Monday, 25 June 2018

2018 FIFA World Cup Match 35: Iran - Portugal (discussion)

Let's discuss here the performance of Enrique Cáceres in Iran - Portugal.  Good luck to the officiating team!
Match #35
Saransk, 25 June 2018 20:00
Iran - Portugal
Referee: Enrique Cáceres (PAR)
Assistant Referee 1: Eduardo Cardozo (PAR)
Assistant Referee 2: Juan Zorrilla (PAR)
Fourth Official: Mehdi Abid Charef (ALG)
Fifth Official: Anouar Hmila (TUN)
VAR: Massimiliano Irrati (ITA)
AVAR1: Gery Vargas (BOL)
AVAR 2: Hernan Maidana (ARG)
AVAR 3: Paolo Valeri (ITA)

197 comments:

  1. Very well deserved appointement for him... if he does well tonight, he'll be a strong candidate working a quarterfinal match. All the best for Enrique!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. disaster...this guy should not be in this World Cup

      Delete
    2. Enrique Cáceres should not be a referee. Never had control of the match. Made inconsistent calls. Hand balls have to show intent and the player was simply balancing himself in air. There was no attempt to bend his arm towards the ball to deflect it a different direction. Let the players decide the game not the ref. Enrique Cáceres should be removed and never allowed to ref again.

      Delete
    3. "Hand balls have to show intent".

      Wrong as can be.

      Delete
  2. Nothing much to report from this match... All going well!

    ReplyDelete
  3. IMO a bit inconsequent foul line of Cácares

    ReplyDelete
  4. Was that punishable handling in the wall? Caceres was not well positioned, he didn't see it and Irrati decided not to call him to review.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Absolutely not punishable for my taste!

      Delete
  5. Never a handball. Arm tucked in to his side, head turned away

    ReplyDelete
  6. But I like Caceres... look at his eyes. Through them he gets the authority he needs... his line so far a bit leniant but not bad I think. He tries to let it roll if possible. South american interpretation of modern FIFA line. For me ok so far.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Replies
    1. I thought the Iranian player slipped himself... Could've done without the YC there!

      Delete
  8. Clear 1st YC R.Guerreiro. 34min.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Clear penalty. How can he not see that without VAR?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Don't overreact! He didn't have a good angle!

      Delete
    2. It's not overeacting. Easy foul. Anglewise okay might not see it it's inside but he should have whisted it. Easy call.

      Delete
    3. Exactly. Bad positioning.

      Delete
    4. Easy call if you are well positioned!

      Delete
    5. I don't agree. It's not straightforward in my eyes. Let's agree to disagree.

      Delete
  10. VAR intervention... OFR and penalty assigned!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Blatant dissent right after that - YC had to be issued by Caceres.

      Delete
    2. This comment has been removed by the author.

      Delete
  11. VARreview possible PK after foul ag Chr.Ronaldo plus YC ag IRN for arguing agressively. Correct PK. And Ronaldo fails...

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. For me after first sight it looked like Ronaldo was looking too much for it. Only with the review I saw it.
      Immediately IRN player tries it in the other box. Classical diver. For me YC for simulation. Caceres just let them play on. He must be aware of not loskng control now. Iranians aggressive...

      Delete
  12. VAR and penalty for Ronaldo! Was that challenge 100% PK? God only knows when VAR is calling the ref...
    Many protests now...

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. 100% PK yes no doubt. Should have been called without VAR too. And then bad protests by the players.

      Delete
    2. Never 100%. It is absolutely fair not to be called real time... Enough doubts there!

      Delete
    3. Was not much but the contact is enough to take him out of step. For me 100% penalty.

      Delete
    4. On replays, yes, definite penalty!

      Delete
  13. Wow the Iranian are angry now... another yellow card+Coach had to go. Crucial minutes for Caceres!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Sorry my mistake, the Iranian Coach is still there, but the Swiss commentator mentioned something that he had to go

      Delete
    2. He was frustrated with the penalty award, threw his jacket, walked down the tunnel and again returned when the player missed it :D

      Delete
  14. Caceres in trouble now. Iranian players are really angry now.

