Sunday 27 November 2022

Game 26 - César Ramos in Belgium vs. Morocco (discussion)

Second game for Mexican referee César Ramos, he will control the tie between Belgium and Morocco, let's comment here about his perfomance. 



Game 26 - Doha (14:00 CET)
BELGIUM - MOROCCO
Referee: César Ramos (MEX)
Assistant Referee 1: Alberto Morin (MEX)
Assistant Referee 2: Miguel Hernandez (MEX)
Fourth Official: Yoshimi Yamashita (JPN)
Reserve Assistant Referee: Neuza Back (BRA)
Video Assistant Referee: Fernando Guerrero (MEX)
Assistant Video Assistant Referee: Nicolas Gallo (COL)
Offside Video Assistant Referee: Kathryn Nesbitt (USA)
Support Video Assistant Referee: Armando Villarreal (USA)
Standby Assistant Video Assistant Referee: Kyle Atkins (USA)

45 comments:

  1. 11'I know ithat was first serious foul,but for sure that needed YC for SPA.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Agreed. SPA. Without offence, attacker is alone moving into PA

      Delete
  2. OT Italian famous SKY Sport journalist Fabio Caressa talked about Sikazwe and his performance in Belgium - Canada.
    Here the short video on twitter:
    https://twitter.com/notFurge/status/1595897063610400769
    He has stated that according to some sources, Sikazwe didn't want to go to VAR after the first time, when there were the penalty appeals by Canada. Don't know how much this can be true, but Caressa made a statement before saying: "You know we as journalists must be sure before telling something, because we hear many things". In this case, it looked like the source was at stadium, and very close to the facts. It is reported that Collina got angry for this reason, of course if true it's normal this happened.
    However, I must also report that Caressa added some remarks about the Zambian and his past, the famous AFCON game and his early whistel, but no mention about his health issues during the game (this could allow to lose some credits on the previous info he reported).
    I just reported as information, take it with the benefit of the doubt.
    Moreover, many articles by Italian press about the Zambian and his very controversial past.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. By pulling all these stuff from the past, journalists definitely lose credibility for me. If writing about a specific game or incident, then concentrate on that specific game or incident. There is absolutely no need to create such negative sensationalism, especially out of context (or without any). It's also very unfair to Sikazwe: I was very critical of his performance, but this is wrong IMO. And also explains a few things about reasons for such low level of knowledge about refereeing in the general public.

      Delete
    2. We are constantly getting on Sikazwe.

      I am Canadian. This is all very speculative. VAR, not the referee, decides on whether to intervene or not. We are not in 2018 anymore where VAR was in its infancy and referees intervened verbally before VAR had a good look.

      Former CAD FIFA AR Joe Fletcher analyzed BOTH CAD penalty appeals on TSN. Neither were penalties (ball played in one; attacker caused contact in other). I had already come to the same conclusion before his analysis and fully agreed.

      Delete
    3. I don't understand people's negative approach towards Sikazwe. It was a very challenging game for him and apart from not spotting the handball (what was quickly corrected after OFR), he had a very good game. I would like to see him again as I don't think he deserves to be rejected after this performance!

      Delete
    4. And by choosing to bring these speculations, it is not a good look on this blog and the admin. You could have easily passed. You did not bring similar damning speculations and negative past stories about other refs who had truly poor games here. I for Sikazwe will probably get another game in this tournament as his performance is not as dreadful as people describe it to be. In fact he had a good game.

      Delete
  3. Correct first YC of the game by Ramos, the Mexican seems always very focused, according to my memories about him at previous WC, now he seems a different referee, by far stronger... I didn't like him at that time.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. He missed what should have been the actual "first YC" in the 11th minute for a crystal clear SPA foul on De Bruyne.

      Delete
  4. Replies
    1. No. Intensity (key indicator) was not high. However, 100% YC.

      Delete
    2. So then missed 2 YC's ...

      Delete
    3. Don't be mistake counter, please :) cheers

      Delete
  5. Replies
    1. Also a clear arm in the face so it shouldn't have been allowed anyway.

      Delete
    2. Won't be a goal. Attacker challenged for ball.

      Delete
    3. Aye. Closer than I thought it would be... Only a slight amount of head offside

      Delete
  6. Correct offside 48' after OFR

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Ooofff, I thought they were in trouble whether to ignore the striking on Witsel or not; surprised to see offside be given... to be rewatched carefully.

      Delete
    2. Offside the obvious (easier/first) offence to deal with

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

      Delete
    4. VAR called him for the offside first and then for a attacking foul.
      Remember previous match of Cesar Ramos and VAR intervention (also attacking foul before handball)

      Delete
  7. Very good OFR and good decision.
    Clear interferance on the GK

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The offside attacker challenged for the ball - this is the offence. Not really "interference on the GK".

      Delete
    2. Though ‘attempting to play the ball’ in the laws is considered a form of ‘interfering with an opponent’, in this case the goalkeeper :)

      Delete
  8. SAOT clip:

    https://send.cm/d/HM3j

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Good call (again) by Guerrero. Tbh they should have been looking quite hard for any reasons to disallow this goal after the original freekick decision...

