The referees in charge of 2022 FIFA World Cup Qualifiers - Inter-confederation play-offs.
2022 FIFA World Cup qualifiers, Inter-confederation play-offs
13.06.22 20:00 CET
Ahmad Bin Ali Stadium, Al Rayyan (QAT)
AUSTRALIA - PERU
Referee: Slavko Vinčić (SVN)
Assistant referee 1: Tomaž Klančnik (SVN)
Assistant Referee 2: Andraž Kovačič (SVN)
Fourth Official: Victor Gomes (RSA)
Fifth Official: Zakhele Siwela (RSA)
VAR:Juan Martínez Munuera (ESP)
AVARs: Jérôme Brisard (FRA), Jerson Emiliano dos Santos (ANG)
AUSTRALIA - PERU
Referee: Slavko Vinčić (SVN)
Assistant referee 1: Tomaž Klančnik (SVN)
Assistant Referee 2: Andraž Kovačič (SVN)
Fourth Official: Victor Gomes (RSA)
Fifth Official: Zakhele Siwela (RSA)
VAR:Juan Martínez Munuera (ESP)
AVARs: Jérôme Brisard (FRA), Jerson Emiliano dos Santos (ANG)
14.06.22 20:00 CET
Ahmad Bin Ali Stadium, Al Rayyan (QAT)
COSTA RICA - NEW ZEALAND
Referee: Mohammed Abdulla Hassan Mohamed (UAE) Assistant Referee 1: Mohamed Al-Hammadi (UAE)
Assistant Referee 2: Hasan Al-Mahri (UAE)
Fourth Official: Abdulrahman Al-Jassim (QAT)
Fifth Official: Saud Al-Maqaleh (QAT)
VAR:Abdulla Al-Marri (QAT)
AVARs: Khamis Al-Marri (QAT), Taleb Al-Marri (QAT)
https://www.fifa.com/fifaplus/en/live/event/2AWTP0yK6aHFYcvChdFfU9kcVzg
ReplyDelete(For those, who don't have another broadcaster of the game in their country)
Thank you Philipp!
DeleteFirst half thoughts on Australia-Peru:
ReplyDeleteGood 12th minute yellow card for SPA, but IMO 24th minute challenge should have been (at least?) a yellow card for Duke, he was late and studs up. Now 32’ potential penalty decision, no intervention from VAR but I think it could be discussed.
From a stylistic perspective, I think a referee in a game like this could do more to benefit the spectacle of this match. For context, I am used to watching a lot of MLS, where this year there has been a heavy emphasis on delaying the restart of play (as well as SPA). There were a lot of YCs early in the season for any little bit of gamesmanship that slowed down the opponent's restart, and also goalkeepers are warned quite early (sometimes even in the first half!) for wasting time on goal kicks. There are not so many of these YCs at this point in the season because all the players have learned how strict the line is and have adapted their behavior, which has benefited the flow of the game.
I can't help but think that these sorts of instructions would benefit a match like this one. There have been quite a few really small incidents that have just just slow down each restart a little bit; it makes the game feel really choppy in my opinion. And the Peruvian goalkeeper is already taking quite a long time on goal kicks. This game hasn't been flowing nicely. I do think the heat contributes to that problem of course, but I also think a different tactical approach from the referee could help make this game (and future games at the World Cup) more attractive. This is not so much a criticism of Vincic, rather a plea to FIFA to adopt the directives used by PRO in MLS to make the game more appealing as a spectacle!
I agree on the three specific scenes, although in 12' I think, the card was not mandatory, because it was near the sideline and therefore not a clearly promising attack. But also not wrong to give it.
DeleteInteresting delayed flag for the ball out of play on a goal kick in the 51'.
ReplyDelete54th(ish?) minute was another challenge that I think should have been a yellow card, Australian player caught a Peruvian in the head with his studs. Rather low force in the challenge, so I don't think it was enough for red, but the mode and point of contact are quite bad.
ReplyDeleteBetween this one, the 32' challenge, and then one other challenge in the UAE-AUS game, I feel like there has been more leniency on potentially-reckless challenges in these games than I am used to. Maybe I am reading too much into a small sample size, however.
If you watch enough of the UEFA club competitions, there that's clearly been a raising of the bar for reckless and serious foul play challenges over the last 4 to 8 years.
DeleteRidiculous lack of added time.
ReplyDeleteWell, I expected more minutes added to the 2H and ET 2H, too.
