A&H

Tunisia vs Mali..

I would really need facts before passing judgement. We are all speculating based on what is reported in media and some educated guesses. We all know how media reports 'facts'. As it stands now not a lot of things make sense.

As far as knowing the facts, it would probably never happen as in true fashion of any top level football management thing are swept under the carpet or discussed behind closed doors.
We DO know that a fairly significant timekeeping error by the referee went uncorrected by his 3 colleagues - none of that is 'speculation'
 
The Referee Store
We DO know that a fairly significant timekeeping error by the referee went uncorrected by his 3 colleagues - none of that is 'speculation'
What do you mean by uncorrected? You mean they didn't tell him? If so, do you know that for a fact?
The only person who can correct a referee's decision is the referee himself.
 
What do you mean by uncorrected? You mean they didn't tell him? If so, do you know that for a fact?
The only person who can correct a referee's decision is the referee himself.
If I may say so I think you're being deliberately obtuse.

If we want to be 100% correct then, I am assuming that the most likely scenario of these two happened

1) Referee made a time keeping error that went uncorrected by all the other 3 officials
2) The referee ignored the correction advice received from at least one of his three colleagues

As I've said before, we all know and recognise how errors can be made, but to pretend a fundamental basic error such as this by the whole team in a match such as this is somehow 'Ok' or 'understandable' does us no favours at all and quite frankly just looks silly imho.
 
I haven't seen actual video of the first "final whistle", but written reports do read like he was immediately corrected on that one, presumably over comms.

And the second final whistle came with only 13 seconds of the match left - close enough that a dodgy watch or the ref starting his watch a little early could explain him thinking it was 90. The decision not to add any added time is technically his - so while it would be very odd not to play anything extra given the 2 penalties, red card, associated VAR checks and substitutions, I don't know if that is technically wrong to the extent that the other officials would be obliged to insist he played additional time?

Don't get me wrong, it's all very odd and despite this: https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/africa/59981733 I don't think it's over. But there's a limit to what the AR's and 4th can do if the referee is insisting the game has finished and won't be persuaded otherwise?
 
I haven't seen actual video of the first "final whistle", but written reports do read like he was immediately corrected on that one, presumably over comms.

And the second final whistle came with only 13 seconds of the match left - close enough that a dodgy watch or the ref starting his watch a little early could explain him thinking it was 90. The decision not to add any added time is technically his - so while it would be very odd not to play anything extra given the 2 penalties, red card, associated VAR checks and substitutions, I don't know if that is technically wrong to the extent that the other officials would be obliged to insist he played additional time?

Don't get me wrong, it's all very odd and despite this: https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/africa/59981733 I don't think it's over. But there's a limit to what the AR's and 4th can do if the referee is insisting the game has finished and won't be persuaded otherwise?
But as the 4th official you would have been in his ear well before the (second) final whistle to ask him how much added time to indicate. If he said none then alarm bells should be seriously ringing.

Also at senior levels the 4th official will often keep a stoppages log and they will tell the referee what they think should be added, the referee will agree or counter. Unless the 4th official also had heatstroke he is hardly going to propose zero or let the referee say zero without trying to talk him out of it.
 
This actually goes beyond refereering, and is more, individual life skills

Rank goes out the window here.

Are you sheepishly just going along with ref because he is the ref?
not really much point in you being there then if you dont have a voice of yoir own.

I know for sure am not walking off a game as AR on 89 mins, the referee would be not advised, but told, in no uncertain terms, look, your timing is wrong here. If after all that the pennys not dropped, you can shove your team ethos and I would be absolving myself from all blame, " guys I am on 89 but ref says game over"
 
Last edited:
Alas, because of the culture in the game and the fact that football is bordering on impossible to referee, the team doesn't really work as a team. It works as a superior and two or three subordinates... note: I've no idea of the dynamic when VAR is in town 😏
Subordinates have a habit of acting with inferiority
 
Last edited:
Alas, because of the culture in the game and the fact that football is bordering on impossible to referee, the team doesn't really work as a team. It works as a superior and two or three subordinates... note: I've no idea of the dynamic when VAR is in town 😏
Subordinates have a habit of acting with inferiority
Good point. I remember hearing about an aeroplane which stalled and crashed. The copilot knew that the plane stalled and could have saved the plane but didn't want to challenge the captain. The flight crew was Korean and in Korean culture it was frowned upon to challenge superiors. Anyway, after this incident there was a review and complete change of the dynamic between copilot and captain in Korean aviation; copilots were trained not to act inferior to the captain (but still followed reasonable orders).

Not sure if this links to football but I hope you understand what I'm saying. ARs should be able to challenge referees but can't because players will round on the referee causing mass dissent. It's a cultural problem.
 
This actually goes beyond refereering, and is more, individual life skills

Rank goes out the window here.

Are you sheepishly just going along with ref because he is the ref?
not really much point in you being there then if you dont have a voice of yoir own.

I know for sure am not walking off a game as AR on 89 mins, the referee would be not advised, but told, in no uncertain terms, look, your timing is wrong here. If after all that the pennys not dropped, you can shove your team ethos and I would be absolving myself from all blame, " guys I am on 89 but ref says game over"
Sheepishly, no. But what can you actually do if your watch says 89 and the ref blows full time and won't hear any objections?
 
Good point. I remember hearing about an aeroplane which stalled and crashed. The copilot knew that the plane stalled and could have saved the plane but didn't want to challenge the captain. The flight crew was Korean and in Korean culture it was frowned upon to challenge superiors. Anyway, after this incident there was a review and complete change of the dynamic between copilot and captain in Korean aviation; copilots were trained not to act inferior to the captain (but still followed reasonable orders).

Not sure if this links to football but I hope you understand what I'm saying. ARs should be able to challenge referees but can't because players will round on the referee causing mass dissent. It's a cultural problem.
Very true. RefChat profanity filter has blocked my use of the word 'c0ckpit' a number of times. The profanosaurus doesn't like the phrase 'c0ckpit resource management' either! Whilst we could learn an awful lot from how pilots work together, it's a bit different cos airmen don't have stewards and stewardesses storming into the c0ckpit to abuse them every few minutes on account of unwanted turbulence and wotnot 😆
 
If I may say so I think you're being deliberately obtuse.

If we want to be 100% correct then, I am assuming that the most likely scenario of these two happened

1) Referee made a time keeping error that went uncorrected by all the other 3 officials
2) The referee ignored the correction advice received from at least one of his three colleagues

As I've said before, we all know and recognise how errors can be made, but to pretend a fundamental basic error such as this by the whole team in a match such as this is somehow 'Ok' or 'understandable' does us no favours at all and quite frankly just looks silly imho.
Big difference between what I am saying and you think I am saying. Let's leave it at that.
 
Back
Top