The Round of 16 ties have now concluded, and we are 96 matches into the FIFA World Cup™. What is your overall assessment?
Let’s start by saying that we have now played 50% more matches than at the FIFA World Cup Qatar 2022™, and there are still eight more huge games to be played.
Overall, we are happy. However, with such a high number of matches played in a relatively short period of time, it is normal that some things do not go as expected. When that happens, they are ready to work even harder to ensure they are fully prepared for the next match.
Of course, constructive discussion about decisions will always be part of football, but unfounded allegations have no place in our sport. Nobody can question the integrity of the FIFA World Cup match officials. When this happens, it may provoke reactions that lead to threats against them and their families. This is not right.
Equally, nobody can claim that FIFA Refereeing can be influenced by anyone, not even by the FIFA President [Gianni Infantino]. He has always shown his full support for FIFA Team One while trusting us to work with complete independence. Match officials make honest decisions and, just like players and coaches, they always try to do their best.
Are there any specific areas of focus for you?
Usually, during a competition, we prefer not to focus on specific incidents. However, as we recently clarified what match officials would be looking for when attacking players try to prevent the opposing goalkeeper from moving and being able to defend the goal, we also wanted to clarify another topic that has generated debate.
After every goal is scored, the VAR checks the attacking possession phase (APP). If a foul is identified in the build-up and is deemed to have had an impact on the goal, the VAR will recommend an on-field review. There is no defined limit regarding either the distance from goal or the amount of time between the incident and the goal.
An example of this came in the Argentina v Egypt game where Egypt No. 19 Marwan Attia clearly treads on the foot of Argentina No. 6 Lisandro Martínez.
We believe that a foul is a foul. Regardless of whether the foul appears 'obvious', if the referee did not see it on the field of play, the VAR can intervene.
Equally, if no foul is identified in the build-up to a goal, the VAR will advise the referee accordingly. Stepping on an opponent's foot is a foul, whereas a defender who touches the ball first and then makes normal football contact has not committed a foul. Again, an example of this came at the end of the same game. The referee and the VAR deemed it normal football contact between Egypt No. 10 Mohamed Salah and Argentina No. 10 Julián Alvarez.
Of course, there will always be an element of subjectivity in some decisions, but we are happy with how this principle has been applied throughout the tournament.
It's not the Salah situation that people are talking about. It's the holding on Fathy where his collar almost broke.
ReplyDelete
ReplyDeleteThis once great judge destroyed the European, and now the world, judges.
One thing that stands out is that every time a controversy arises, Collina immediately rushes to make public statements and give interviews. He clearly cares a great deal about managing the public image. I keep saying that this World Cup has featured an approach that simply wasn't there in previous editions.
ReplyDeletePhilipp mentioned the regular interviews about refereeing in past WC editions whern I said that in the other discussion, but I'm sure he also realizes that those were different circumstances. They were essentially technical briefings and general reviews of refereeing matters. Their purpose was not to respond to a specific controversy. They were low-profile updates followed mainly by people who were genuinely interested in refereeing.
This time, however, Collina is personally stepping in front of public opinion and, so to speak, delivering all of his verdicts. In short, they are doing everything possible to ensure that this World Cup ends with as little controversy as possible. And Collina wants to take the spotlights.
The fact that there has been so much discussion, to put it mildly, and in reality these have been extremely heated controversies, with Egypt in revolt against the French referee has undoubtedly shaken Collina and Busacca. Believe me, their primary objective is not yellow cards, red cards, penalties, or anything like that. What they really want is for everyone to be happy after the match. That is their biggest priority. If they could avoid showing even a single yellow card, they probably would. It almost feels as if they want referees to go out onto the pitch and apply the Laws of the Game by not really applying them.
I can see the whole picture. Collina apologizes because there have been controversial decisions. But shouldn't you simply ignore the criticism? Shouldn't you stand by your convictions? Instead, constantly giving verdicts and trying to smooth things over with reassuring words, in my opinion, says a lot about the direction they want to take.
A performance is assessed only looking at the effects on a national team, that seems to be the philosophy. But that isn't refereeing. That's simply creating a carefully managed spectacle.
Fortunately, this tournament is almost over, and soon we will be back to UEFA. Yes, I have to say it: even though I have criticized UEFA in the past, UEFA and the people working with him operate on a completely different level. Of course, there are still major injustices and things that don't work as they should. But at least there is still a fundamental respect for what refereeing is supposed to be.
