Chinese referee has been appointed to oversee the last game of the tournament, the final betwen Jordan and Qatar, to be played on Sunday 10 February 2024.
10/02/2024
Jordan - Qatar
Referee: Ma Ning (CHN)
Assistant Referee 1: Zhou Fei (CHN)
Assistant Referee 2: Zhang Cheng (CHN)
Fourth Official: Ilgiz Tantshev (UZB)
Reserve Assistant Referee: Taspenko Andrey (UZB)
Video Assistant Referee: Fu Ming (CHN)
Assistant Video Assistant Referee: Iida Jumpei (JPN)
Referee Assessor : Saad K M Alfadhli (KWU)
Ma Ning 1979
ReplyDeleteWc u17 2019 Brazil
WC QATAR
CWC 2023 MOROCCO
2 AFC ASIAN CUP 2019 2023
Al-Fadhli (KUW)
Delete2004 Asian Cup final referee
2024 Asian Cup final referee assessor
Ma Ning refereed 3 games and 0 VAR intervention,far better than other referees,overall a very good performance.
ReplyDeleteMany Asian referee with poor accuracy on KMIs.
ReplyDeleteMa Ning awarded Qatar wrong penalty in match Qatar vs Palestine in round sixteen
ReplyDeleteThe AFC referees committee avoided appointing Arab referee in the final
ReplyDeleteThe AFC referees committee supported the penalty call.I think it's no argument here.
ReplyDeleteYou can post the link for discussion.
ReplyDelete[OFF-TOPIC] As Champions League return is just around the corner, I would be interesting to hear your opinions from the latest match refereed by Elite UEFA ref Istvan Kovacs in the domestic league (Sepsi OSK vs Universitatea Craiova, 1-3).
ReplyDeleteHis performance in this game has been heavily criticized, with the biggest Romanian online newspaper giving him a 1 mark (the scale is 1-10, with 1 being cathastrophical).
VAR at this match was Sorin Costreie, a former ref with no notable performances, who retired last summer and is now only working as VAR.
Min 19' - penalty appeal for Sepsi OSK
Kovacs decision: play on (no VAR intervention).
Video: https://youtu.be/5pVKOKYVQ_0?feature=shared&t=2904
Better angle: https://youtu.be/5pVKOKYVQ_0?feature=shared&t=3040
Min 27' - 2nd penalty appeal for Sepsi OSK
Kovacs decision: offensive foul against the attacking team (no VAR intervention).
Video: https://youtu.be/5pVKOKYVQ_0?feature=shared&t=3142
Min 45+5 - potential missed 2nd YC against Craiova #34 Raul Silva
Kovacs decision: foul, no YC
Video: https://youtu.be/5pVKOKYVQ_0?feature=shared&t=3312
Min 51' - potential missed RC against Craiova (elbowing)
Kovacs decision: foul, YC (no VAR intervention)
Video: https://youtu.be/5pVKOKYVQ_0?feature=shared&t=3472
Min 53' - penalty awarded for Craiova, overturned after VAR check.
V
Video: https://youtu.be/5pVKOKYVQ_0?feature=shared&t=3557
Min 69' - missed penalty for Craiova, awarded after VAR intervention.
Video: https://youtu.be/5pVKOKYVQ_0?feature=shared&t=3614
Also worth mentioning that Kovacs has been receiving low profile domestic matches since October (4 games, all among teams outside the playoff spots), this being the first higher profile game since then. His form has been rather poor the whole season (worth mentioning the infamous CFR Cluj - Petrolul in round 9, game with several crucial mistakes after which he received a suspension which he served refereeing in the Saudi Arabia Superleague (!)), but the criticism received from press after this last performance is unmatched.
19' - Penalty and YC for DOGSO-attempt would be the preferred call but only the last angle really shows that the defending player didn't touch the ball. One could also ask whether the attacking player would've been able to continue his action if not kicked by the defending player - it looks like he uses the play as a chance to win a penalty rather than being interested in a goal-scoring opportunity. However, considering this aspect would be maybe over-analysing the incident.
Delete27' - One can agree with this call. It seems the attacking player plays the ball with studs and therefore his action could be deemed dangerous. However, if there was normal kicking movement and the ball kicked in a usual way, it should've been a penalty for careless kick.
45+5' - No YC is correct, the ball is played towards an opponent and therefore the chances to reach the ball were pretty slim for the red player.