DeleteMarciniak's record will not be beaten very soon :)
DeleteI guess there could be some kind of instruction to not be overly meticulous regarding added time because of high temperature in Qatar. Vinčič also kept both eyes closed to delaying the restart by goalkeepers. Initially, I was negatively surprised indeed but then I thought about the weather conditions in which the game was played. Especially now, with the modern refereeing philosophy (referee being a 'game manager'), everything is taken into account.
DeleteTo be clear, the temperature in Qatar in November/December is more bearable therefore the referees were instructed to be strict with lost time compensation during FIFA Arab Cup. But now, it's hardly bearable (36°C today, 39°C tomorrow and over 40°C on next days, over 30°C in the nights...), therefore I think we should understand this particular tactic in this context.
DeleteFirst penalty shootout in a WC playoff since AUS-URU 2006?
ReplyDeleteAnd AUS have won in the shootout against South American opposition just like in 2005.
DeleteVincic took about half an hour to explain penalties to both captain's, a goalkeeper and both coaches.
ReplyDeleteIt’s unnecessary and I think he just wants to draw focus to himself to make it look good. Nobody else does this. Why on earth bring the coaches and captains to explain what everyone already knows?
DeleteI didn’t see this game but in the EL final he also explained the VAR procedure and asked them to not celebrate after the winning penalty until VAR confirms - if he did the same here I think it’s actually quite a clever thing to do
DeleteIf Redmayne isn't given a YC for repeated unsportsmanlike conduct, no GK ever will during a penalty shootout.
ReplyDeleteI didn’t like the GK movement but I also don’t like the stutter or stop start run that penalty takers often use as well.
DeleteWhat unsporting behavior? I don’t see anything he does wrong here. He is absolutely allowed to move side to side on his goal line as long as he remains on the goal line, facing the kicker, without touching the net, posts, or crossbar until the ball is kicked.
DeleteThat wasn’t the point. He went up to the penalty spot, then wasn’t in goal when the taker was ready because he took an extra drinks break to irritate him, etc. All up, Vincic told him 4 times (!!) to stick to the rules.
DeleteSo the goalkeeper jumped off the goal line during the run up and then got back on it before the ball was kicked. But hasn't he clearly violated this part of the procedure for the taking of a penalty kick? Because the same part of the procedure has the clause about the keeper having at least one foot on or over the line when it is kicked, which VAR uses to the millimeter now. How can we blatantly ignore the clause that he has broken?
ReplyDelete"The defending goalkeeper must remain on the goal line, facing the kicker, between the goalposts, without touching the goalposts, crossbar or goal net, until the ball has been kicked."
Unfortunately, the broadcaster didn't show a good replay that would 100% confirm the encroachment. Right foot is clearly in front of the line but the position of GK's left foot is debatable, imo.
DeleteSee: https://snipboard.io/jYZVnR.jpg
Another question is whether the protocol allows VAR to intervene in such case.
It's probably not been talked about before, but it is in the same procedure for a PK has the one about having one foot on/over the line when it's kicked. It would be tough to argue that one falls in var protocol and one doesn't.
DeleteI agree with you both; it certainly looks like he was off the line but the camera angle we are shown isn’t conclusive. However, it would not surprise me if he was in fact off the line during the run up. While I can’t think of any specific example of the top of my head, I know for sure that I’ve seen these situations before, and, for some inexplicable reason, the ARs and VARs consistently ignore the other parts of Law 14, only focusing on the freeze frame at the moment of the kick.
DeleteThe Laws of the Game are clear here: the goalkeeper must remain on the goal line until the ball is kicked. If he was in fact off the line, it should be a huge controversy/scandal that this offense was ignored, especially given the immense consequences.
Thank to smala017 for his report, here some clips about the game:
ReplyDelete12' YC for SPA
https://streamff.com/v/358388
More blatant because not a genuine attempt to play ball, so you can understand why referee gave YC, some people can still think that this wasn't a mandatory booking, as Philipp wrote.
24' Possible YC for reckless tackle
https://streamff.com/v/8f6d91
In my opinion a card should have been issued. Dangerous tackle.
32' Penalty appeal
https://streamff.com/v/c3f9ca
Very risky action by defender, not clear whether inside or outside, but I think that foul could have been easily whistled, still, I agree with VAR not clear and obvious mistake, grey area with more dark tones than white ones... :)
54' Another possible YC for reckless challenge:
https://streamff.com/v/709382
For me another card to be issued, but I don't know how much this is relevant in nowadays football (read the analysis below).
102' YC for reckless use of arms:
https://streamff.com/v/ae55ee
OK, but it looks definitely soft if compared to other challenges.