    ReplyDelete
  15. This match is getting very challenging now... Cáceres is being put under immense pressure by the Iranian players!

    ReplyDelete
  16. Cáceres must be careful now. It's about to escalate. Two YCs for dissent. Soft PK for me.

    ReplyDelete
  17. Replies
    1. This could not be nothing but a penalty.
      It’s not possibile to have different opinions!

      Football has black, white and grey areas.
      This is not grey, this is black, that is to say clearly a foul!

      Delete
    2. The penalty is clear and my origin is Iran.

      Delete
  18. Now both sides escalating. Dangerous development.

    ReplyDelete
  19. Mehdi Abid Charef also having a busy time managing the benches!

    ReplyDelete
  20. I would like to see this penalty by Caceres, for some people very clear and missed by referee, for other people too soft...

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. In comparison with some other incidents that were not spotted by VAR, especially Irrati, it was a rather soft one.

      Delete
    2. https://www.clippituser.tv/c/nbqmqe

      There you go

      Delete
    3. What incidents?
      Please, make a list...

      Delete
    4. Ok, from this angle it seems like a clear penalty. You‘re right.

      Delete
  21. Very firm Cáceres... Excellent management of heated proceedings!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I agree! Social media is not very happy with him but what do they know... this match was very difficult but he dealt with it well in his typical, firm manner. Excellent job IMO

      Delete
  22. Quaresma gets nailed. No call
    Quaresma gets up and seeks his own justice.
    Moral of the story. Call the first foul and prevent further drama.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Jonas Eriksson said on Swedish TV that the Iranian player should be sent off for violent attack as there is risk of injuring the opponent. He also added that the revenge tackle from the Portuguese player could also be RC, but a YC is also supportable.

      Delete
  23. Revanchefoul Quaresma - ugly. Dark Yellow. Immediate YC.

    ReplyDelete
  24. Cáceres is a brave ref and he can do OFR and change the error, not like some other German ref.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The 2nd part of the statement should be avoided since we exactly don't know what happened there!

      Delete
    2. I agree, just don't like when it's not fare. Let's keep at the brave referee point :)

      Delete
  25. Iranian coach very clearly warned by Cáceres now... Probably he was creating a lot of problems for Charef!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Indeed... Repeatedly making the VAR TV signal and asking to review!

      Delete
  26. Unfair and unsporting behaviour by the Iranian coach - he could have been sent to the stands. Just a warning.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The management was good anyway to give a clear final warning!

      Delete
    2. Agreed, in case of another unsporting behaviour he must be sent to the stands.

      Delete
  27. Does anyone have a video of the Foul by Quaresma? Not sure if YC was correct or RC was justified for SFP

    ReplyDelete
  28. Replies
    1. Cáceres is taking a long time watching the replays!

      Delete
    2. Although I don't like Ronaldo, YC is enough.

      Delete
    3. Yellow card given... Similar situation to the Diedhiou YC in Serbia v Costa Rica!

      Delete
    4. For me correct to give a yellow card, nothing more

      Delete
    5. Good decision to recommend an OFR. Nice to see that Caceres took the needed time - I think it wasn‘t easy to decide for him. YC is supportable.

      Delete
    6. Cáceres made a very good impression today overall, I think!

      Delete
    7. Guys, I really think many of you just don't understand what the protocols for VAR are.

      If Irrati is recommending an OFR, he is saying to Caceres "I believe this is clearly a red card for VC."

      He's not saying "please come look at this because it could be yellow and it could be red, so why don't you decide?"

      If you think a yellow SUPPORTABLE, then it is not a good decision to send down the OFR. Period. It means it was in the grey area and was not a clear red card.

      OFRs are not about re-refereeing the game. They are about giving the referee an opportunity to correct a clear error or make a clear call that he could not see on his own. OFRs should go very fast and are not about "taking the time needed"--that's not how this is supposed to work.

