A&H

World Cup England vs Nigeria

GraemeS

GraemeS

RefChat Addict
Level 5 Referee
England given a penalty, looked a pretty clear push albeit definitely milked a bit.

VAR calls referee over to the monitor and seems to be showing the preceding contact that ended outside the PA as a reason not to give the PK.

But then referee corrects the VAR on why she gave the penalty, is re-shown the actual incident she gave the penalty for and is persuaded to overturn the PK regardless?

And of course the on-pitch announcement is just "decision is no penalty, restart is drop ball", which adds nothing over the classic cutting the grass gesture and carrying out a drop ball.
 
The Referee Store
GraemeS said:
And of course the on-pitch announcement is just "decision is no penalty, restart is drop ball", which adds nothing over the classic cutting the grass gesture and carrying out a drop ball.
Click to expand...
Only the UK / English use this sign, so the rest of the world will be as confused as they are with VAR.
 
lincs22 said:
Only the UK / English use this sign, so the rest of the world will be as confused as they are with VAR.
Click to expand...
What was the rest of the world sign for "no penalty" or "no goal" before VAR started resulting in announcements?

The exact sign is an irrelevant detail - non-UK competitions have had to announce overturning of goal or penalty decisions in the past (and I'm sure I've seen "cutting the grass with a card in hand" to signal cards being cancelled in World Cups before?), so how have they done this previously?

Or if the argument is that there wasn't an agreed signal elsewhere, then adopting cutting-the-grass universally and officially seems like a much easier solution that adding a whole bunch of tech to make low-information announcements? This would be textbook IFAB though, completely reinventing the wheel instead of just adopting something that works in a specific subset of the football world or in another sport.
 
Yeah, clear red card.

Reinforces my thoughts that the announcements are bad though - James responds to the announcement and starts to walk off, has to be stopped and made to turn by the 4O to see the red card. Could easily have been down the tunnel or unwilling to turn back, in which case you either end up having to wave a card vaguely at the tunnel or delay to get her back out in order to be dismissed.
 
I’ll say it again. The standards are appalling at this tournament. Whether that’s down to implementation of instructions from above or something else I don’t know. But it’s so poor.

And the downside to England’s progression is that it reduces the available talent among the officiating teams still further based on this evidence.
 
The red card is nailed on, she can have no excuse.

The penalty summed up perfectly why the referee announcements aren't working. She told us that it was no penalty and a dropped ball, but not why. We knew it was no penalty and a dropped ball, but we still have no idea why.
 
RustyRef said:
The red card is nailed on, she can have no excuse.

The penalty summed up perfectly why the referee announcements aren't working. She told us that it was no penalty and a dropped ball, but not why. We knew it was no penalty and a dropped ball, but we still have no idea why.
Click to expand...
Well, if they're implying Daly dived, shouldn't she have been cautioned ?
TBH she might have been awarded a pen if she hadn't made it look so theatrical
 
BCMilan said:
Well, if they're implying Daly dived, shouldn't she have been cautioned ?
TBH she might have been awarded a pen if she hadn't made it look so theatrical
Click to expand...
That's the problem, we have no idea if that is what they were implying. Even if they were it wouldn't be even vaguely credible to caution someone for simulation when there had been that much contact.
 
Let's face it. While the overturned pk probably doesn’t meet the original standard of a clear and obvious error, not giving the PK there is the widely preferred decision and that seems to be what VAR uses when reviewing a given PK.
 
BCMilan said:
Well, if they're implying Daly dived, shouldn't she have been cautioned ?
TBH she might have been awarded a pen if she hadn't made it look so theatrical
Click to expand...

Yep would have carded her for diving. (But would have been harsh.) There was slight contact but not enough to warrant a full front flip.

Isn't that in line with the guidance about contact in the box these days? Is the action following contact commensurate with the contact initially.
 
The problem with the new VAR public announcements is that what is announced adds no value at all in most cases. No point stating the obvious. "After review, yellow card is cancelled, and the new decision is red card". We can all see that.
 
Murri O said:
Comments?

England's Lauren James - intentional foul (violent conduct) = 2 match suspension.

Nigeria’s Deborah Abiodun - unintentional foul (serious foul play) = 3 match suspension.

Click to expand...
I was a bit surprised that James didn't get a 3 match ban but I'd also like to know what previous decisions for similar incidents have been. There also seems to be a lot of down-playing of the Nigerian player's challenge in the comments in that article. By whom, for instance was it deemed "mistimed and unintentional"? To me, it looked like a tackle that seriously endangered the safety of an opponent - a real "leg breaker" in common parlance.

But yeah, I thought they both deserved 3 match bans so perhaps there is some merit in the claim.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top