Long explanations by Vincic before PSO, including coaches from both teams:
https://streamff.com/v/e7ceb4
Some clips about AUS GK management by Vincic during PSO:
https://streamff.com/v/ef77f3
https://streamff.com/v/5ec585
https://streamff.com/v/7810fd
I didn't watch the game, but based on the clips I think we can say we saw the classic Vincic of the last appearances in European competitions, including EL final. Not so much willing in booking players, allowing clearly reckless challenges (this was the case in both 24' and 54'). The risk with such modern approach (it is not about Vincic, but also other referees, of course) is to have soft cards, for situations like SPA in which you can question whether the sanction was mandatory or not (see 12') but then you don't see cards for very dangerous challenges. That's the trend we are watching. The question can be whether this will be the "welcome ticket" of Qatar 2022, hopefully not, at least not at all, I'm sure we will see referees with different styles.
Having said that, second chapter about PSO: said with all respect, but to me, a keeper acting in this way looks more like a clown than a player. I can't believe which level of unsporting behavior we have reached today in order to have the best on opponents, I know, everything is allowed unless you are transgreding the laws of the game, and very likely this wasn't the case, as he had always at least a leg on the line, but... so many warnings by Vincic, and he continued to make all he wanted. I don't like this new trend, I can make an overall speech, not only related to this game, but for example players celebrating a penalty when referee whistles it, I'm really disappointed by how football is perceived today. It is not seen as genuine sport, but as something in which you must deceive referees and also your opponent, and then in this context, the lenient approach by referees we are seeing in recent times.
It seems to me that a certain time is over and also for this reason we don't see very often as before, referees who are talent, simply, they can't be talent, they just must be at the service of players... even being blamed... really sad...
And here is the whole performance in highlights.
Deletehttps://we.tl/t-uMPbTktv7v
I completely agree with you, Chefren!
ReplyDeleteVery unsporting behaviour by GK in this clips, even if it is not clearly forbidden by LotG. It raises the question if Vincic could have done something about it, give a YC for example for general unsporting behaviour. But I understand that he didn't want to do that, but then there is no sense in warning the GK that clearly.
I think what Redmayne did was nothing more than a psychological game, we all know that in a penalty shootout skill cannot stand alone, it must be combined with strategy including psychological game. If psychological things are linked with fairplay or unsporting behavior, I think it's not quite right. As long as it's according to the rules, what's wrong? I think there is a difference regarding unsporting behavior like a clown (dancing in the line) and stalling or provoking (approaching) the executor for which caution should be given, in this case I only saw the unsportsmanship of Redmayne and Gallese at the time when both face the last executioner before sudden death. As for what Vincic did (giving a warning) it should be done including before the penalty shootout where he gave briefings to both captains and coaches, we can say it's a formality but yes, that's what must be done, while in practice it can be contradictory because their strategy, but again if it doesn't violate the rules, don't associate it with sportsmanship. In my opinion, if dancing in the line must linked with sportsmanship it is same as telling VAR to intervene in every soft penalties, it's impossible to do that.
ReplyDeletesorry if I have different opinion
DeleteNo need to say sorry, your message is absolutely welcome and it is a pleasure to read different opinion, in the spirit of this blog. About what you wrote, indeed I can't say you are wrong!
DeleteAnd in addition to what anonymous statet one can also say that the behaviour of the players executing the penalty kick is often in a similar manner. I think of players like Pogba or Zaza in 2016 almost dribbling to the ball. Also irritating but not forbidden according to LotG.
DeleteI agree with Anonymous, there's nothing wrong with Redmayne jumping around the line like that trying to distract the kicker (as long as this is not done verbally).
Deleteoff-topic
ReplyDeleteDo you think that the full house game factor is very influential on some "new" referees? I don't know if referees like Espen Eskas, Bram Van Driessche have ever felt sold-out stadium atmosphere, 54,200/54,139 (over-capacity) in Tbilisi and 28,745/30,000 in Nur-Sultan considering as far as I know football in Norway and Belgium don't have ultras. Different case with Jovic in Geneva (26,300/30,084), he should of course have experience with Dinamo Zagreb/Hajduk Split.
I hope I can get opinions from the experts in here such as Chefren, Philipp, Euro Soccer, Mikael, usaref, etc
Did anyone see Escobar last night in Honduras-Canada? He awarded one red card and 4 yellow cards to Canada in min. 94 plus mass confrontation at the end!