      Either Irrati was wrong to send down the Ronaldo elbow because it was not a clear red OR Caceres was wrong to only give a yellow. There is no possible way that they both were right.

      Delete
    8. Final call rests with the referee. It's a matter of perception. For Irrati it's a RC whereas for Cáceres it's not!

      Delete
    9. This is so frustrating to read.

      Don't you understand how that is unacceptable? The whole point of VR and VARs is to correct CLEARLY WRONG decisions only.

      It is not okay for the two of them to have different opinions here.

      If you think either decision is supportable, then it was wrong for Irrati to send it down in the first place.

      If you think it was only ever a yellow, again, Irrati is wrong.

      If you think it's a clear red, then Caceres is wrong.

      It sounds like you think both opinions are acceptable. And the point is that that means there should be no VAR intervention. Irrati is not just supposed to give his own subjective judgment, he needs to determine if a red card is the only supportable call. He said it was. But Caceres disagreed. So one of them made an unacceptable decision.

      Delete
    10. Usaref, On press conference before the tournament Collina and Bussaca told that referees will take as many time as they need to make correct decision. Wheb it comes to when VAR should step in you are partialy right. It is true when referee wrongly interpreted some situation, but VAR (as i understood) can also recommend OFR for situations that are not clear but referee on the pitch completely missed the incident and didnt at all saw that something happened.

      Delete
    11. Irrati should not have called for a review there. I think even a yellow is harsh. It's certainly not a clear and obvious red!

      Delete
    12. A review (YC or RC) was brilliant here. It slowed down a heated game. It is better than completely ignoring the incident. It allows everyone some breathing time and allows the referee to decide on something he never saw. Most YC's don't need this. One that is close to red (this was orange for me when I first saw it) benefits the game.

      This is what soccer wants -- the right decision to be made by the referee. Had a few other controversial situations gone this way, they would have been far more accepted.

      Delete
  29. The reddest of red cards, and no balls. Setting such a pathetic example for millions of refs worldwide.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Totally wrong.

      Arm to the face could also bring to no cards!
      This could be defined reckless, no more!

      Delete
    2. Never a red card in a million years

      Delete
    3. RC because the ball was nowhere near the Iranian player

      Delete
    4. But Mark, it wasn't deliberate at all. The contact with the face seems clearly accidental to me. Yellow at MOST.

      Delete
    5. Deliberate has nothing to do with this decision.

      Delete
    6. From Law 12:

      "In addition, a player who, when not challenging for the ball, DELIBERATELY strikes an opponent or any other person on the head or face with the hand or arm, is guilty of violent conduct unless the force used was negligible."

      My argument is that, because it wasn't deliberate, this clause (which I'm assuming is what Mark and Questionmark were referencing implicitly) doesn't apply.

      Delete
  30. I also think that YC was appropriate since the contact was negligible

    ReplyDelete
  31. The Hungarian commentator said that it is not possible that give a YC after the ref reviewd VAR possible red card. What is the rules ?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. It is definitely possibile.

      Delete
    2. He‘s wrong. After an OFR a YC can be given, too.

      Delete
    3. He can disagree with the VAR and decide for yellow or nothing.

      Delete
    4. The referee can watch the scene only if there‘s a possibke RC but afterwards he can do what he thinks is right

      Delete
  32. Arm to the face. RC for VC possible. YC the "safe" choice.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Arm to the face doesn’t mean red card.

      It could be just foul, foul plus yellow card and foul plus red card.

      Delete
    2. How is it “safe”? If I have a player on the pitch who elbows another one in the face, even if he only lightly touches him, far away from the ball and with full intent, how is it not a RC?

      Delete
    3. No question of RC there!

      Delete
    4. Ronaldo missed him. Remember Cup of Confederations final (clear elbow in face with intensity--> YC. That's not same situation but then was stronger than this).This is for discussion.