51' - I think it's a YC offence. It looks bad from the first angle where we can think about a deliberate action but the second angle shows no clenched fist (it points towards using an arm as a tool), the contact not being very serious and indeed both arms were used for jumping movement (contrary to the illusion the first angle offers).
53' - Good VAR intervention and overturn but I wouldn't blame Kovacs too much here. You can be easily deceived as it all looked very natural. Suboptimal positioning.
69' - Kovacs sacrificed his left side by breaking his diagonal way of movement to the right. He did that also in 53' and it didn't worked well for him. Penalty and we can debate about the card - most likely only YC nowadays but the likelihood of the fouled player getting the ball in a clear OGSO scenario was very high, imo.
Kovacs' positioning was really annoying and he paid for that. Three KMIs wrongly assessed (in my book) is never good but on the other hand all mistakes were somehow understandable.
Very good analysis ESR but outcome was too generous to Kovács. Maybe understandable but not forgivable.
DeleteVAR: good work in 53. and 69. min. but mistake in 27.
19' Should have been whistled by referee, the arguments are very well explained by Euro Soccer Referee, I agree this was not VAR stuff but the last replay makes it by far more a foul to be whistled than play on.
Delete27' If kovacs gave indirect free kick for dangerous play the decision was absolutely correct, but today we never see this infringment whistled and all people expect always penalty (indeed you can hear the opinion of Romanian commentators). I praise the referee, if he exactlt saw the incident and decided for indirect free kick to defender, otherwise, as Euro Soccer Referee wrote, clear penalty for the action by defender.
45'+5 opponent was not impeded from playing ball so I think you can give YC only for reckless here, but it doesn't seem the case, nevertheless the speed of the action and the very particular challenge give the perception of YC
51' WOW, a game full of borderline decisions, here I simply think that you can't be sure player did that on purpose and this would be element for RC, I think a small percentage of an accident without intention, and therefore only reckless challenge, exists, so YC must be supported, but at the same time, VAR wouldn't have questioned a RC if given by Kovacs, I think.
53' I think that in this case most of referees would have whistled penalty, it is a classic scenario in which attacker is touched by defender and falls down. The replay presents us a different reality with the foot of attacker rather on the leg of opponent or no contact at all. Romanian referee can't be blamed too much, I think even in a better position he could have made same mistake.
69' Kovacs not focusing at all in the middle of penalty area, he just followed the action from his position, correct what Euro Soccer Referee reports, with a wider view he could have spotted the incident, still not easy, but maybe expected. About the color of the card, we had an even closer DOGSO similar scenario than this one in Milan - Bologna (holding close to the net with a pass in the middle that would have been very likely reached by player) and we saw only YC after OFR. I think that the trend nowadays is to give ALWAYS YC when you can't be 100% sure about the possession of the ball, the same principle applied to changing color of DOGSO in case of genuine foul in penalty area. Teams don't want to see easy red cards and it seems the refereeing officers agree on this point. The one in Milan - Bologna was very evident, and I'm quite sure, not assessed as mistake to consider it only SPA.
Back to this game by Kovacs, I think indeed a very poor one, in the first incident he must whistle penalty, then the discussion about VAR intervention or not is another argument. Correct about the free kick in the second case, while clearly wrong decisions in the third and fourth incidents. In addition to that, very challenging game and further borderline situations. Not easy, but he indeed didn't look to be at the best, maybe in such games now for him it's harder to find some motivations, if compared to CL sonorous clashes. Also, I want to underline the body language during the last OFR, indeed it eas clear that he was very disappointed...
Football fans can't understand some of these decisions, as said, and in my opinion this makes th performance perceived as even more negative than it really was.
Kovacs is a ref with lots of ups and downs tbh.
DeleteWe praised him after Man City - Real Madrid, Liverpool - Real, Arsenal - Sevilla, etc. He seems to excel in (1st leg) matches between big teams that are football-focused and playing nice and clean football at high speed. Such games with a low foul stat are making Kovacs' poor positioning hardly noticeable.
On the other hand he had issues in games such as Sevilla-Lille, Milan-Napoli, Leverkusen-Porto, Porto-Shakthar, etc. where excellent technical skills are required (and not just running fast). In these matches his poor positioning was always noticeable. It’s recurring problem for sure.