ReplyDeleteI didn’t watch most of the game so I can’t comment on his performance as a whole; however there was one moment in which Canada’s Buchanan was probably fouled, and Escobar held his whistle in his mouth for many seconds before ultimately not whistling it and not even playing advantage (there was, at best, no more than tenuous advantage after a very long amount of time). Then he visibly seemed to get into a verbal argument with Buchanan. We know that Escobar usually takes an (offer successful!) South-American style “angry” refereeing approach, but I don’t think this attitude helped him at all in this moment. I don’t think it won him any respect from the players, the opposite in fact.
DeleteThe big match manager needed lots yellow cards to stop the wild dissent by Canadian players after he sent off one of their players?
Deletelate discussion
ReplyDeletehttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lg4ti0xVy4k&list=LL&index=2
QF AFC U23 Asian Cup
UZB (host) - IRQ
Ref: Mohammed Al-Hoish (KSA)
VAR: Omar Al-Ali (UAE)
9' OFR (PK+RC) - VC missed by referee (blind spot by positioning), long checking (over 2 minutes I think)
47' PK, I think bad management
56'50'' HT whistle earlier 10'' (AT +12' with penalty confrontation and OFR I think need more AT)
107' OFR - Potential SFP, I think it's wrong decision, it should be red (even the fact no card has been given)
I think poor performance by Al-Hoish, bad management for confrontation, stalling, and additional time. I don't know why recently additional time become "serious" problem for many officials, after earlier whistle in 1st half, in 2nd ET he only gave +1 AT after OFR and theatrical action by players.
9' is horrific. A few points:
Delete1) The restart is an open question. There is this phenomenon lately of attackers running across keepers to prevent the quick release. That's what happened here. Yes, the goalkeeper committed VC and earned his red card. But I believe an IFK restart to the defense and a yellow card to the attacker is also justice. We can't reward behavior that is written into the LOTG as an offence/foul.
2) The VAR checked the APP for offside. That's a big problem. The goalkeeper was literally in possession of the ball when this misconduct occurred. There's no way that offside should have mattered here. It shows the VAR didn't understand that.
3) How did it take 11 minutes?! I don't care what sort of issues there are with a substitute for Uzbekistan, that is unacceptable.
New Zealand goal correctly disallowed after OFR
ReplyDeleteBig moments near the end of the first half for Mohamed. 37' penalty shout for New Zealand, and I think he's done well not to whistle it. The contact is very light, and no foul is right in line with his relatively lenient foul selection so far.
ReplyDeleteThen two minutes later, a goal by New Zealand disallowed due to a holding offense in the APP. I think this is the right call, and a difficult one to spot in real time due to the angle at which the contact happened. Honestly I feel a little bad for Mohamed for this mistake because it is, in my view, the one blemish on an otherwise really well-refereed first half.
This game is really quite the contrast to yesterday's match, it has been really open and fast-paced, flowing, and certainly more volatile and difficult for refereeing with some flare-ups between the players already. I think Mohamed's lenient line in foul selection is benefitting the match and contributing to the nice flow. He's also already warned the Costa Rican goalkeeper for time wasting, a good change from Vincic's leniency on this topic yesterday.
How about the CRC defender arm? Wasn't that the first action? Or a mutual holding?
DeleteEven if there were as a clear foul by the CRC player first and then a clear foul by the NZL player, the goal had to be disallowed.
DeleteHowever I think, the action by the CRC defender's arm was not enough for a foul, while the holding by the NZL player was.
I understand, that there are some doubts about "clear and obvious" though, but possibly the "missed incident" clause is sufficient here.
"However I think, the action by the CRC defender's arm was not enough for a foul, while the holding by the NZL player was"
DeleteExplain to me how you come to that conclusion Philipp. Is it because one player fought through a foul and stayed on his feet? While the other player flopped at the slightest touch upon seeing he had been beaten? If that's the case. That's capital letter SOFT.
Red card SFP after OFR. Then moments later an incident where Contreras catches a NZL player with a reckless elbow, but Mohemed missed the foul and subsequently booked the NZL captain Reid for dissent. Rough for minutes here for Mohamed; I like his overall management of this game but there have been some important missed calls.
ReplyDeleteRC after OFR, 67':
ReplyDeletehttps://streamja.com/emj6J
Is it really a SFP? For me red card is doubtful and VAR intervention was unnecessary
ReplyDeleteExtremely clear SFP.
DeleteI think that in UEFA this wouldn't have been called, this is the FIFA approach for VAR, even more by officials in charge from other confederations than UEFA. I think that there are strong arguments for RC, but should have been only confirmed in case of such decision by referee. Considering the yellow a clear and obvious mistake is very questionable.