      Delete
    5. As Whistle2 said, remember Mažić's YC in Confed cup final.
      YC IMO

      Delete
  33. Cáceres is the first referee with two OFR in a single game at this WC, right?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I don't think so, but I can't recall exactly which others had it. Might be the first with 3 though!

      Delete
  34. Caseres missed both the Robaldo incident and the penalty one. He is not making a good impression. Players clearly don't respect him.

    ReplyDelete
  35. Another OFR - possible handball!

    ReplyDelete
  36. 3rd OFR... A possible penalty for handball

    ReplyDelete
  37. Third VAR application in one game and very questionable ones

    ReplyDelete
  38. One has to define if there is the touch.
    If it is, that arm has to be punished IMO.

    ReplyDelete
  39. This is by some distance the most challenging game of the tournament from every possible aspect... My prediction for Pitana here did make sense!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I think Caceres was a good choice. This game to me was very comparable to the Uruguay - Mexico Copa America game in 2016. Very high emotions, hot temperature, lots of incidents, very challenging for the referee. Caceres was the best man for the job and he showed it!

      Delete
  40. For me too much controversies. I wouldn't appoint Caceres in Ko-stage. There should be other options.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Better than Roldan for sure! Missed situations are there but with VAR it's a very positive impression!

      Delete
    2. I also liked his appearance until this, sorry, VAR chaos started. Maybe he hasn't much experience with VAR in the past. He could have managed that in a calmer and more confident way IMO. Maybe he'll get R16, QF is too much IMO.
      I don't want to say anything about Roldan, I think we have the same opinion about his performance ;)

      Delete
    3. Half of the match Caceres was in front of TV, correcting his mistakes :-) And I don't think he was always right after VAR.

      Delete
    4. He had 3 OFRs and I think it was managed really well with minimum fuss and maximum authority!

      Delete
  41. So much for the VAR "not re-refereeing the match". The Iran player heads the ball onto the Portugal player's arm which is outstretched for balance, no other Iran player nearby - how on earth did both the VAR and referee think it was a penalty?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Arm was in unnatural position!

      Delete
    2. Why would it matter if no other Iranian player was nearby? You base a handling decision on that?

      Delete
  42. And 1:1. Same moment ESP 2:2. Spain first place...and nearly 2:1 Iran. Wow. What a drama.

    ReplyDelete
  43. 3 OFR in one match. Unbelievable. And minimum the last PK a softone. VERY soft.
    Sat it again now. Not at all a PK for me!!! But FIFA must change the interpretation of handball towards a proved intention to play the ball/ hand goes to the ball.
    The term "unnatural position of hands" opens the door to completely different interpretations. It does not work at all. Many referees argue same way but Fifa ...

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. There is nothing in the laws of the game that says ”natural/unnatural position”

      Delete
    2. In the interpretations it does

      Delete
    3. @Victor Referees are instructed to consider arm in an unnatural position!

      Delete
    4. I know how it works in practically but it’s not written under law.

      Delete
    5. his arm was not in an unnatural position when leaping or landing from a leap. that is my issue. what is natural is defined differently depending upon the action that one is taking. the wording is a bit problematic.

      Delete
  44. Penalty decision
    https://www.clippituser.tv/c/bnyaep

    Ronaldo elbow
    https://www.clippituser.tv/c/nbqmkl

    ReplyDelete
  45. I'm sorry, but you can't intervene in situations like this one. Not a punishable handball and most importantly no CLEAR and OBVIOUS error. I have the feeling that Irrati got caught up by the tension and the hot atmosphere at the end of the game - something that should not be the case. I'm really curious how FIFA will assess this incident. We will see whether Irrati gets a match in the next days. Surely Cáceres won't be appointed again - too much discussion in media and a more than debatable call at the end.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. That might open up a KO stage appointment chance for Cunha!

      Delete
    2. That's my issue with the last OFR. If it takes that long to determine whether there is a touch or not and the slightest of touches at that. It is not imo an obvious error so shouldn't be reviewed.

