The Ref Stop

Diego Simeone - Athletico v Real Madrid

Certainly conclusive from that angle. I really don't see the point of UEFA discussing this with IFAB, surely they aren't suggesting that referees need to consider whether the double touch affects the outcome of the kick as that would be an impossible ask.

Plus it happens incredibly rarely.
 
The Ref Stop
Seems like overkill to me. IFAB, UEFA, @Archer & FIFA all have more important things to be discussing/looking into.

This is a fairly rare scenario that I’m not convinced really needs that much looking in to

If it happens in game, they don’t get to re-take. Why would a shootout be any different?
Agreed. But also I want to point out that its very hard to identify if its intentional. Either way, it will affect the ball movement and change course. Maybe they should make a rule for the penalty goal to stand if the ball doesn't change course after hitting the foot? I think it would make sense.
 
Agreed. But also I want to point out that its very hard to identify if its intentional. Either way, it will affect the ball movement and change course. Maybe they should make a rule for the penalty goal to stand if the ball doesn't change course after hitting the foot? I think it would make sense.
You think it might be difficult to work out if it's intentional or not but easier to be sure if the ball changed course or not, from side on?
 
Bc if the ball changes direction it will prove to be a struggle for the keep to catch it and will be a huge advantage. If you decide its unintentional and it ends up swerving, it will be a disadvantage to the GK.
 
Bc if the ball changes direction it will prove to be a struggle for the keep to catch it and will be a huge advantage. If you decide its unintentional and it ends up swerving, it will be a disadvantage to the GK.
Why add the complication of having to decide if it was intentional or not?
 
It would overcomplicate things with the intention. It would go bonkers if it was an actual rule with the intention. Players could decieve the referee by for example, pretending to slip and deflecting the ball over the other foot. Nowdays players can come up with sneaky tactics in the game. With this rule, players could fake it to make it.
 
Marciniak has seemingly now done an interview saying he thought the penalty was wrong and he alerted VAR to this to check. You would assume they would have seen it themselves without his advice, but like I said at the time it just didn’t look right.
 
This is what has been reported, from Refereeing World but I can’t find a link to a source.

Referee Marciniak reveals the truth about Real Madrid’s penalty shootout drama

Polish referee Szymon Marciniak, who officiated the second leg of the Champions League clash between Atletico Madrid and Real Madrid, has shared details about one of the most debated moments of the match. The fixture ended with Real Madrid securing their place in the quarter-finals, but a major talking point emerged when Julian Alvarez’s penalty was disallowed. The incident sparked widespread discussion, and Marciniak has now revealed what went on behind the scenes.

During the game, Alvarez stepped up to take the penalty, but the goal was ruled out after a review. The reason? The Argentine striker unintentionally made contact with the ball twice when striking it. Marciniak explained that he was the one who initially suspected the double touch and informed the VAR officials about it. He was almost certain that Alvarez had made two contacts with the ball, prompting the video assistant referees to analyse the footage carefully. “I was the one who informed the VAR referees that there was a 99% chance that Alvarez touched the ball twice, and they checked it thoroughly,” he said. There had been rumours suggesting that Real Madrid players had pressured the referee to check the decision, but Marciniak dismissed these claims outright. “It is absolutely false that Mbappe told me anything about the two touches.” The Polish official also admitted that this was a rare situation in football. In all his years as a referee, he had never encountered such an incident. However, he emphasised that players are fully aware of the rules and that the decision was made according to the official regulations. “To be honest, I’ve never faced a situation like this in my refereeing career,” he confessed, although insisting that “the players know the rules.” (Source: Yahoo Sports)

To clear up any confusion surrounding the incident, UEFA later released a video along with an official statement. The footage showed that Alvarez’s standing foot had made slight contact with the ball just before he struck it, leading to a violation of the rules. “Atlético de Madrid enquired with UEFA over the incident, which led to the disallowance of the kick from the penalty mark taken by Julián Alvarez at the end of yesterday’s UEFA Champions League match against Real Madrid. Although minimal, the player made contact with the ball using his standing foot before kicking it, as shown in the attached video clip. Under the current rule (Laws of the Game, Law 14.1), the VAR had to call the referee signalling that the goal should be disallowed. UEFA will enter discussions with FIFA and IFAB to determine whether the rule should be reviewed in cases where a double touch is clearly unintentional.” (Source: UEFA)

#refereeingworld #footballreferee #Respect #LawsOfTheGame #arbitro #referee #szymonmarciniak
 
Marciniak has seemingly now done an interview saying he thought the penalty was wrong and he alerted VAR to this to check. You would assume they would have seen it themselves without his advice, but like I said at the time it just didn’t look right.
This is akin to a referee giving a yellow on the field for a challenge, then telling VAR at the same time he thinks it is a red, can you check it.
The process seems more wrong that the kick.
 
Last edited:
“The footage showed that Alvarez’s standing foot had made slight contact with the ball just before he struck it” - I think the intern doing UEFA’s social media posts made a mistake here, I’m pretty sure it hits the planted foot after Alvarez kicks it. If this is the chronology though, is it still an IDFK? Because for me, the contact with the planted foot doesn’t make the ball clearly move.
 
  • Like
Reactions: one
“The footage showed that Alvarez’s standing foot had made slight contact with the ball just before he struck it” - I think the intern doing UEFA’s social media posts made a mistake here, I’m pretty sure it hits the planted foot after Alvarez kicks it. If this is the chronology though, is it still an IDFK? Because for me, the contact with the planted foot doesn’t make the ball clearly move.
No, they are correct. If you watch the super slow mo, his standing foot slides and hits the ball just before he strikes it.
Although regardless, the chronology is irrelevant. If the ball makes contact with any part of Alvarez twice before it is touched by another player, it's a double touch and the end result is the same (unless one of those body parts was the hand or arm and it becomes a handball offence)
 
No, they are correct. If you watch the super slow mo, his standing foot slides and hits the ball just before he strikes it.
Although regardless, the chronology is irrelevant. If the ball makes contact with any part of Alvarez twice before it is touched by another player, it's a double touch and the end result is the same (unless one of those body parts was the hand or arm and it becomes a handball offence)
I think they are referring to:

"The ball is in play when it is kicked and clearly moves"

If the first foot touches the ball but it does not clearly move, then it is not in play and so when the ball is struck with the non- standing foot this is a legal play.

And

It only becomes a handball offence if, once the ball is in play, a handling offence occurs.
 
  • Like
Reactions: one
I mentioned it earlier in the thread. It's definitely not clear and obvious that it clearly moved.
 
I mentioned it earlier in the thread. It's definitely not clear and obvious that it clearly moved.
And I have mentioned earlier as well that it is not clear and obvious to me that the standing foot even touched it.
 
This is akin to a referee giving a yellow on the field for a challenge, then telling VAR at the same time he thinks it is a red, can you check it.
The process seems more wrong that the kick.
Disagree. The protocols allow the R to initiate a review. And the R needs to be certain that there was an offense before he wipes off a goal. He thought it probably was but wasn’t certain enough to call it. Asking VAR to review is the correct protocol.
 
I think they are referring to:

"The ball is in play when it is kicked and clearly moves"

If the first foot touches the ball but it does not clearly move, then it is not in play and so when the ball is struck with the non- standing foot this is a legal play.

And

It only becomes a handball offence if, once the ball is in play, a handling offence occurs.
Technically it is. Just touching the ball does not put the ball in play.

View attachment 8027
Ah right, misunderstood, although it does clearly move, as we wouldn’t know that there was contact if it didn’t.
 
Back
Top