ReplyDeleteArguments: a certain excessive force in the speed of the tackle (but it could have been worse) and the point of impact. Especially the latter, wouldn't have "allowed" a UEFA VAR to intervene.
Don't think there was excessive force or speed in the tackle. Mistimed yes but nothing more than that.
DeleteFor me both, the RC and the OFR is totally correct. But it shows that there might be difficulties in the next WC: When will and should the VAR intervene? UEFA seems to be reluctant. I don't know how it is in national matches in Italy, France, Spain, England and so on but your comments, Chefren, make me think that, for instance, Italian VARs follow the "UEFA way". As I described in another comment, in the last months German VARs tended to intervene more often which was well accepted by public. Lutz-Michael Fröhlich stated that they have to work rather on the non-interventions than on the interventions as one could see that OFR helped the referee in terms of acceptance of decisions. This approach goes in a different direction than we expect it to be in UEFA matches. How will FIFA deal with those different approaches? Keep in mind that there are not just UEFA video match officials (where we can see differences) but officials from all over the world. Probably FIFA will not apply the "clear and obvious" rule as strict as UEFA does. Then, can UEFA VARs, coming from countries in which the strict UEFA approach are applied, adapt to these instructions? It is very difficult to achieve a uniform approach under these circumstances. To be honest, in my view, it is not the FIFA approach that should change...
DeleteAlways a pleasure to read your comments, Ref_1707 and I can only add that we have to wait and see for knowing the answers, for sure it will be extremely interesting to understand which kind of VAR approach FIFA will perform at WC. But... as you said, before that, the difficulty of reaching such goal is extremely hard, we have referees from very different realities, they always used VAR in a certain way, that's why I'm not so much surprised about the call they made today. Differently, in UEFA we are seeing a totally different management. If you ask me, the UEFA approach has some positive points, especially regarding penalties, quite often a grey area. Intervention only in very clear situations with objective foul (mostly tripping). However, there are also negative points, like RC for SFP, in this regard I would like more interventions.
DeleteThe classic FIFA approach we saw in some tournaments in past, on the other hand, seems too open, sometimes it is just sending referee to review to have a better assessment, and this shouldn't be done, if you ask me.
The best solution would be a middle way, not being so strict like UEFA, but at the same time not calling 2 or 3 OFR per game...
Still, before coming to that, many question marks about how to have a consistency between UEFA VARs and all the others... let's repeat again, we can only wait.
Forgot to answer about the Italian VARs, difficult to give an overall view because here not all VARs work in the same way, but indeed you are right, the classic Italian VAR (Irrati, he is considered the best by AIA, appointed in big games and big occasions) acts according to UEFA guidelines, so he should be the main reference for Italian approach. But the rest, believe me, it is very hard to analyze...
DeleteKwiatkowski already explained the difference between FIFA's and UEFA's use of VAR in the interview. UEFA = dogmatic approach, only CLEAR AND OBVIOUS(!!!) mistakes to be corrected. FIFA = optimal decision according to the LotG should be made; if VAR, as a referee, would have taken a different decision, he should call the referee for an OFR but it's still OK to stick to the original decision being the referee.
DeleteThank you for sharing your impressions, Chefren. Indeed, we have to wait and it will be tough for FIFA to achieve the uniformity we are looking for…
DeleteEuro Soccer Ref, so we should expect a change by UEFA Var working for FIFA. It already happened in some FIFA qualifiers, indeed, but is that a fair thing?
DeleteThe topic is extremely interesting because now we can go deeply inside the question, as at the times of 2018 WC, VAR was still at the beginning and this difference between UEFA and FIFA started after that competition...
Yes, UEFA VARs have to adapt the FIFA approach in FIFA competitions. But it's still difficult to find consistency, especially with reckless-SFP incidents like today. A UEFA VAR could assess it as reckless and be 100% sure about it. According to UEFA RAP it was '8' where both cards are possible but a yellow card is preferable. I am not so sure that a VAR from UEFA would have called the referee to the monitor, even in FIFA competitions. FIFA Referees Committee should work on this matter, unless the referees already got a strong message regarding SFP. I am really curious how things are going to work during the WC.
DeleteFIFA is right. UEFA is wrong. Get all the decisions correct! Always based and backed by the Laws of the Game. Period!
DeleteTo be honest, I also strongly prefer FIFA's approach.
DeleteVery good intervention for me. Studs with high force into the opponent's ankle/Achilles - SFP.
ReplyDeleteAgree
DeleteI agree, crystal clear OFR for me.
DeleteBut still too much leniency,not single YC was given for fouls or players behaviours,and believe me,there's been plenty reasons to show them.