      Delete
  46. Probably the most difficult match so far.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Indeed it was... From all aspects!

      Delete
    2. I think we shouldn't forget we had a match between Argentina and Croatia...just there without VAR interventions...(even though it would have been really useful)

      Delete
    3. That match was spoilt by Irmatov being really weak and Irmatov made it difficult for himself!

      Delete
  47. I see a lot of times Iranian players running after the ref with unbelievably harsch gestures. Letting this ruined the refs authority. Clearly no player on the pitch was respecting the ref. Showing all the cards in the same irritating manner made players become crazy.
    Would any of this dissent happen if Pitana, Kuipers, Cakir etc were on the pitch ? I am sure the answer is no.
    So aside from PK and other questionable decisions, Caceres didnt impress me at all from man management and match control point of view, i dont expect another appointment for him in the later stages.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Everyone had problem with Iranian players behaviour. For sure, Cakir, Pitana and Kuipers have bigger authority.

      Delete
    2. Iran players didn't even accept Cakir fully!

      Delete
    3. I disagree, I thought that after he showed a few yellows for dissent, the arm gestures and whining were dramatically decreased.

      Delete
  48. Caceres is for me very good referee, but when you have to do 3 OFRs to overturn your decision you cant be appointed in KO stage

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. On two of the VAR situations he didn’t really take a decision before VAR. On the Ronaldo situation it seemed like he thought no penalty.

      Delete
  49. Every decision was discussed permanently. Absolutely any! It does not surprise me that one loses sometime. Was already more than a derby match for the referee. The criminal fins at the end was none. Correct Ronaldo not to put off.

    ReplyDelete
  50. @Chefren, terrible evening for referees? Irmatov and Caceres are out?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Irmatov WC should be over, that's my honest opinion. He has failed many times in protecting players. Disciplinary control in both games has been more than weak and for this reason he has experienced the worst troubles in terms of control.

      Caceres: I didn't watch his game this evening, I'm now checking the incidents. So, let's wait before stating something.

      Delete
  51. I say something about the incidents, waiting for a video of the missing one (for me).
    Cristiano Ronaldo possible sending off: good thing that it was subject of review, Irrati did a correct choice there. However, I think no more than YC. Reckless for sure, but not a violent conduct.
    Penalty to Iran for handball: the decision can be supported even though quite harsh. There isn't almost any distance and it seems that Iran's player deliberately hit the ball against opponent's arm. There is also a previous rebound on opponent's head, if I'm not wrong. However, the penalty would be still OK because, according to UEFA guidelines, at least, the arm in that position is a risk.
    But main question is about the OFR: in my opinion not a situation worthy of being analyzed. Given this screenshot:
    https://s15.postimg.cc/xyn3f53wr/image.jpg
    You can clearly see that Caceres was in full visual control of the incident. Another clue that a review suggested by VAR was almost impossible there.
    So I come to conclusion that Caceres, being unsure, asked for rewatching it. Penalty is supportable.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Visual control and VAR intervention is completely unrelated. VAR can always intervene but referees can reject the proposition of an OFR saying that he is absolutely sure!

      Delete
    2. I mean, Soham, you are there, so close. Do you really need VAR? I would be quite in doubt about that. Clearly, Caceres could decide by himself in that case, and given that it wasn't a clear mistake in terms of VAR intervention, I came to conclusion that referee on the pitch asked for that!

      Delete
    3. Of course Cáceres wasn't sure or something because he didn't make any call there and simply seemed to stop the game!

      Delete
    4. Chefren, I do not understand how you can say on the one hand it was a "good thing that it was subject of review, Irrati did a correct choice there." But then in the very next sentence you say it was no more than a YC.

      There are a lot of misconceptions out there about VAR and we--many of us who are higher-level referees--shouldn't fuel them.

      The VAR is only supposed to send down a red card decision if he, the VAR, believes it is 100% a red card and that not giving a red card is clearly wrong. He is not supposed to be sending down decisions just so the referee can have a second look.

