Posts from Football!

The penalty was 100% clear, and complaints should be directed not at the referee, and not even at the player who committed the foul, but at the pair of center-backs who completely messed up in this match, essentially costing the team two games.

Regarding the handball in the penalty area. This episode is up to the referee's discretion. I didn't notice any intentional handball. Besides this episode, there was an episode where the ball hit Tymoshchuk's hand in Zenit's penalty area (also in the second half). The referee made an identical decision.

What is there to review? The Zenit player managed to deflect the ball with his leg and bring it down; otherwise, the Bayern players would have been sidelined for quite a while. He just didn't manage to stop the momentum. In the fight for the ball, someone always fouls first, and there's contact, so should the second player always be penalized? Besides formalism, there should be some logic. That's why, after reviewing the replay, Advokat clearly and confidently said that there was no penalty. The moment was, at the very least, debatable.

It's not at all the same. In the case in the German penalty area, the ball was heading towards the GOAL (and there wasn't even a goalkeeper there), which is no longer up to the referee's discretion, but a clear penalty. And if you consider the handball intentional (although I personally wouldn't), then it's a last-man foul and a red card.

1. There are the rules of football and the FIFA/UEFA guidelines. Everything else is just made up.

2. Have you ever seen a coach who said that a penalty against his team was definitely justified?

I suggest we return to this episode later (on Sunday), when I have the opportunity to rewatch the match and all the controversial moments.

P.S. If I understand correctly, you follow Ukrainian football, and maybe you even watch the Ukrainian national team's matches. I was just reminded of the Ukraine - Croatia match in Kyiv in 1997. If anyone watched it, they'll remember the outrageous behavior of the referee against the "yellow-blue" team. But can anyone remember a time when a club (or national team) from Russia, Ukraine, Belarus, etc., was treated so unfairly? My memory doesn't recall anything like that.

There's no point in going back to it. As I said, I'm not very confident about this episode, and even with the best intentions, it would have been difficult for the referee to keep track of everything in that chaos. After the match, the overall impression was of poor refereeing, and analyzing individual moments won't change that, although perhaps many people simply want Zenit to advance. Be that as it may, everything will be decided in St. Petersburg, and that's not such a bad thing. Good luck, guys!

P.S. If I understand correctly, you follow Ukrainian football, and maybe you even watch matches of the Ukrainian national team. I was just reminded of the Ukraine - Croatia match in Kyiv in 1997. If anyone watched it, they'll remember the outrageous behavior of the referee against the "yellow-blue" team. But can anyone remember a time when a club (or national team) from Russia, Ukraine, Belarus, etc., was given such preferential treatment? My memory doesn't recall anything like that.

1. There are rules for playing football and FIFA/UEFA guidelines. Everything else is from the devil.

2. Have you seen a coach who said that the penalty against his team was definitely a mistake?:eek:



Hold on - pause. It seems we're talking about different episodes. I was talking about the fact that (as it seemed to me) during that attack, in the scramble near the penalty area, the ball bounced off someone's hand from Bayern.
During the shot on goal (when it went past the defender and the goalkeeper who came out (what was he doing there:confused: )), there was no hand. This happened 5-7 seconds later.

I suggest we return to this episode later (on Sunday), when I have the opportunity to watch the match again and review all the controversial moments.

So far, humanity has not been very successful in writing rules and laws that do not allow for dual interpretations; otherwise, lawyers would be in trouble.
But I haven't read the modern recommendations myself; maybe you are right according to them, but then the officials have serious problems with common sense.

Yes, many times, if the penalty is really obvious.

Yes, there's no point in going back; I'm saying that I'm not very sure about this episode, and even with a strong desire, it would have been difficult for the referee to navigate in that chaos. After the match, there was just a feeling of not very good refereeing, and it cannot be removed by analyzing individual moments, although maybe many people want Zenit to go further. Be that as it may, everything will be decided in St. Petersburg, and that's not so bad. Good luck, guys!