Moreover, Kovacs also had been dependent on cards and not a ref to manage issues with personality. I assume that Rosetti and Vassaras recognize his deficiencies and will appoint him in a sensible way
https://www.streambug.io/cv/f060df
ReplyDeleteI agree with Mohammed - the penalty is actually de facto wrong. Qatar player can see the defender coming, deliberately kicks the ball too far, trawls his legs in order to generate a contact, and the defender isn't trying to challenge the attacker in the first case, but rather only block a shot. HOWEVER, the contact exists and I don't really see any practical problem with this penalty call; TBH, it seems like the expected one.
Re Mikael and Mohammed,
ReplyDeleteI had this kind of discussion with a few AFC Referee Instructors. IMHO, football about playing the ball. Any action that does not intend to play the ball or fails the play the ball are under the risk of being penalized. The side that fails to play the ball is responsible for the foul. In Ma Ning's case, and many similar cases where the attacker kicks the ball away, the ball was still in reach of the attacker (though very borderline) so the the defender is held responsible for action of failing to play the ball. Therefore, the decision of a foul and penalty is correct, at least highly supportable.
I believe this is the consensus in refereeing practice, at least from the education I received. Happy to discuss further about approaches and philosophies on handling these incidents.
Agree with Mikael, this wouldn't be penalty for the unfair behavior by attacker, and it was rather him going against defender, but modern football wants to see penalty because you have a player running in penalty area and a defender making a tackle without playing ball, enough for all... such penalty must be always whistled and supported.
ReplyDeleteAlso to add, that's why in modern football we have difficult officiating, because players are allowed to do that and they are not blamed, the main target becomes getting a penalty and not trying to continue an action. It is for this aspect a very different football if compared to the old one when a referee could decide about a situation in a way and maybe there was not even the evidence he had taken correct decision or not... very poor by attacker who indeed kicks ball and then just very easyily runs into the defender.
ReplyDeleteI cannot believe my eyes, impossible call and no OFR! Easy and very clear example of simulation given as a penalty.
ReplyDeleteReferee: MANOUCHOS Evangelos (Greece)
VAR: EVANGELOU Angelos (Greece)
https://x.com/kuw_pl/status/1755600691631210703?s=46&t=PH8y3YWkfGxvTpIa3xlnRQ
Some words and (below) clips from Iran vs. Qatar. My first thought - what a terrible penalty decision that was! This is not Italian-esque rigorousness regarding handball, but simply not understanding the laws, or the game itself. One comment would be "AFC have lost the plot about handballs", but in my eyes the more nuanced and correct comment is, "AFC have paid for their 'regional quotas' approach and the appointed Thailese VAR has lost the plot". Even throughout the game, Pu-udom was taking longer than necessary to clear even blatant situations; of course, one shouldn't rush things, but if the Thai official gave a 'jittery' approach in the game as a whole, then this really poor handball call confirmed it. Arms close to the body, mostly orientated around protecting his face, barely enlarging his body surface by any margin… sorry, this is simply never a handball and a BIG mistake by Sivakorn Pu-udom in this scene. Al-Ali could have still refused after the OFR, but that would have been a difficult course of action I think given the pictures shown. How was the Kuwaiti ref overall? Well, okay I'd say - he isn't a charismatic leader on the pitch, but his 'thorough' approach generally worked quite well. Successful verbal warnings at 27' and 45' are obviously the kind of things AFC were impressed by in his style. While he did miss quite a few late fouls in both halves, I found the second less satisfying for Al-Ali. No cards at 45' was fine, but 52' was a big 'riot' and in UEFA you would be 'killed' for not booking anyone there, many players got involved in the scuffle. After that, he started to lose it a bit and of course needed the OFR for the fairly clear RC, Iran defender being the last man. Overall I think AFC can be fairly satisfied with how it went, tempered though by: a) an extremely questionable penalty and the luck that the recipient side went on to lose, b) that Al-Ali wasn’t so much in control for quite a lot of the second half and c) that the Kuwaiti required an OFR to give a clear RC.
ReplyDeleteClips in the next comment.
