Serbia - Portugal

[Tealeaf]

Link to Vid

Real pick and mix this one, main points being;
1: Red Card 90+1
2: Goal/no goal 90+3
3: Full on tantrum from Ronaldo afterwards

Not red for the challenge myself; for me that’s firmly in the reckless category, but not endangering.

Goal - no goal. Surprised there was no GLT in this tie as a full international. With the naked eye it’s impossible to say, and there’s no AI modelling in the video to be sure. Giving a goal there is guesswork, so the decision is appropriate. Assistant is perfectly placed though.

Ronaldo’s confrontation and impeding of the assistant after that rightly gets a caution. Not clear if the other Portugal players who surround the referee at the final whistle picked up anything (they should have done) as the camera is on Ronaldo’s meltdown.

Disappointing comments from the Portugal coaches after the game; some quotes accused match officials of cheating which is downright wrong.

Be interesting to see what if any further action is taken.

 

[one]

Sort of agree with the card. It was an orange one. So I won't argue with either colour.

It did look like a goal. But with all the replays I have seen, there is no angle to say it definitively was. The accepted practice is, unless you are sure, don't give the goal.

I would like to see retrospective action against Portugal officials but I doubt it. There are many other things football bodies prioritise higher that protecting the integrity of referees.

 

[Big Cat]

Link to Vid

Real pick and mix this one, main points being;
1: Red Card 90+1
2: Goal/no goal 90+3
3: Full on tantrum from Ronaldo afterwards

Not red for the challenge myself; for me that’s firmly in the reckless category, but not endangering.

Goal - no goal. Surprised there was no GLT in this tie as a full international. With the naked eye it’s impossible to say, and there’s no AI modelling in the video to be sure. Giving a goal there is guesswork, so the decision is appropriate. Assistant is perfectly placed though.

Ronaldo’s confrontation and impeding of the assistant after that rightly gets a caution. Not clear if the other Portugal players who surround the referee at the final whistle picked up anything (they should have done) as the camera is on Ronaldo’s meltdown.

Disappointing comments from the Portugal coaches after the game; some quotes accused match officials of cheating which is downright wrong.

Be interesting to see what if any further action is taken.

All fairly typical of where we're at with the game

 

[Degnann]

Not a red for me.
Can’t remember the last time I actually saw a match official use a wallet for their cards that wasn’t grassroots

 

[RustyRef]

It is a harsh red for me, but I can see why the referee has given it. Yet another when where a player mis controls the ball and then lunges after it.

The ball is definitely over the line, but I suspect the assistant couldn't see clearly as the post was blocking his view. He's moved well down the line to follow play but hasn't quite got there.

 

[HenryW139]

1) Looks like a red initially due to the height of the boot off the ground but it is already planted by the time it makes minimal contact with the side of the boot. Stonewall reckless yellow and surprised as ref as good as Makkelie saw it that way considering he was so close.

2) The non-goal is just ‘one of those’. Difficult decision- erred on the defensive side as is sensible. Real issue is the lack of GLT at such a high level. Ronaldo rightly getting a yellow- Portuguese officials should be fined for their comments.

 

[ladbroke8745]

I think the lack of GLT is more down to not every country having it around the world, not just Europe, as its a world wide competition.
Fifa should have paid for it for all used stadiums but for fairness, I am guessing if someone like San Marino, or Tahiti, can not afford it for their grounds, then no one uses it.
But that's my opinion.
That still makes it look like a stonewall goal. But the live replays I wasn't 100% certain.

We say stills can't be used for fouls, to give a true reflection of things, and I think the same can be said here.

 

[Mr Dean]

UEFA used to use additional assistant referees before VAR. Might've been a good idea to bring them back since VAR is not being used.

 

[Peter Grove]

It did look like a goal. But with all the replays I have seen, there is no angle to say it definitively was. The accepted practice is, unless you are sure, don't give the goal.

Not sure which coverage you were watching but for me, it was clearly, clearly over the line even with the replays shown at the time. As far as I can tell, the freeze frame posted by @RustyRef is taken directly from one of those replays.

 

[RefIADad]

UEFA used to use additional assistant referees before VAR. Might've been a good idea to bring them back since VAR is not being used.

In theory, I agree with you. In practice, I don't see that being feasible. Not only are you looking at needing more officials and those officials traveling more in a pandemic, but I have to think the mechanics of officiating are different with AARs than with the traditional four-official crew. How difficult would it be to retrain on these mechanics?