P.S. If I understand correctly, you follow Ukrainian football; maybe you also watch matches of the Ukrainian national team. I just remembered the match Ukraine - Croatia in Kyiv, in 1997. If anyone watched it, they will remember the lawlessness that the referee created against the "yellow-blue" team, but can anyone remember when a club (national team) from Russia, Ukraine, Belarus, etc. was so favored? My memory doesn't recall that.

I agree. I think the most wonderful refereeing in our favor was the refereeing in the replay of a match between some Austrian club and Lokomotiv, when the Austrians were trying to defeat Lokomotiv, which was simply devastated by the most unfair and unique decision to replay the return match. There, the referee judged fairly and even sent off one Austrian player to make it easier for Lokomotiv, although, to be honest, he could have not sent him off.
But I have almost no complaints about yesterday's refereeing. There was a penalty. Only Ricken is to blame. He didn't assess the situation at all. Ze Roberto no longer posed any threat at that moment. The rest is minor. Yes, Arshavin and Faizullin could have been spared yellow cards, and yellow cards could have been shown to a couple of Bayern players. But this is quite within the margin of error for fair refereeing in favor of the home team. There is no conspiracy. Moreover, Michel is definitely more connected with us now. He often referees important matches in the Russian championship.

Would you be so kind as to quote these rules? So as not to be unsubstantiated and prove your point. ).

Anyone can end a phrase with something like "and so on," "and the like" in order to appear smarter than they really are.).

12. Violations of the rules and undisciplined behavior of players. Violations of the rules, expressed in the use of prohibited techniques and undisciplined behavior, are punished as follows: Penalty kick: The opposing team is awarded the right to take a penalty kick if a player commits any of the following six violations, in which the referee considers his actions to be careless, reckless, or excessively physically aggressive: - kicking or attempting to kick an opponent; - tripping or attempting to trip an opponent; - jumping on an opponent; - attacking an opponent; - kicking or attempting to kick an opponent with the hand; - pushing an opponent. The opposing team is also given the right to take a penalty kick if a player commits any of the following four violations: - when contesting the ball with an opponent, touches him before touching the ball; - holds an opponent; - spits at an opponent; - intentionally plays the ball with the hand (except for the goalkeeper in his penalty area). The penalty kick is taken from the spot where the violation occurred. Penalty kick: A penalty kick is awarded for any of the above ten violations if it is committed by a player within his own penalty area, regardless of the location of the ball, but provided that the ball is in play. Is that enough? And this is already an attack. After such words, you should have provided a rule that DISPROVES my statement or given a link to it.

This isn't an attack. I just wanted to see these rules. It seems like everyone knows them, but only a few can formulate them precisely. Sorry if I offended you.

But for me personally, the peak of refereeing outrage, when a referee practically killed a team that was head and shoulders above its opponent, was the 1/8 final of the World Youth Championship (2002): South Korea vs. Spain.

And that entire championship, from a refereeing perspective, was a complete disaster. I don't remember such poor refereeing at any World Cup or European Championship. And I've seen quite a few (starting with the 1986 World Cup).

I only remember one match with a replay. It was Spartak and Basel (Switzerland). Then Spartak won with a score of 5-1 (if I'm not mistaken).

Yes, that was the height of injustice. I've been watching football for a long time, since the 1982 World Cup (I remember my t-shirt with an orange on it... :)). But it was against Spain that Korea played in the quarter-finals. In the round of 16, they also defeated Italy with the help of the referees.


That was a replay due to the size of the goal. After winning the away game, a draw would have been enough for Spartak, and they achieved it. Basel was upset. They were punished.
In the case of Lokomotiv, a replay was ordered due to a refereeing error, something related to Pimenov's dismissal. This was the first and, so far, only precedent where a match was replayed due to a refereeing error. Previously, we were told that this never happens. And how upset we all were, the guys, when in the round of 16 in Mexico, the referees ruined the brilliant Soviet team, which could have easily become a medalist at that time... But they said that matches are not replayed due to refereeing errors, and then... Kaiser intervened, and they replayed the match...
It was the best match in Nigmatullin's career and the best match for the referee who officiated matches involving domestic clubs and national teams.