Key Match Incidents
Delete18: https://www.streambug.io/cv/7aa087
47: https://www.streambug.io/cv/e15d01
82: https://www.streambug.io/cv/90debc
91: https://www.streambug.io/cv/890878
First Half
https://www.streambug.io/cv/e32a5e
11’ - penalty appeal by Qatar.
https://www.streambug.io/cv/7aa087
18’ - correct decision of no foul in the dogso scenario, caution for dissenting on the bench to Iran.
https://www.streambug.io/cv/05ff92
20’ - yellow card to Iran for tactical foul.
https://www.streambug.io/cv/e66e00
27’ - management of dissenting by Iran in consecutive scenes.
https://www.streambug.io/cv/8b0f47
40’ - yellow card to Qatar for reckless striking / tactical foul.
https://www.streambug.io/cv/dafc85
45’ - management of an altercation.
Second Half
https://www.streambug.io/cv/e15d01
47’ - penalty given to Iran for handball (+ yellow card to Qatar for ‘basog’ handling) after an ofr; missed caution to Qatar for reckless.
https://www.streambug.io/cv/bf0b1d
52’ - penalty area incident for Qatar followed by big altercation.
https://www.streambug.io/cv/ba2812
56’ - management of dissenting by Qatar in consecutive scenes.
https://www.streambug.io/cv/8ba49c
59’ - tactical foul by Qatar.
https://www.streambug.io/cv/00fc16
62’ - correct non-SYC to Iran after a late but careless foul.
https://www.streambug.io/cv/ecaa63
65’ - undercutting penalty area incident for Iran.
https://www.streambug.io/cv/8ff91d
74’ - missed late foul by Qatar.
https://www.streambug.io/cv/90debc
77’ - potential yellow card to Iran and denied advantage for Qatar.
https://www.streambug.io/cv/90debc
82’ - excellent onside by Kuwaiti linesman for ultimately the winning goal to Qatar.
https://www.streambug.io/cv/2db196
88’ - potential vc after a careless foul but not enough even for a yellow card, imo.
https://www.streambug.io/cv/890878
+91’ - red card to Iran for dogso, correct decision but only after an ofr, changing from yellow card given on-field (defender was the last man).
https://www.streambug.io/cv/47e191
+100’ - potential deliberate handball by Iran, confusing reaction of the Kuwaiti linesman.
https://www.streambug.io/cv/282137
FT - chaotic end featuring two big Iran chances, total loss of match control in one scene (+103’), no reaction after a further dtr (+104’), and generally excellent work fourth official Jumpei Iida and even jumping in by reserve linesman Zhang Cheng to stay on top of both technical areas.
Thank you very much for the clips!
DeleteThe main thing catching my attention watching those is how Al-Ali suceeded to maintain a certain level of trust, while clearly not being that charismatic leader on the FoP. Of course there have been some dissenting actions for him to face, but he almost always ended up connecting with the players, which is quite something considering the hotheads from both sides. Furthermore, he ended the game relatively unscattered, while having no real control and aiming for survival (staying in the shadow and hoping for the best, obvious in the last ~25-30') through 2H. I believe this is enough to please AFC.
The handball penalty call was plain wrong and a rather embarassing decision (like, is there a single reason to call for an OFR ? Dreadful from Pu-udom but Al-Ali should have had the courage to stick with his original decision tbh...) The DOGSO-RC given after OFR was quite clearly the correct outcome, although my feelings are a) this was a 'safe choice' from the Kuwaiti considering the time of the foul and b) the Qatari not having full control of the ball would have been a sufficient reason to support the YC in UEFA vision IMO.
About the 4th/5th officials activity: how refreshing it was ! I 'm still scarred by the last WC scenes where benches were given 'carteblanche' throughout the tournament.
One last word: you put the 82' clip in the 77' section too :)
Correct link:
Deletehttps://www.streambug.io/cv/047453
77’ - potential yellow card to Iran and denied advantage for Qatar.
Thanks for the comment! I agree with your main takeaway too - Ahmed Al-Ali's style was quite interesting. While his interactions were really good in the first half, the two incidents in the 56' clip suggest it was wearing a bit thin(ner) as the match went on. As you said, AFC should be happy and my personal judgement as well is that Al-Ali justified the assignment overall. I wonder too how deliberate the appointment of Iida was - simply regional quota filling, or maybe sth more deliberate, tasking the most law-enforcer type official at the tournament with keeping control of the benches in this hot encounter. He had a bad appearance in this tournament, but I will be very interested which Japanese name(s) made the grade from FIFA's perspective on the road to WC2026 from AFC - Iida would deserve that call-up, imo.
