Question Number: 23498

Character, Attitude and Control 6/18/2010

RE: competitive Adult

Michael Borga of point pleasant, nj usa asks...

Can anyone tell me what the foul was that called back the 3rd goal for the US against Slovenia? AR didn't raise flag so it couldn't have been offsides, could it?

Never saw any indication from the ref as to what he was calling, did you?

Anyone care to criticise the mechanics involved by the 'World Class' Referee?

In my opinion, his lack of any explanation could have easily frustrated players into a state where he completely lost control of the game. It would appear that the professionalism of the US team was probably the only thing saved his control of the game. He didn't to have a discussion but he does need to make it clear what he called, rightly or wrongly.

Then there's the earlier Germany match where it seemed that any attempt to tackle was rewarded with a YC, Klose was sent off with a 2nd YC when both cards he received appeared to be less than 'trifling' at best?

These are the best referees in the world?

Answer provided by Referee Ben Mueller

I am a bit confused myself. I have watched the last 5 minutes of the game now about ten times. I do not think that they called offside simply because the Malian referee did not display his hand for an IFK kick. The U.S. claims that the referee refused to tell them what the call was. The referee for this game displayed fear and confusion by his facial expression during the end of the game, He also looked very fatigued and not very confident.

Answer provided by Referee Joe McHugh

Hi Referee Borga
Yes these are the top referees in the world having achieved a high standard of performance over many years at a variety of national and international tournaments under the watchful eye of FIFA match assessors etc. We all know how difficult the task is now at the highest level and how difficult it is to get to the pinnacle of refereeing.
Let me start with the Klose sending off. Both challenges were IMO technically cautionable offences as the player had little hope of playing the ball in either case but instead chose to foul an opponent. The purpose of the caution is to tell the player that a repeat will result in a dismissal. Klose chose to ignore the warning and he has to accept the consequences of a rash poor challenge from behind. Another referee in a different competition may have given Klose a further warning.

I suspect that referees have been briefed to be brave in making decisions such as this. FIFA set out the standard that referees must follow and achieve. A cursory viewing of previous WCs in the seventies and eighties would show that the player would probably not even be cautioned. So lets not shoot the messenger but instead ask for the administrators of the game to amend what is wants in play and match control.

In the USA game the referee saw an offence that he believed merited a free kick to the defense. Yes there is a lot going on by both sides and as we know as referees that one particular incident in many can attract our attention greater than others. That can be based on our position, watching a particular player because of a previous incident etc. There are fouls in this phase of play. The referee could have seen a hold even slight by a USA player and awarded the free kick. He does not have the benefit of multiple angles of view, freeze frame, action replays. We also know that fouls by either side do not cancel either out and the referee will give what he believes was the 1st foul committed.

Answer provided by Referee Dennis Wickham

I would expect an analysis on this event to come from the FIFA Referee Committee.

Based on my view of the replays, I believe that the goal by Edo was disallowed because of foul committed by Carlos Bocanegra. Bocanegra had a bear hug around Jejc Pecnik that kept Pecnik from making a play for the ball. The foul is visible only one of the replays; most of the cameras do not catch it, and are not from the angle of view of the referee (who was less than five yards away looking directly at Bocanegra.

Answer provided by Referee Keith Contarino

I will respectfully disagree with Ref Wickham. In at least 2 videos it's clear to me that Pecnik starts by holding Bocanegra, then putting him in a headlock. Bocanegra's arm comes around Pecnik's body only after being put in a headlock by Pecnik. Bocanegra gets thrown to the ground. That said, maybe that IS what the referee saw. If he did, I don't understand how the referee could have missed #17 being held in front of Bocanegra and closer to the referee?

The referee is not required to tell anyone what he called and I think this is a huge mistake on the part of IFAB. To further this insanity FIFA actually forbids the referee from discussing his calls after the game. Soccer referees are given a lot of power and we should at least be required to say what we called. At the World Cup level, I find it appalling that a referee of this caliber didn't immediately after the match explain himself, FIFA be damned! Whether his call was correct or not, he should at the very least say what it was. He'll never get another World Cup assignment and he knows it so what does he have to lose by at least saying what the call was?

Answer provided by Referee MrRef

Michael,

As a referee question and answer service, we are still bound by the referee code of ethics which prevents us from publicly criticizing the performance of a referee, especially one above our pay grade, regardless of our personal feelings, unless a referee has specifically asked for our opinion.

We are happy to provide any information we can on the possible choices faced by the referee, and the result of such choices. I would reiterate what some of my colleagues have said - we weren't there, and the referee did NOT have the advantage of multiple replays from many angles or the luxury of extra time to review any decision he might wish to make or not make. Second guessing them is an ultimately frustrating exercise.

The following questions were asked as a follow up to the above question...

See Question: 23534