      Delete
    2. And this time, it should be mentioned as well, very quick evidence of the offside position in the form of the Saot-animation. Before we had to wait much, much longer for these animations to appear.

      Delete
  9. There was one GK for Morocco during anthems and he was also in the line up graphics but when the game started another one was between posts. Weird situation and i'm not sure if it is legal

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. As long as the game has not started, the team can change a named player. No sanction, of course. Even if the referee is not informed, there is no sanction (it is only reported).

      Delete
    2. There was a report that he might have gotten sick before the start of the game. Hope he's okay, however Law-wise there's nothing wrong with that.

      Delete
  10. Ramos has to pray that unlike Siebert in Atlético vs. ManCity, there isn't one incident to make everything explode at the end and he can just about survive this game...

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. ... or a second Morocco goal :)

      Goodness me, that was a struggle for the Mexican. I prefer him to Elfath but the American would be a better option for KO stages than Ramos...

      Delete
  11. Great performance for me. Kudos to Ramos and his team.

    ReplyDelete
  12. I like Ramos a lot. He has understood that the teams are playing mostly honestly and has let the game flow even when there were some easy fouls he could have called. I think the performance is spoilt a bit by the missed YC at 31' and the missed offside call that had to be fixed by Guerrero, but I can only find positive things to say about Ramos's approach.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The player was offside by less than 5 cm. That's not a miss for me.

      Delete
  13. A less convincing showing than his 1st match, foul detection wasn't very good and a couple of YC's missed for my liking. Ramos has probably shown enough over his 2 matches to stake a claim for a knockout match, especially his 1st performance

    ReplyDelete
  14. Not entirely impressed by the Mexican's performance today.
    He surely managed to 'get through it' but he didn't seem self-confident enough for me, the match was sometimes about to inflame but Ramos was lucky enough to survive this duel until the end.
    In the end he could have played a few minutes more (5' added, whistle after 5 min altough the Morocco goal took quite some time) - but he simply wanted to end this before it would explode.
    He was also lucky that the goal in injury time of 1H was offside because the freekick was debatable to say it kindly.
    Again very, very good VAR work by Guerrero - he does well in the VAR room.

    In conclusion however, this match leaves doubts about Ramos capabilities to deal with hot(ter) matches in the following rounds - at least for my taste.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The Saudi player was clearly kicked/fouled

      Delete
    2. Horacio Elizondo (ARG) agreed that there was indeed a foul. I'll take the word of the Referee who whistled a World Cup Final over anybody else in this case.

      Delete
  15. Analysis

    Video clip of the just-before-HT disallowed goal/intervention:
    https://streamable.com/z3w22t

    César Ramos survived - but only just. For the second time running, the Mexican was appointed to a ‘quasi-host’ game, having first handled TUNISIA vs. Denmark, now he was now in for Belgium vs. MOROCCO. This game was a step up from the last one, with Ramos facing a much higher level of difficulty. One can praise Ramos for ultimately not letting everything get out of hand in a tense atmosphere (both on and off the FoP), but I must say he was in very deep waters this time, and to carry on the analogy, FIFA should be careful not to push Mexico’s official ‘out of his depth’ in the surely inevitable third assignment.

    He signposted even early on that faith in his own technical accuracy wasn’t terribly high: missed foul in 1’, rather wrong foul in 2’, missed striking on Ziyech in 3’. Starting on disciplinary matters, contrary to Wilton Sampaio in POLKSA, after a SPA holding on De Bruyne (11’) which would have constituted a quite justified YC, Ramos only gave a freekick, and decided to ‘hope for the best’. He rightfully cautioned Onana for recklessly using his arms (28’), but missed an even more blatant offence (SFP was in sight) for the very reckless tackle on Hazard by Amallah, that was 32’.

    He saw out the rest of the first half okay in this regard, and the last incident before halftime was the disallowed goal - rightfully so, another good piece of VAR work by a CONCACAF official, this time Fernando Guerrero. Only when being the official assessor could you work out where to apportion blame in this scene for the on-field miss (maybe linesman Hernández detected the offside but Ramos, who wasn’t well-positioned to make a call on active vs. passive offside, said there was no offence? it is one scenario at least). In addition, the attacker was only beyond the second-last defender by a small margin, as SAOT showed. If not for the offside, would the VMO crew have intervened for the striking foul do you think?

    The second half was something of a ‘struggle’ for Ramos, who clung on rather grimly to match control. Missed, or at least unconvincingly given, assessments of foul duels were not uncommon (49’, 50’, 64’, 80’, 83’, 85’), though we should be clear - the Mexican was focused, he saw it through to the end, FIFA should be happy with his performance. I can’t help but feel the +95’ caution, the second and final sanction of the game, would have been much messier if not for the match being now decided at this point. Overall Ramos did okay (and his strong ARs count in his favour), but I wouldn’t want to bet thaaaat much that if facing a more difficult tie than this one (in the knockout stage), he would be able to successfully land the plane - which he did in Belgium vs. Morocco yesterday.

    6 - 7 - 6 - (III)

    ReplyDelete

Thank you for writing a comment on our blog!