      The situation where a referee gives a yellow card after an OFR should be very rare and is indicative of someone making a mistake.

      Because either the VAR was wrong to send the incident down in the first place or the referee is wrong to give a yellow card.

      I know I am a broken record here, but this is important. People are learning how VARs and VR is supposed to work. We have an obligation to teach them the right processes.

      If a yellow card is correct, then Irrati was wrong to send this down. If it's borderline and either decision is acceptable, Irrati is still wrong to send it down. Irrati is only right to send it down if red card is the correct decision (and, in that case, Caceres is wrong for not agreeing with him).

      Delete
    5. Dear Usaref,
      thanks for your comment and I understand your point. But if we assume that in every situation in which VAR intervenes for a possible RC, there should be a RC for sure, so what is the use of calling the referee to rewatch the incident? RC could be directly "issued" via VAR. Do you understand what I mean? I could also add a very similar case one year ago in Confederations Cup: Mazic with YC after a possible RC. Do you remember? Also in that case, RC was not issued. I just think that referees on the pitch have still their discretion, despite of a possible different opinion of VARs. But for sure there is room for discussion and the topic is very interesting.
      On another note, if what you have written is shared by FIFA committee - then only one consequence is possible: Caceres did a more than incredible mistake in missing that RC, because it was the only decision possible, right? But I wouldn't think so. For me, it is still something that can be considered YC but not 100% worthy of RC.

      Delete
    6. Just got to know, FIFA is fine with varying perceptions of the VAR and main referee! So Irrati and Cáceres both are completely okay to act as per their perceptions!

      Delete
    7. There is a reason why it is called a "possible" penalty review or a review for a "possible" red card... I commend both Irrati and Cáceres on doing their job well!

      Delete
    8. I do as well. All 3 of these decisions needed to be reviewed.

      1. Referee may have been too close (or turning eyes away too early) to judge what actually happened. It was a stone-cold penalty.
      2. Soccer has to deal with off-ball incidents that are orange or above. This fit the category. Referee sees it, took his time. He decides. I wish a few of the 90% penalties earlier in the tournament had seen a review -- then at least world knows that REFEREE made final decision.
      3. Handling correct to go to OFR. Some of the replays I saw (and same one viewed by referee), ball hit arm directly (no touch by head). My first look, however, was like most: ball from head into arm -- more controversial, of course.

      Delete
  52. @Chefren/2, I remember that you are Italian. I don't know if you watch Tiki Taka TV program, but what do you think about Mr.Cesari's statement? Do you agree (for example with the 2nd YC for C.Ronaldo for handball)?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. No, I'm sorry, I'm not watching this program now.
      I can't comment on the situation because, as said, I didn't watch this game. However Cesari, De Marco and Bergonzi, now working for Mediaset, have definitely lost my trust.
      They say many wrong / not accurate things, and given that they are former FIFA referees, all people believe that. Shocking. I don't want to add more.

      Delete
    2. Cesari said that:
      1. With a VAR review you can't give YC, or RC or nothing.
      2. Ronaldo should be booked for an handball on a long ball.

      Delete
    3. See... how much ignorant ;)

      Delete
    4. Chefren, I partially agree.
      Cesari is definitely ridicoulous.
      Bergonzi and De Marco are more serious, they remember what to be a referee means and used to speak properly most of the times.

      Having said that, Cesari said a very absurd and not correct statement: the foul of Ronaldo is never a YC, since it doesn’t stop a promising attack, hence it has simply to be punished with a foul.

      Delete
    5. Yes, Bergonzi and De Marco are definitely better, but on recent days they have reported many incorrect things as well. :) Nothing against their work in TV, but they should know everything about refereeing in a very detailed way. I'm sorry to say that they don't do that.