ReplyDeleteI'm not watching the game, but if it is like you are saying, and indeed this RC was first card of the game, one could even question more the decision, because sometimes the color of a card in borderline situations can be decided based on the approach of referee. All is also about the line used before.
DeleteAccording to most sites,it was the first card of the match.
DeleteToo many things were unpunishable,best example is CRC's time wasting in 90'when one player was going to take the throw in,held the ball for 15-20 seconds and then left it for other player.
No booking,no warnings.
And Navas can do this all night if ref is going to only warn him.
ReplyDeleteDo you mean the hand gestures and mean stares didn't dissuade Navas from wasting time? Shocking! ;)
DeleteTypical overly lenient and permissive AFC Referee. Everything was "hand gestures" and "mean stares" all night for the Emirati referee. The type of officiating has made AFC Club and National team's competitions unwatchable. It seems as if the LoTG are mere suggestions and not actual rules for the AFC and its referees.
ReplyDeleteThe disallowed Kiwi goal was laughable and downright farcical. At most, it was a case of mutual holding by two players fighting for position and possession of the ball. Definitely nothing clear and obvious for a VAR intervention. For some to suggest that the New Zealand foul was more egregious than the initial Costa Rican foul is just an apologist excuse to "back the badge" and support the referee at all cost.
The real head-scratcher is that the Emirati referee will be at the World Cup. Definitely a clear case of FIFA having to please all of its confederations by including undeserving (less capable) referees at the expense of excluding better more qualified referees.
"When we looked at what Australia got against Peru last night with good quality European officiating, I thought FIFA made a mistake in such an important game for us," - Danny Hay, New Zealand Coach
ReplyDeleteIf we're being honest, he's not wrong. FIFA should have put this immensely important match in the "safer hands" of a CONMEBOL Referee. Fernando Rapallini (ARG) would have been the ideal choice.
On the bright side, hopefully, the FIFA Ref Committee realized what a limited referee Mohammed Abdulla Hassan Mohamed is. And only assigns him to the mandatory single group stage game and sends him packing.
DeleteIn my opinion Mohamed Abdullah did good game yesterday and he now is one of the best 3 referees in asia with faghani and beath and he walk like the legend bujsaim who refereed in 3 worldcups and refereed semi final between Brazil and Netherlands in wc 1998
DeleteI don't understand why Abdullah has been selected for the World Cup ahead of Shukralla.
Delete@Thomas Don't be silly! Don't compare Mohamed Mohamed with Shukralla if your goal is only to bring down Mohamed Mohamed, if you want to compare you have to look at Shukralla or Mohamed Mohamed other matches, remember a referee is not assessed only by single match, Mohamed Mohamed yesterday was not so bad either.
DeleteAnonymous you are being really harsh here. Mohamed had a very good game in my opinion with the exception of not catching in real time the decisions that were subject to OFR. It’s also worth noting that this game was significantly more difficult to referee than Australia-Peru. In my view, Mohamed’s performance was actually much better than Vincic’s apart from the OFRs. This idea that non-European referees can’t do as good of a job as Europeans comes off sometimes as rather discriminatory to me - if this view is based on the actual performance history of the referee(s) in question that is one thing, but the New Zealand coach’s criticism seems most likely based in prejudice to me.
DeleteI agree with you that Shukralla is a better referee than Mohamed and should have been at the World Cup, but for whatever reason FIFA doesn’t want him anymore. I think he got really shafted in both his previous World Cups, honestly.
The two crucial situations from NZL - CRC:
ReplyDelete37' Penalty Appeal
https://streamff.com/v/b37c0e
Agree with referee in this case, I wouldn't have called it. Quite soft, but indeed a call was possible.
39' Goal disallowed after OFR
https://streamff.com/v/b318bd
Extremely interesting case, in my opinion this is still something that UEFA wouldn't call due to the mutual action (not a very clear foul by one side) and this OFR looks again like a classic one made with "FIFA approach". But I think that VAR in this case had certain strong arguments, the firm holding by arm on the leg of opponent is indeed quite blatant, and missed by referee. Last replay at the end of video says that. However, at the same time, given the action by opponent before, with that arm on the body and the overall perception, I still think that in an extremely neutral point of view (NO FIFA - UEFA approach), a minimum of something is missing for the clear and obvious mistake. Philipp is right when he writes that even in case of clear foul by CRC before, a subsequent one by NZL should have been punished, because at the origin of the APP, but now this explains us that maybe referee from the pitch should have taken at least a decision, and this would have made the things easier.