Unfortunately, I think this is a side effect of having competitions that include countries lacking the infrastructure to deal with GLT and/or VAR. I don't know if the right answer is to allow GLT in stadiums that have the technology (at least the same for both teams in a particular match) or to just do away with it completely (i.e. "If we can't do it everywhere, we won't do it anywhere"), but the fairer situation to me is not to use it at all if you can't use it anywhere.

 

[socal lurker]

In theory, I agree with you. In practice, I don't see that being feasible. Not only are you looking at needing more officials and those officials traveling more in a pandemic, but I have to think the mechanics of officiating are different with AARs than with the traditional four-official crew. How difficult would it be to retrain on these mechanics?

Unfortunately, I think this is a side effect of having competitions that include countries lacking the infrastructure to deal with GLT and/or VAR. I don't know if the right answer is to allow GLT in stadiums that have the technology (at least the same for both teams in a particular match) or to just do away with it completely (i.e. "If we can't do it everywhere, we won't do it anywhere"), but the fairer situation to me is not to use it at all if you can't use it anywhere.

I really don't get the "more fair not to use it at all" when it comes to GLT. All GLT does is accurately determine if a ball crossed a line in an event that happens what, once in a 100 games? (I think the argument is different for VAR, which changes the game more.) Where I the grand high mucky-muck in charge, GLT would be used in any stadium that has it--but I wouldn't necessarily be investing in it for stadia that don't.

I do agree that adding AARs is impracticable. Not only does the "main" crew have to adjust, but no one is getting trained as AARs now.

 

[RefIADad]

I really don't get the "more fair not to use it at all" when it comes to GLT. All GLT does is accurately determine if a ball crossed a line in an event that happens what, once in a 100 games? (I think the argument is different for VAR, which changes the game more.) Where I the grand high mucky-muck in charge, GLT would be used in any stadium that has it--but I wouldn't necessarily be investing in it for stadia that don't.

I do agree that adding AARs is impracticable. Not only does the "main" crew have to adjust, but no one is getting trained as AARs now.

The only thing that I can offer as a counter-argument is that FIFA (who I imagine is making the call as these are qualifiers for a FIFA tournament) is saying that all qualifying matches will use the same technology for helping to officiate the match regardless of where the match occurs. Their reasoning, whether or not we agree with it, is likely "If the exact same situation happens in Game 1 with GLT and Game 2 without GLT, then the outcomes are not as fair because of the technology difference". To make it more "real life", what would happen if GLT was in use for the Netherlands-Latvia match and that goal was given because Cruyff Arena had GLT? I'm not saying you're wrong by any stretch, but I can imagine Portugal raising an issue because GLT was able to award the goal in Amsterdam.

I'm definitely willing to change my mind on this argument, and I can't really argue against your point. I'm not sure how UEFA handles GLT in the Champions League or Europa League when some stadiums have GLT and some don't.

 

[GraemeS]

The only thing that I can offer as a counter-argument is that FIFA (who I imagine is making the call as these are qualifiers for a FIFA tournament) is saying that all qualifying matches will use the same technology for helping to officiate the match regardless of where the match occurs. Their reasoning, whether or not we agree with it, is likely "If the exact same situation happens in Game 1 with GLT and Game 2 without GLT, then the outcomes are not as fair because of the technology difference". To make it more "real life", what would happen if GLT was in use for the Netherlands-Latvia match and that goal was given because Cruyff Arena had GLT? I'm not saying you're wrong by any stretch, but I can imagine Portugal raising an issue because GLT was able to award the goal in Amsterdam.

I'm definitely willing to change my mind on this argument, and I can't really argue against your point. I'm not sure how UEFA handles GLT in the Champions League or Europa League when some stadiums have GLT and some don't.

The problem with that is that differences from game-to-game have been an accepted part of football for years. A different referee/AR might have been in a better position or more willing to go "yeah, I'm pretty sure that was over so will give it". A different match with the same incident might have had heavy rain, so the ball would have got stuck in the muddy ground and not actually crossed the line.

What makes a difference in the conditions under which a match is played "just part of the game" vs "unfairness between matches"? Aside from my default position of "If in doubt, disagree with Ronaldo", I'm not sure how to go about answering that!