Question Number: 35188

Mechanics 10/29/2023

RE: Adult

Antonis Klidas of Athens, Greece asks...

Can you please give me your expert opinion on referee decisions in Olympique Marseille vs. AEK Athens on Thursday 26 October for the Europa League? There are two decisions that were contested:
1. Whether there was an offensive foul against AEK defender Vida in the first goal of OM.
2. The penalty given to OM against AEK player Amrabat (for the 3rd goal of OM).

I also wonder why the referee did not directly show a red card to AEK goalkeeper Stankovic in the first penalty of OM and needed to be called for onfield review by the VAR.

Thank you very much!
Antonis

Answer provided by Referee Richard Dawson

Hi Antonis,
no one has an expert opinion, just a perception of events viewed after video slow motion, freeze frame, stop, start, rewind, multi angle, couch viewing, biased insight. Unfortunately my Country and others with these goofy regulations. I cannot seem to find a video of the events to review?

A real time decision is based on the angle of view in that critical moment of time by the on field referee. Only that referee can tell you the reasons with clarity, we can only offer a reasoned guess , that is assuming we can see the incident for real or review a visdo,

At the pro levels, they added the VAR, with the concept of, lets get those important decision right, even if we might look foolish at times for not seeing or missing something.

I think the over reach of VAR is, it has referees second guessing themselves, relying on the VAR to make the tough decisions? Not that they are cowards but are trying to manage the game with less severity than be seen as heavy handed, My good friend and mentor Esse has a great example of, even those who think they got it right, have it wrong . He was the CR in 1998 at France World cup between Brazil and Norway. Have a gander at this ,
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7-lNODXuA6k
it shows you what the spectator can hope for is the man or woman in the middle with integrity and courage to make the call THEY see from the middle, doing the job they love. Plus a great example of advantage on that first goal, lol

If a review is granted on a call where the referee saw the event only as reckless, it is likely the excessive or VC aspect was missed and the review shows this clearly enough to make the referee change their decision BEFORE the restart of play! This is different then say if the referee MISSED it entirely and did not caution at all or even call a foul. Thus the information being new, if there was misconduct involved, it CAN be sanctioned even after a restart .

Remember the head butt by Zidane on that Italian defender? France already had a restart before play was stopped to deal with it. Zidane was still shown the red card & sent off reducing France by a player and a DP restart to Italy, which they returned the ball back to France .

The ARs, the 4th & VAR are supposed to assist the referee with making the correct decision by supplying additional NEUTRAL information. When it comes to a judgement or opinion as to whether that was or was not it is STILL the official in the middle, referee's FINAL decision.
Cheers

Answer provided by Referee Joe McHugh

Hi Antonis
Unfortunately there are no videos of the incidents available on the web due to copyright control so my answer is based on not seeing the incidents yet based on general principles.
1. VAR reviews every single incident in games and if the referee needs to be alerted to a foul by the attacking team in the build up to a goal it will result in a review. Obviously the referee nor an assistant saw an offence nor did VAR on review so if there was something there it was considered doubtful or trifling.
2. Without seeing the incident the referee in real time called a penalty. If that was an obvious error VAR would intervene to alert the referee of an error. As that did not happen VAR agreed that the penalty call was correct. A dive, simulation, the defender getting the ball are factors that VAR will look for in the review.

On a dismissal the referee can use VAR to confirm his decision or otherwise. I saw one recently in the EPL where the referee in real time gave a caution / yellow card for what was a potential denying an obvious goal scoring opportunity situation. His on field view presented that he felt there was covering defenders yet video from other angles showed otherwise at the time of the offence. VAR alerted the referee to that which resulted in an on field review by the referee which resulted in the yellow card being upgraded to a red card.
That is the correct use of VAR and it can go the other way as well.

Finally I think referees would rather go caution and then an upgrade based on review rather than a red card and then a downgrade to a caution. While the decision can be based on the video review it will be perceived as the referee not rushing to red card yet rather giving the benefit of doubt of a caution which then gets ruled on by review after careful consideration.
Another approach can be to not make any card decision and wait for the VAR review by asking whether a red card is appropriate '