      Delete
    6. I'm from Italy too snd I must blame everything cesari says on tv. It's a shame that a former gifa referee can say so stupid things against his colleagues

      Delete
  53. After having seen the three crucial decisions reviewed by VAR, I think Cáceres made one crucial mistake, which is not sending off Ronaldo. The criteria of not being a very strong contact is not enough to justify a YC, IMO. The gesture he makes, the way he throws the arm and the context in which the situation happens make it crystal clear that he has a violent reaction against an opponent and should have been sent off.

    The first penalty is correct, as is the second, IMO, hand in a invasive position.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I would go for a YC there, only reckless for me!

      Delete
  54. Let’s predict the first KO-games.
    Russia Spain : CAF-referee?
    Portugal Uruguay : Brych Ramos?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Russia-Spain Mazic or Skomina
      Portugal-Uruguay Gassama or Shukralla

      Delete
    2. Spain v Russia : Felix Brych
      Uruguay v Portugal : Nawaf Shukralla

      Delete
    3. ESP-RUS: Shukralla (or someone else with only 1GS match like Aguilar, Skomina or even Conger)
      URU-POR: Ramos

      Delete
  55. It simply is a lottery... How should that be a deliberate handball or at least how should that be a clear error to evaluate it as not punishable? On the other hand VAR does not interfere in some clearer cases (e.g. GER-SWE, SRB-SUI or at a holding situation tonight in POR's penalty area).

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. If anything, VAR is inconsistent... I liked what one Morocco player shouted on the screen after the match ended!

      Delete
    2. He said 'VAR is bullshit' and to be honest: He is so fucking right. 3 wrong penalties in one day...

      Delete
    3. I agree with the Moroccan player partially as it does work at times but the number of high profile fails are too blatant to ignore. But I'm completely fine with the Cáceres penalty for Iran though!

      Delete
    4. Why it should be VAR fault if those penalties were wrong ?It is referee who take the final decision.

      Delete
    5. VAR is great if it’s used by the correct people. Too many mistakes. Clear fouls and red cards not even reviewed so far.

      Delete
    6. True actually. In the Roldan game VAR clearly wanted to correct him but Roldan didn't change his call. As I always say, the VAR system itself isn't bad but the people operating it badly mess it up at times!

      Delete
    7. The fouls you mention were not even reviewed cause of the referee on the pitch who was sure about his decision.

      Delete
    8. For me, this handling is not a penalty. Ball to the arm, short distance, no intention whatsoever, the defender didn't see the ball.. Is the arm in unnatural position? If you play football try to jump in position like that, and you'll see what will happen with your arm. It is normal movement. I remember lots of situations kind of this one where on this and previous blog (3rd team) all of us said that it is not punishable. And it is not. In any case, following the protocol, VAR should never intervene because it is NOT CLEAR AND OBVIOUS MISTAKE.
      But, I like that VAR intervened in all 3 cases! The VAR should always call the ref to review this kind of situations IMO, and REF IS THE ONLY ONE WHO WILL MAKE FINAL DECISION. He could be wrong (Roldan was today by any means, and Caceres for me in this last occasion), but give the ref opportunity to re-watch and make decision based on his assessment of the incident. If that was the case in some other matches (Swiss goal against Brasil, double holding on Mitrovic and 2 missed PKs from Marciniak), many things would be different on the tables.

      Delete
    9. Maybe Marciniak just didn't want to review the incident cause he was sure about him like in ARG-ISL penalty appeal.
      In those situations you mention i think the referees refuse VAR intervention.

      Delete
    10. VAR surely saw those incidents and recommend the referee to review, but it is him who as the last word. If he is sure , no review.

      Delete
    11. We will never know unless they reveal it themselves.

      Delete
  56. However, let's hope that Faghani will do a good job in SRB-BRA. In this case, probably #1 choice for final...

    ReplyDelete
  57. 8 R16 + 4 QF + 2 SF + F 3/4 + F 1/2
    We have 14 matches and we need at least 12 referees. Have we got 12 referees with expected level in their matches?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. If I count correctly, it is 16 more matches :-)

      Delete
    2. We should comment on this after the group stage is over!