To conclude: I can't blame this intervention, but to me still something to discuss about, even more thinking at the UEFA approach... it is very difficult, I think it will be impossible to see consistency for such incidents at WC.
Highlights
Deletehttps://we.tl/t-2DAfIc3Ol2
Bahattin Duran and Tarık Ongun ended their careers in Turkey today. It seems that Cüneyt Çakır retired together with them. The reports saying they have offers from other associations and they are evaluating the situation...
ReplyDeleteSince 2009 they officated together as a team in Süper Lig and in Europe.
Cüneyt Çakır has one more year contract with TFF, so it looks like he will continue in Turkey.
DeleteOT: Footballers complain about the long season. Referees never compain, do they?
ReplyDelete-Some of the Domestic leagues ended at the end of May
-Nations League lasted until 14 June
-World Cup referees are invited in Madrid in a few days
-July is all about pre-season preparations?
Did they have enough time-off, after such a long season, and an even longer season incoming?
Referees don’t officiate every round in their competition though, while players usually do
DeleteThere are big differences between referees though.
DeleteJust compare the amount of matches refereed in 2021/2022 by Marciniak or in particular Makkelie(!) with for instance Orsato, Vincic or Siebert.
Premier league refs like Taylor and Oliver also did a lot of matches.
Delete1.Danny Makkelie 47 Games
Delete2.Micheal Oliver 43 Games
3.Serdar Gözübüyük 43 Games
4.Anthony Taylor 42 Games
5. Szymon Marchinak 42 Games
6.Istvan Kovacs 41 Games
7.Halil Umut Meler 40 Games
8.Sandro Schaerer 40 Games
9.Deniz Aytekin 39 Games
10.Clement Turpin 37 Games
11.Gil Manzano 36 Games
12.Daniel Siebert 35 Games
13.Mateu Lahoz 34 Games
14.Slavko Vincic 33 Games
15.Sanchez Martinez 33 Games
16.Arthur Dias 33 Games
17.Beniot Bastien 32 Games
18.Del Cerro Grande 31 Games
19.Felix Zwayer 30 Games
20. Srdan Jovanovic 30 Games
21.Francios Letexier 30 Games
22.Cüneyt Cakir 28 Games
23.Ovidiu Hategan 28 Games
24.Daniele Orsato 28 Games
25.Davide Massa 27 Games
Are they only domestic appointments or domestic + international games?
DeleteBoth
DeleteExactly some players play 60+ though
Delete@JackS, That's right, but e.g. Makkelie is on top of this 'ranking' and still has a parttime job as cop. Thats incredible imho
DeleteThe penalty whistled by Kabakov:
ReplyDeletehttps://streamff.com/v/fd3639
Dear Chefren, even as Bosnian I must admit that this is NOT a penalty. Everybody knows that Kabakov is far away from requested level for Category 1. He has NO even ONE game without crucial mistake. Every game of him is a DISASTER. But we know his close connections with Marc Batta. Now Viktor Kassai is pushing for him as new responsible for Bulgaria. But the result will be similar. He is just NOT good enough for Category 1 level. On the field of play there are no connections. You are by yourself alone. That is way every game of Kabakov is DISASTER. He is LIMITED.
Deletefor me clear penatly!
DeleteNever a penalty !!!
DeleteWhat a joke of a penalty. Ha-ha-ha
DeleteA fantastic call and a subsequent YC. I wish more referees had been so alert. Don't get me wrong - I comment just the concrete situation, not the overall competence of Kabakov, with which I am not quite familiar.
DeleteThere must be 10 penalties like this one in every game. Poor desicion
DeleteNo penalty!? Disaster!? Just look the right hand of the defender, he clearly holds attackers shirt all the time. Clear penalty
DeleteIMO excellent decision, clear holding.
Delete@robby ref When I look at your comment, I remember for Nole who always blame the referee, the different is Nole just blaming referee in all circumstances (He's crazy Serbian). You say you are Bosnians who are benefiting in this case (PK for Bosnia) but you criticize Kabakov massively, I think you should be more objective, very strange because Kabakov is not that bad, maybe it was a soft penalty, but it was clear there was contact there (pull) and VAR can't intervene even if VAR is allowed to use a 50:50 ratio (clear and obvious error) it's definitely not an error/mistake, it's a matter of style and management of the referee himself that you can't blaming him.
DeleteBlatant mistake, never a penalty
DeleteRobby Ref and Graz AU always write against Kabakov, one shouldn't give their comments any weight / consideration. About the penalty, I agree with Xabi - correct call, very good spot by the Bulgarian ref. I'm sure that users can delineate between the comments with a clear sabotaging agenda, and those who are actually trying to analyse the incidents, performances etc.