I won’t dispute your desire to be back to UEFA competitions, but I do want to address the comparison between a 5-week tournament and the European competitions, which take well over 9 months.
DeleteIMHO the management of both events cannot be compared, as a relatively short (WC or EURO) tournament is more or less a pressure cooker while in a year-over competition dynamics and emotions are different. One only needs to compare the commenting on this blog during the UEFA competition phase and in major tournaments.
We shouldn’t forget the absolute shambles Rosetti cum suis made last Euro’s, throwing their refs under the bus whenever Mr. Ceferin (or whichever influential individual) required so.
Acknowledging all deficiencies one could find in the current World Cup, one could also view Collina’s post-match statements as standing by his officials publicly. Something Rosetti and his refcom would never do.
I think that this approach also does more harm than good. Why now and not after France-Paraguay. Why did he not mention the penalty shout? Has he ever admitted a mistake? This will not sway people who have already made up their minds. Similar to when Infantino came out to say that the committee acted independently and that Trump's call didn't have any effect. Also, no way can you consider the foul before Egypt's goal a clear and obvious error despite the very high thresholds we've seen for fouls. If it wouldn't be considered a foul without a goal, a goal being scored shouldn't change that. You cannot have your cake and eat it.
DeleteThis comment belongs here
ReplyDeleteWhat were expecting to come from the devil's mouth ""that the game between Argentina and Egypt was refereed poorly """ that's impossible in million years, such a negative comment from the Refcom chair would have SHAKEN THE WORLD and Letexier career would've been lfinished internationally , And also a negative statement would've confirmed all the conspiracy theories and every Argentina match was going to be under review from every MEDIA Household starting from Qatar WC22.
Collina is also doing his job and he has been great at it over the years so not a surprise to me, BUT IF there was no wrong doing by the match officials ( put all the doubts to bed and appoint them both Letexier and company --same VAR -- to another match) in that way no more questions from my side, but if not Letexier is in very big trouble and I don't think he will survive especially in FIFA
It can't be that coincidentally all the referees assigned to ARG just suddenly decide to have a poor performance so I'm not sure what you mean here about punishing Letexier. If such accusations are indeed true, it is definitely orders from FIFA rather than independent referees acting out of their own volition. So I'm not sure how not appointing Letexier helps sooth the negative optics surrounding referees
Delete“A foul is a foul” unless the referee had a clear view and a penalty would result.
ReplyDeleteI thought Letexier had a good game but ignorant of the narrative surrounding Messi and co. Needed to find opportunities to punish ARG to give perception of fairness but did not take easy one after Messi penalty miss.
Collina insists that FIFA's refereeing is "not influenced by anyone." Yet if a phone call from Donald Trump to Gianni Infantino is followed by Balogun's red card being overturned, that claim loses credibility. Whether it was direct influence or not, the optics are terrible. FIFA should never allow a situation where political intervention appears capable of affecting sporting decisions.
ReplyDeleteHe also says that "a foul is a foul" and that VAR should intervene whenever the referee misses one. However, Argentina's goal against Austria came after a clear foul on the Austrian player, yet VAR remained silent. That directly contradicts the principle Collina himself outlined. Either VAR intervenes consistently for missed fouls, or these explanations become little more than convenient justifications applied only when they suit FIFA.
I would also add that this entire tournament has been defined by inconsistent decisions. VAR sometimes works and sometimes does not, which only creates more controversy. This World Cup will be remembered as one where referees needed to be at their absolute best — perhaps the best in World Cup history — especially with all the technology and VAR assistance available to them.
The suspension rules also benefited them because referees did not need to be overly lenient or forgive so many bookable offenses, knowing that players would not miss crucial matches as easily. Yet here we are. Expectations were higher than ever, and even referees who were considered the most reliable and trusted are no longer showing the same level of consistency.
Fair play to Collina for backing his referees and protecting their image. That’s much better than Rosetti’s approach at the Euros, where referees were sent home without any public support after controversy.
ReplyDeleteBut that doesn’t change the fact that Letexier had a poor game.
The penalty was initiated and therefore a gift imo. Egypt had a goal ruled out for a tiny toe contact, despite Letexier refusing to give soft fouls all game (different standards and re-refereeing = poor optics!). No cards for Argentina, not even for taking the shirt off. Then another big penalty-box incident before Argentina scored the winner. It’s too much, I’m sorry.