Just asking for your opinion, what do you think JPN No.1 at the moment? Based on assignment, initially Kimura was No.1, then Araki, but I’m not sure that Araki is better than Iida. I think Japanese faced the worst AFC Asian Cup, their national team is out “early” and their officials can’t performed well, especially in terms of main referee.
ReplyDeleteIMO, Iida's style is (much) better than Araki's & Kimura's, whose level ranges from 'average' to 'okay, but wouldn't trust him a WC KO stage game', though Iida's KGZKSA was rightly his only game as a central referee at this Asian Cup, as he had two OFRs (I'd still recommend to watch his performance at VIETHA AFF final 2nd leg in early last year :D). Don't really know what happened to Kimura, he had a shaky performance -but not the worst- at QATTJK but seems that AFC sent him home for a different reason (missed VAR intervention for goalkeeper's handball in in IRNHKG?). So the #1 candidate at this point might be Araki, a referee I don't really fancy but had less problems in his two games than his compatriots.
DeleteToo harsh opening caution by Ma for what was a generally careless foul on the Qatar goalkeeper (18’). A rather heavy Jordanian foul tackle a few minutes prior was actually more reckless, but only a small warning was administered on that occasion.
ReplyDeleteI agree about the challenge prior in the 15th minute , I also call attention to the foul by Qatar #20 in the 3rd minute. I think the challenge on the goalkeeper (18’) warranted a caution, but interesting to analyze in the context of the two earlier fouls that could have drawn cautions.
DeleteI think what he decided was generally okay in both 15/18, but he was very jittery in both episodes: unsure what to do, whether to book, in the first, and immediately sprinting over with a yellow in the second, anxious not to lose control, and overestimating how bad the foul by the Jordanian was.
DeleteVery soft penalty call by Ma Ning. I don’t think if this match played in neutral venue he would be call that foul.
ReplyDeleteCorrect penalty I think. He’d call that at the other end
DeleteBut if he’s not whistle it, I don’t think VAR could intervene there
DeleteAfter a few early challenges that could have been the first caution of the game, Ma pulls out the yellow for Jordan #9 for a reckless challenge on the opposing goalkeeper in the 18th minute. Good decision.
ReplyDelete20th minute correct penalty given to Qatar.
Correct penalty, firmly called
ReplyDeleteMissed YC Qatar #20 on 29’ reckless challenge on achilles of Ali Olwan
ReplyDeleteCan anyone find a clip of this challenge? Based on the point and mode of contact one has to think about a yellow card at a minimum, it would have even probably caused the VAR to take a close look for a possible red card. Difficult to spot on the field.
DeleteProbably hard to avoid for the Qatari player so red would be extremely harsh. Another foul from him just now though, possible SPA and still no caution
Deletehttps://streamin.me/v/24497406
ReplyDeleteTrip from behind (careless), correct penalty. VAR should have intervened in case of NO CALL.
Could you get a clip of the 29’ challenge as well?
DeleteMa Ning is losing the plot here…
ReplyDeleteHalftime thoughts:
DeleteI don't think he has lost the plot YET, but in a game more difficult than this one, he would have. [I am not saying this game is easy, the Qatar team especially is subtly difficult to referee with lots of diving, complains, petty fouls etc.]
The good: He was in very good position to see and sell the penalty kick decision. Both cautions have (for me) been correct and he did well to get to those situations urgently.
The bad: I think his assessment of challenges has been kind of all over the place. There were several situations where he could have shown a yellow card for reckless challenges but decided not to (3', 15', 29', 34'). Not all of these were mandatory, but 29' certainly was and I think 3' would have been VERY useful. Sometimes he has called very soft fouls (36' and 39', for example); other times he has not whistled things that were much more (e.g. 14', and possibly 45'+8' but need to see that one again). I also think his demeanor seems small and nervy. Even when giving stern warnings, he doesn't project much strength.
The host influence really visible on Ma Ning performance so far
ReplyDeleteWhy maning stop the game evrymoment and warning the player yo do it first ok is enough
ReplyDeleteThe injury time should go up to 8 minutes now with the Qatari player injury.
ReplyDeleteCorrect YC for Jordan and correct no foul for Afif diving at the end.