Delete1) As I said in the NL specific post, I think it's a spot-on PK+YC decision and Kabakov had a good performance yesterday in Zenica.
Delete2) I like Kabakov as a referee, I appreciate his particular body language and think he's a good manager and has potential but reminds me of Bastien, a referee who recently had bad luck with many 'strange' incidents in his UEFA games that have led to mistakes and controversial performances (e.g. the PK in WOB-SEV), however I rate higher what I call 'firemen referees' like him or Bastien who might make mistakes but are safe pair of hands for tough/challenging games where you just have to survive than 'biscuit referees' (good looking but break if they have to get wet) like (with my utmost respect) Gozubuyuk or Grinfeld, who IMO are perfect for football-focused games but everytime the game gets heated look visibly insecure. His decision-making deficiencies have provoked him to miss out his first chance for Elite promotion, however he's still relatively young (36) and might have another chance to recover committee's trust.
3) I have the suspicion that Robby Ref only pops up in this blog whenever Kabakov has a game to throw him under the bus, I don't remember any other kind of comments by this user.
Good Evening everyone,
DeleteI totally agree with @Mikael W that, those two users @ Robby Ref and @ Graz AU are always active when Kabakov has game and intentionally creating negative comments based on no consideration just to "kill" the Bulgarian referee. I was one of those, who criticized Kabakov after the UCL game in Wolfsburg even, it was more fault by the VAR to recommend an OFR for the possible PK and showing him replays from close up camera on slow-mo. Finally, it was Kabakov's decision and it was wrong. In my opinion, he has the needed qualities to be an Elite Referee.
Quilava: as always, a pleasure to read your comments. I completely agree with you
Delete@Quilava: I really like that comparison with a biscuit! :)
DeleteAnd committee obviously KNOWS who can handle the tough/challenging games. For example Gozubuyuk: in CL he is often assigned to English teams. Not without a reason, I assume.
@Robby Ref I doubt you are Bosnian, are you Finnish or anti-Bulgarian, or just a Kabakov haters or even haters of certain people behind the Kabakov "you already know"?
ReplyDeleteSo please make this forum
DeleteNot anonymous or anything like that. Or even remove comments of not
Trusted people like those. We all know that observers and comitee members read this forum And this affects Their opinion. This is just not fair. Corning the penalty there is clear holding and preventing exactly the attacker who is to receive the ball to play with it. Anyone who doest agree with this is either blind or either make on purpose. Correct decision and PK Yc.
I couldn`t find anywhere videos from the game I watched yesterday but finally, today, the most important moments were analyzed on TV with the former international referee Ion Craciunescu. I hope the video at the end of the article works.
ReplyDeletehttps://www.digisport.ro/fotbal/echipa-nationala/analiza-lui-ion-craciunescu-la-fazele-controversate-de-la-romania-muntenegru-1748787
Romania-Montenegro, 14 June 2022, Joao Pedro Silva Pinheiro, 3 key moments:
1) [0:15] Possible second YC for Montenegro #16
Now this is pretty clear a YC. The important thing to mention was that the first YC was given kinda wrong less than 2 minutes before. The moment is not presented in the video but barely it was a foult, absolutely not one sanctionable with YC
2) [1:05] Possible PK for handball
One could say that the arm stopped the ball from going into goal but I tend to think that it was a correct decision because the arm was in the back, near body and was no intention. Mr. Craciunescu also thinks that the referee took the correct decision.
3) [3:15] Disallowed goal for offside
Well, it is impossible to say without VAR. From the stop-motion it looks indeed offside. As you know there were problems with VAR at this game and this moment could not been checked. The initial news was that VAR didn`t work at all but after an update it was revealed that the problems were only with the offside cameras. Media wrote that the second incident was checked but this third on not.
Apart from that I think that Joao Pinheiro did a decent job. The atmosphere was pretty hot in a full stadium and it is not easy for young referees. I liked his general approach to the game, despite of a few minor foults missed. Room for improvement but he showed potential.
Thanks for this report, in my opinion very strong arguments for giving a second YC but at the same time I can't say it was a clear crucial mistake, given also the trend we see in other games, it would be important to know more about the style used by Pinheiro in this match. The challenge can be reckless without doubts, but you know what is the situation nowadays with that. Then, for me goal was regular and correct not to give penalty, arm in natural position, considering the action of the player.
DeleteWhy former international referee ion from Romania didn't referee in wc 1994 in usa though he refereed ucl 1995 final ?
ReplyDelete