Question Number: 13072

Law 12 - Fouls and Misconduct 6/17/2006

RE: Pro

James of New Haven, CT USA asks...

Was Larrionda (the ref of the USA-Italy game)as bad as it seemed? He was wrong on several of the offsides calls that he made (including at least one where his linesman kept his flag down.) He also seemed to be throwing cards around like confetti. Would I be right in thinking:
1. Totti was very unlucky to get a card as he barely caught the man
2. Eddy Pope's first card was rubbish
3. De Rossi deserved a yellow, but not a red
4. Same for Maestroni (don't know about the spelling)
5. Eddy Pope deserved his second yellow
Thanks!

Answer provided by Referee Chuck Fleischer

Please discount 98% of what the television commentators say and be sceptical of the rest. They are paid, handsomely, to say a lot about everything -- it would seem they are not paid for accuracy. As an example one of the gents on the Italy 1:1 USA match read from Law 11 - Offside.

He is to be lauded for his effort to be correct. After he read what an offside offense is, he couldn't let being correct alone, he offered his opinion and was wrong again.

Read what Ref Mueller says, he is right.

Regards,

WARNING: another of my opinions follows. For those that have read one please enjoy again. For those of you who have weak stomachs kindly read something else. For ABC, I sent you a letter saying the same thing, you chose not to answer even though, as I said in the letter, not answering or correcting the commentators would prove accuracy is not something you desire:

To place the American television commentators, on ABC/ESPN/ESPN2 on a scale of excellence I would have to say pathetic is a level of excellence they have yet to attain. ABC is to be commended for allowing the US Football fanatic to have something to watch, especially in High Definition however the sound man could have omitted the commentators audio feed and I would not have been the least bit disappointed. For the gent who said there are two kinds of referees bad and worse perhaps football would be better off if we carry on without them. Or you...

Referees are the keepers of the history and traditions of The Game. Without us there would be no game. What would happen if the referees of the world chose one month to wash their uniforms, polish their shoes and do a general clean up of the 7-900 USD stuff in their kit bag. How would the World's Game fare. Now think what would happen to the World's Game if television commentators took a month off for a facial and haircut. Referees reading this should be smiling...

Read other questions answered by Referee Chuck Fleischer

View Referee Chuck Fleischer profile

Answer provided by Referee Ben Mueller

You are correct that camera's proved several offside calls to be wrong most of which favored the U.S. The offside call that nullified the U.S. goal was correct. As easy as it is for us to call it when we see it on video, the referees have no such luxury. They must make a call and have literally a few seconds to decide. The AR's must keep up with second last defender or ball (whichever closer to goal line), have total 100% concentration, and have correct knowledge of the law. As far as the cards, we cannot argue those. The referee was in perfect position on each card. He had the perfect line of vision. He made a decision and that was that. Sure everyone in the world has their opinions, but the only one that matters is the referees. The LOTG will back up all of his decisions. As Always,

Read other questions answered by Referee Ben Mueller

View Referee Ben Mueller profile

Answer provided by Referee Keith Contarino

Re-read what Ref Fleischer wrote above. I'd only add that even with the benefit of slow motion replay, we and the announcers still don't have the feel of the game the referee does. Only the referee and his assistants are really in the position to make or not make calls. We have all attended certification meetings and seen how even with 2 or 3 video angles, the camera gets things wrong that with another angle we see that the referee got it right. rarely do we see more than 2 camera angles and I'd trust the referee over a camera any day.

Read other questions answered by Referee Keith Contarino

View Referee Keith Contarino profile

Answer provided by Referee Richard Dawson

Hi James,
BAD????????????
Did you honestly watch the same match as I did????.
That was possibly the one of the best refereed matches to date at the world cup. The game was thrilling to watch and proved that entertainment and punishing ill-conceived play are not mutually exclusive.
All three players sent off have no real grievance and were the authors of their own demises.
There are always a divergence of views based on the "partisan"outlook.

There were two certain offside calls in favour of the USA that were incorrect after SSSSLLLLOOOOOWWW MOOOOTTTIIOOONNN manages to isolate the position of the players. They were close to being even. Given the human eye reaction on opposing bodies moving in opposing directions must first register the position when the ball is struck can not work fast enough to process the sight and sound information together it will ALWAYS be a factor on the very close decisions WHICH by degree we are told, when in doubt, DO NOT WAVE it ABOUT! The AR looking across will ALWAYS receive the support of the decision by the CR. The CR is RARELY In a position to overrule an AR whose MAIN responsibility is to get the offside calls correct. The offside call which disallowed the goal was 100% correct . McBride was too tired to get out of the way and was in the direct line of sight of the keeper and the ball. Text book offside interfering with an opponent

Mastroeni red card was a perfect example of a two footed straight legged challenge with the studs showing. It was a direct red card those who have some deluded version of what SFP actually is a busted leg does not have to be the end result. It was a late It was performed in a dangerous manner. Intent is irrelevant, the result is irrelevant, it is the ACT itself which is being punished. The disciplinary committee will add further punishment by watching the foul and deciding the NATURE of the incident as to the FORCE and perceived intent. No doubt there are worse looking tackles and it is true that similar tackles in the past have gone unpunished but I am equally certain that they must be for the good of the game.

I think it is important to FIX the misconceptions of what is or is not permitted. The 2006 IFAB general meeting in march SPECIFICALLY looked at certain things and are wanting referees to stamp out the behaviour of over aggressive tackles. Admittedly I get hot when others imply it was a substandard performance because it was a QUALITY decision enforced exactly as requested! I want to convey why it is important to get it right. I want to convey why it is important to get the FACTORS right. I talk to my contacts in Germany everyday. While the technical group is sequestered they do leak out certain things. They were DELIGHTED with the referee's performance.

USA-ITA involved two very different teams, in terms of ability, attitude and tournament standing. The Italians presumably viewed USA as an upstart, not a major threat, and this would have led Italy to be irritated when the USA declined to defer to the big dogs. The USA, no matter how hard they tried to keep their emotional balance, had to find a way to play effectively against a better team. The Italians' did their best to stifle the US'
efforts, which presumably meant that the US was irritated at Italy. The fouls rapidly escalated from the occasional result of play to constant fouling at every occasion of conflict between players and instances of personal violence. I thought Larrionda clamped down very well on the fouls. He never lost control of the match, and thus never had to seek to regain it. It wasn't pretty, it was a battle, but it definitely was a real soccer game between two teams, and it really could have been something else without a GOOD referee to manage the SAFETY of the participants

Examine the first criterion of judging fouls: careless/reckless/excessive force.
Further, consider how much control a player has when he makes a jumping, sliding tackle.
Next, please review the understanding of how to treat "la plancha", the open-cleat, straight-legged, two-footed tackle against the opponent's planted foot.
Consider the timing of Mastroeni's tackle and Pirlo's playing the ball away.
Finally, have some respect for the guy who has the responsibility (and SOLE authority) to make judgments of the facts, at match speed.

Cheers


Read other questions answered by Referee Richard Dawson

View Referee Richard Dawson profile

Answer provided by Referee MrRef

Words from the way wiser than me appear at:

http://www.ibabuzz.com/soccer/

Read other questions answered by Referee MrRef

View Referee MrRef profile