cards given for SFP? Yes. Are they given with anywhere near the same frequency they were a few WC cycles ago? Absolutely not. But, suddenly, they are being given religiously--at least inside UEFA--when the ankle buckles.

I'm loath to even reply to you on silliness like this. But I will use this observation to point out that the more important mechanic related issue here is the whistle stuck firmly in her mouth. Way too many referees have acquired this bad habit during the carding procedure.

 

Thanks to @Mikael_Referee for the slow-motion here:
https://www.streambug.io/cv/94d985

Seems like it's a pretty straightforward foul. I get the desire to not want to make a call in real-time. In a lot of ways, it's like the Kane simulation card from last matchday. Yes, the attacker is absolutely looking for the penalty. But the defender has taken a risk and obliged. Here, you can add in a layer of embellishing or overselling the contact. That said, the contact is still there.

It's peculiar, isn't it? In the old days, I do think most refs--good ones, at least--would be forced into a decision. It's either a simulation or it's a penalty. Call it and deal with the consequences. Now that we have VAR, referees A) don't want to be embarrasingly wrong on such a big call and B) argue, to themselves and the players on the field, that VAR will intervene if it's really a penalty. But then VAR doesn't intervene because... well, in those olden days, plays like this didn't get given as penalties all the time. It's circular and you end up with the no-call as the default.

As an aside, imagine if this had gone the other way and Italy failed to qualify directly on this play in this moment of the final matchday.