      Delete
  58. I watched now the penalty assigned to Portugal.
    In my opinion a very soft one, I wouldn't have whistled it and I don't see it as stuff for VAR. But I can be wrong.
    Here, differently from the other situations, I can't find an explanation. I will rewatch it better tomorrow... for today it is enough football ;)

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Clear penalty for me. That's probably the only VAR review that I think was done correctly.

      Delete
  59. Graziano Cesari... One of the best referees. I remember when he blown for the end of the CL match Bayern-Valencia 20 years ago. :-)

    ReplyDelete
  60. I thought Caceres was excellent in the game. Very strong control over a very hot-tempered match. The only thing I will complain about is that he should have seen the first penalty live. The second penalty was a difficult one to spot, and the Ronaldo incident was hardly anything and Irrati should not have recommended an OFR for that.

    ReplyDelete
  61. Here are my thoughts.

    3 VAR interventions in this game. All were handled well.

    Had some matches done even ONE "I'm humble enough to take a 2nd look" event, the world would have accepted the decisions (changed or not) better. The man in the middle in this WC must be able to accept that (as we saw in this match). Even if the decision on the field remains the same or does not go full "red", the world wants the referee to be able to decide with ALL the evidence in front of him.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Fair amount well made... I really hope they modify the protocols in due course! You have made an excellent point!

      Delete
    2. I posted in another forum: If Collina and Bussaca say the following, we could have a VAR revolution -- for the good:

      "Referees, we are on the WORLD stage and not yours. We have video. Be humble enough to use it if there's potential controversy. Be humble enough to take a second look. The world will have more respect (not necessarily for you, but for the decision). They trust you more than the VAR -- who they don't understand. VAR's: It's OK. If you think the world believes it might be a PK or RC, send it to the referee to look at."

      Perhaps it has already been said. In two games today the referees (whether we like the decisions or not) had the opportunity to make the final decision -- a PK confirmed and YC added to it in Saudi-Egypt and a YC to Ronaldo. Both decisions, IMO were supportable. Had they NOT gone to the referee for review or been "accepted" by the referee for review (as some believe happens -- I'm skeptical here based on my conversations with my VAR friend), they would have been even more controversial and less accepted.

      Delete
  62. In my opinion, VAR intervention is this game slightly moved the idead of the football game and all intrigue about it.

    ReplyDelete
  63. We have a referee who can't assess properly 3 crucial incidents.

    He waived play-on on the first penalty, didn't even see the Ronaldo incident and changed his mind on the handball penalty.

    Honestly, such a referee is suitable for a WC match? Since he needs VAR on every crucial call?

    Definitely not. I am not talking about the non-existent authority, the fact that he was surrounded by Iranian players all the time and of course the non existent personality......

    He should be on the first flight home.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. In two of the situations, one can even debate on the VAR intervention in the first place. Assessing this performance will be a nightmare for FIFA!

      Delete
    2. I believe he did enough to go home. That's the most important assessment. There are for sure 12 better refs at the tournament. You can't allow so many controversies in the match, especially when you have full visual control (both penalties). Therefore lots of protests on the pitch and comments after the match is over.

      Delete
    3. It's difficult to make such comments without knowing how exactly FIFA evaluates these things. Let's wait for a few days!

      Delete
  64. I really supported Caceres and appreciated his performance in the first match, which was an easy one. The performance in this challenging match was under par, too many mistakes and nearly losing control 2nd half - knowing that ko-games can easily get even more challenging, this just wasn't enough to stay in the tournament. I think he nevertheless proved that he has good reason to be proud of being one of the best Conmebolrefs, with some points to improve. Compliments!

    ReplyDelete
  65. Maximum of allowed comments has been reached here.
    If you want to write about Caceres game, please use without problems Irmatov's discussion:
    https://law5-theref.blogspot.com/2018/06/2018-fifa-world-cup-match-36-spain.html
    Thank you.

    ReplyDelete