Taken individually, you can debate each decision. Together, they form a pattern and a poor image. The pressure got to him. Nevertheless, we must acknowledge it was a very challenging game to referee.
I respectfully disagree.
DeleteWhat you’re calling “too much” is exactly the narrative the losing team tried to create. After falling behind, they shifted the focus onto the referee instead of taking responsibility for the result.
None of the points you mentioned were major issues until around the 79th minute. Once they realized they were losing, the protests escalated. That a common reaction from teams trying to find a scapegoat.
As for the disallowed goal, I think we can agree it resulted from a careless foul. VAR has been very consistent throughout this tournament with those type of offence. We saw a similar situation in Scotland vs. Brazil, where Brazil second goal was also disallowed because of a careless offensive foul.
Regarding the claim that Argentina should have received a card, let’s be specific. Which incident deserved a caution? Simply saying “they should have had a card” without identifying an actual cautionable offence isn’t a convincing argument.
The two penalty appeals were correctly rejected. Rather than recognizing those as good decisions, they’re being presented as refereeing mistakes, which I don’t think is justified.
I believe referee delivered an excellent performance. He managed and dealt with every key situation as expected. Don’t let the drama and attempts to shift blame convince you that he had a poor game.
One of the greatest referees on the pitch, but also a politcal monster who harms football. You cannot ask referees to keep up the flow (don’t whistle) and at the same time instruct VAR to spot any error before goals. So shameful.
ReplyDeleteI’m not versed in the history of refereeing, but I have often wondered if Collina really would be “the greatest referee of all time” if he was refereeing in the current period of VAR, technology, and social media. Was he really so head and shoulders above all the rest of the referees who came before him and since?
DeleteI also dont think so highly of him.
DeleteIt's just his personality and demenour,people maybe find great and amusing when ref shows that he can stand his ground.
Look at Barton,he became after his demonstrative style and talk about RC.
So maybe Collina was expressive and not someone to fool around.
As for his quality,bookings and other things.
We'll let our colleagues say that cause they were born maybe before and followed him when he was at his peak.
And now Quansah suspension has been confirmed,not for 1,but for 2 games...
ReplyDeleteEngland should hire Trump as advisor since he was sportsman and can decide what's RC and what's not.
Balogun's challenge was more serious... He received a 1-match ban (which was suspended), while Quansah got 2 matches? It’s disgusting.
Delete"Nobody can question the integrity of the FIFA World Cup match officials."
ReplyDeleteAnd he doesn't know why this started? And why did it happen after the 95th match, when after the previous 94 matches, nothing like this had happened? This is a demonstrative, ostentatious astonishment.
Excuse me, but I'm increasingly reading embarrassing comments, full of acrimony and critical aggression.
ReplyDeleteNot a day goes by without insults raining down on Collina for the most bizarre reasons: because he gives instructions and explains them, or because he doesn't explain them, because he intervenes or doesn't intervene, and when he does intervene, because he supports one regulatory argument instead of another, lapsing into surreal, afterthought discussions about why he explains an incident and perhaps defends a referee's decisions based on the rules.
Explain to me why I'm struggling to understand this, but what is a FIFA Ref Comm Chief supposed to do?
And in a world that now boasts an AI that didn't exist in Qatar 2022, and where the impact of social media has advanced exponentially, is there still anyone who can logically compare FIFA's approach today to that of four years ago?
It's claimed that Collina's goal was to make everyone happy: but come on! Regardless of the fact that in an ideal world this would be precisely the goal, rereading Collina's interview, does it seem to you that by interpreting the refereeing decisions in ARG-EGY, he's aiming to make everyone happy?
Or is he aiming to clarify the rules according to the VAR protocol, regardless of who is or isn't happy?
And let's be honest: after 90 matches, can't it be reasonably argued that overall refereeing performances have been generally good/very good?
Sure, there have been some exceptions, but on such a statistical basis, the exception remains just that. It doesn't change anything.
And shouldn't the debated disparity in judgment also be correlated with the origin and number of referees present? And with their ability to withstand pressure that's often unusual in their own countries?
Think about it calmly. And then let's see if, beyond the chatter, anyone has the courage to honestly say they're better than Collina