ReplyDeleteCan Qatari players not be carded? #24 has delayed restart twice by kicking the ball away and #20 as previously mentioned HAS to have at least a yellow…
ReplyDelete29' was very hard to spot, but was very reckless (at minimum!) by no.20; I find much less forgiveable the non-booking of Qatar no.9 for the really deliberate late charge he committed at 34', with Ma incredibly assessing it as an accidental(!) head collision. Game control really felt in doubt in those minutes after (hence my comment above), which included a very bizarre freekick given to Jordan. Three very blatant cases of kicking the ball away by the Qataris too which the Chinese ref completely ignored on each occasion. The huge call for the penalty was obviously justified though, Ma having nice proximity to the incident too. So: not a disaster, but not a good first half in technical aspects for the referee from China either.
DeleteAgreed Mikael, and good point about the repeated kicking the ball away (Jordan growing increasingly frustrated at it as well). I didn’t mention it in my own comment because I feel there are some competitions that simply don’t want referees enforcing that at all, unfortunately.
DeletePositioning is to blame for the missed penalty in the 69th minute, Ma is too central and should have been further to the right to get a view of the right side of the penalty area and avoid being screened by several other players.
ReplyDeleteHmmm… didactically it is a foul for sure, but given there was no step on foot, I considered such play by defenders as ‘within bounds’ for modern football.
Delete2 penalty (very clear penalty no doubt) correctly given by Ma Ning but the one especially with OFR, in case Qatar won, still referee would be come trending topic (“to blame”)
ReplyDeletePoor OFR called by Fu Ming
ReplyDeleteClearly no VC
DeleteMa Ning redeeming himself there. Terrible from VAR to recommend a review
ReplyDeleteThis Qatar #5 is a real annoyance to referee, second time this game he’s gone down clutching his face despite contact only being to his chest. Correct by Ma to show yellow, well done to whichever teammate alerted him to the situation behind his back. Strange OFR recommended and good on Ma to stick with yellow; I would have even liked to see him ALSO show a yellow to the Qatari for simulation.
ReplyDeleteSurely that was offside??
ReplyDeleteWhat a match 3 penalty given to the host, I don’t know what media reactions for this, especially Iraqi :) after Faghani
ReplyDeleteVery interesting situation, it highly depends on what Ma’s on field decision was with regard to the challenge which occurred after a delayed (incorrect) offside. To me it’s debatably a penalty but I think there’s an argument that the goalkeeper’s leg is already down and then the attacker steps into him and falls easily.
ReplyDeleteGreat tournament but hard to take this seriously. This final could be played 10,000 times and there would never be a scenario where Jordan get 3 penalties and zero cards. Yet here we are
ReplyDeleteQatar were not as clumsy in their penalty area as Jordan were. Take your conspiracy theories somewhere else.
DeleteI’m not suggesting the officials were paid or anything, just influenced. With a Faghani in charge the game never would have panned out the way it did. To win the fair play award aswell just makes a mockery of it all, but there will always be a big asterisk next to Qatar’s name in football anyway
DeleteVery tight onside according to SAOT, by the shoulder. Would have been better if Ma had called PK live, then go immediately back to offside, without needing an OFR later (?). A carbon copy situation of Kim Jong-hyeok's in IRNSYR.
ReplyDeleteBut really with different damage
DeleteSurely with 3 OFR, 1 correctly reject, 1 correctly given, and 1 doubtful call it would be really nightmare for the AFC after this match. Oil money would be trending topic because doubtful penalty eliminate Jordan chance to bring the match to the extra time.
ReplyDeleteFor me no pelanty in extra time afif look for contact
ReplyDeleteHe pushed it past the goalkeeper who was late; in my opinion it's a clear foul and less controversial than the second penalty but understand how one could have different views about that.
DeleteIn refereeing, sometimes you need a bit of luck - and Ma Ning was incredibly unlucky today. The first penalty was right, it was basically impossible to refuse the second at the OFR, Fu very unwisely called him to send off a Jordanian for VC, and his linesman was wrong with his offside call at the end. BUT, with his weak game management and general impression, I'm not sure the Chinese ref 'earned' much luck either on the day. Euro Soccer Ref was exactly right, Ma Ning did not have the skills to referee the final.
Disasterous tournament for AFC, and the final was 'the icing on the cake'.
Without doubt: A big crisis in Asian refereeing!
"The final performance that AFC deserved". What a mess...
ReplyDeleteAgree 100%
DeleteI think that’s a little harsh, it wasn’t a total mess. I think Ma’s accuracy on the field was quite poor, but ultimately he got through it with no (justifiable…) controversy. I do think the standard of VARs in AFC is quite poor, I don’t like the second and third reviews recommended by Fu Ming, but I think the last penalty decision can be seen either way.
DeleteIn summary, overall unsatisfactory performance in a variety of ways but not a total disaster. It is a shame that this is the best AFC has to offer right now, besides Faghani.
Here we go 433 reactions :)
ReplyDeleteWho we should blame after this poor performance
ReplyDeleteI didn't follow so close this tournament like AFCON, but based on what I saw and thank to your reports, I must say that AFC is in extremely poor times and that's also a "compliment" for them. The Chinese referee has not distinguished himself from the others too much, but at the end he had a certain reputation, coming from a "neutral" region in relation to the final teams, but at the end he showed what many other referees also showed at this tournament. Very weak and missing in a basic skills to control a game. See the card to keeper before final whistle, just as small examples.
ReplyDeleteTBH I prefer a CAF referee who screams at a player, even though this is not allowed... but definitely we can't find a middle way there!
First pelanty given by ma i rember the same incident happend in MAR RSA it was play on
ReplyDeletehttps://streambug.org/cv/0780d8
https://www.streambug.io/cv/f35f18
DeleteIncident from mar rsa very semlaire to first given by ma ning
Second after ofr
ReplyDeletehttps://streambug.org/cv/10d434
This is what happens when you push referees who don't deserve to be pushed. I wrote after Ma Ning's first game (a pity that for private reasons I couldn't follow the tournament since MD3) that he completely doesn't feel when to jump in with cards and warnings. With all due respect, such referee wouldn't reach first category in UEFA.
ReplyDeleteAFC has better referees: Al-Kaf was the best, Muhammad Abdullah Hassan Muhammad and Faghani are top personalities as well, Makhadmah's absence after first game is really strange, Fallahi gave good impression as well. So what is the problem? They are all from WAFF. The other AFC members (ASEAN, EAFF, CAFA, SAFF) have NO really talented referees and the ones who operate at the highest level are artificially created as top referees. Even if one or two show good management skills, they are poor in decision making. And, unfortunately, most of them are simply weak in both aspects (see the Chinese).
Something is very wrong with coaching in AFC. They were really good until WC2010 but after that tournament everything changed there and 'WC2014 Busaccaism' is still present there. The problem is that AFC referees were always very(!) good law enforcers and when they are not allowed to referee in a strict way, they are catastrophic - see late Irmatov!
So, my recommendation would be to change philosophy to stricter one (ignoring even the most blatant 'kicking the ball away after whistle' cases is something I can't understand) and coach, coach, coach, especially in EAFF, CAFA and SAFF.
After farouk bodo left afc stragglers
Delete3 penalties and no red card are all correct and brave. Remarkable performance despite some flaws. It would be worse if officiated by another ref
ReplyDeleteAgree with anonymous,not so good in a challenging game,1 correctly rejected and 2 correctly given,all of these are reasonable,it wouldn't be a disaster.
ReplyDeleteOverall a decent performance.The quality of AFC referees should not be overestimated.Plenty of OFRs in AFC Asian Cup.
DeleteFurther remarks about the VAR in this game.
ReplyDeleteGenerally a very slow procedure. I think 1:30 / 1:45 minutes to call referee for the penalty in 73' is too much. The game continued regularly for a very long time and there wasn't any clue an OFR was about to take place. Ball went out of play and then OFR. The sensation is that: what would have happened without a stoppage in the game? Nevertheless, things could have been managed better, maybe VAR was not sure about the call.
Second OFR for possible red card: totally wrong. VAR should have detected by himself it wasn't clear RC. Good by referee to stay with his original decision.
Third OFR: in this case a rather long time before calling referee is justified due to the offside check.
As Quilava correctly stated above, the fact that referee needed OFR to call penalty was not a good thing, would have been expected to switch the decision in penalty, once VAR had verified it wasn't offside. This should mean that Ning missed what happened later after the wrong offside call, but if we look back at that minute, we see him waiting AR and looking at him before taking the decision, so I think he had very likely an idea but he wasn't then brave to confirm it without watching at monitor, or, more generally, this is something too complex to do for the current status of AFC referees.
Jonas Eriksson in ig story said that Akram Afif need to be booked for his hocus pocus celebration, what do you think?
ReplyDelete