In the 11' of the France versus Argentina World Cup Round of 16 match on 30 June 2018, AFC's Iranian referee Alireza Faghani whistles for a foul and points to the penalty spot.
France successfully dispatch the penalty kick and the score is 1 - 0.
In the 19' minute Faghani whistles for a foul and points to the penalty spot ...
And when the YC was shown, I thought the Referee's decision was a penalty kick for DOGSO.
However, it becomes apparent that Faghani has awarded a direct free kick outside
the penalty area and not, as many people initially believed, a penalty.
The Referee is pointing to a spot outside the penalty area. To
avoid any misunderstanding he should perhaps not use this pointing
signal (which is exactly the same as the signal for pointing to the
penalty spot, which he used 8 minutes earlier) or otherwise use another
signal to indicate the location.
Now, this leads on to the consideration whether this was a DOGSO incident ...
The France attacker Kylian Mbappé controls the ball and is then tripped by Nicolas Tagliafico, who is the second-last defender. This therefore meets the criteria for DOGSO. Faghani's AR did well to tell the Referee that the foul was outside the penalty area, however could the AR also have given his recommendation for DOGSO? If the unfair challenge by the second-last defender was outside the penalty area, then it should have been a RC to Tagliafico and a direct free kick to France.
Furthermore, with VAR used for "clear and obvious mistakes" (specifically with Red Card incidents being one of the four main uses) why did the Referee not use (or hear recommendations from) the VAR?
Humble coin toss will confound fight against football graft
Seemingly
simple flip of a disc will confound those battling graft in football,
since there are no rules on how refs must conduct it
Humble coin toss a match-fixer's dream. Photo: Reuters
How
much is a coin toss worth? Can foolishly faking a frivolous flip and
flick of a thin metallic disc prove financially tempting? You bet. Five
years ago, the going rate was 100,000 yuan (US$16,000).
This was the amount Chinese referee Huang Junjie accepted from fellow
referee Zhou Weixin to rig the coin toss between Manchester United and
FC Shenzhen in 2007. Huang fixed the flip to ensure Shenzhen kicked off
the match in Macau.
Huang and Zhou admitted this in court when they became the first
referees to face trial in December 2011, following a two-year crackdown
on soccer corruption in China. Soon after, Lu Jun, a former World Cup referee, stood trial. Lu was previously considered China's most
respected referee, nicknamed the "golden whistle" for his impartiality.
Lu was found guilty of accepting 350,000 yuan for fixing a match in
2003 and subsequently received a five-and-a-half year jail sentence. In
an instant, China's golden match official joined the ranks of corrupt
referees on the mainland, who are dubbed "black whistles". These
infamous black whistles also received life bans.
In recent weeks, major organisations have declared match-fixing to be
widespread. A report by Europol revealed about 700 matches worldwide,
including Champions League ties and World Cup qualifiers, were suspected
of having been fixed.
And last week, Interpol met with Fifa officials at a conference in
Kuala Lumpur jointly hosted by the Asian Football Confederation to set
tougher laws in the battle against criminal syndicates suspected of
match-fixing.
The AFC announced it had established a task force that would
collaborate with all stakeholders and educate member associations on
ways to tackle match-fixing in Asia.
Rational Ref is keen to see what kind of role, and support, match
officials will be given in this initiative to combat suspect practices.
Take, for example, the rigging of the seemingly straightforward coin
toss.
The tradition of the coin toss is based on Western culture. Observe
most Western referees and they will place the coin on top of their thumb
and forefinger to flick the coin up in the air. The coin will twist and
twirl in a blur and then be caught in the same hand that flipped it.
Without looking at the coin and in one smooth movement, the coin is
slapped onto the back of the other hand and then revealed.
This is the standard protocol of the coin toss, providing you are
British, Australian, Canadian or American. Last Tuesday night,
Australian referee Chris Beath performed the standard coin toss as
expected during the AFC Cup match between Kitchee and Churchill Brothers
from India.
But watch referees from continental Europe, Asia or South America,
and the coin toss action varies considerably. Some cannot flip the coin
using their thumbs, some catch the coin with both hands, some catch and
reveal using only one hand, some let the coin land on an open palm, and
others will let the coin fall to the ground after throwing the coin up
without imparting any spin. Some referees are just clumsy and fumble the
coin toss.
Furthermore, the rulebook assumes all referees know how to flip a
coin. It states: "a coin is tossed and the team that wins the toss
decides which goal it will attack and the other team takes the
kick-off".
Since there is no accepted coin toss protocol, criminal syndicates
have benefited. For instance, what's to prevent referees from catching
the coin in an open palm, seeing the result and then deciding whether or
not to slap it over on the other hand, depending on the desired
outcome? There have been occasions where Chinese referees catch the coin
in the open palm, with the wrist slap being optional.
Details are unknown about the infamous coin toss at the Manchester
United versus FC Shenzhen match. If the referee did not rig the actual
toss, he could have easily used another suspect method.
Hypothetically, the referee, having gone through the motions of the
coin toss, could quickly look at the result and declare Manchester
United would choose ends, thus leaving FC Shenzhen to kick off, which
was the prearranged outcome.
Any visiting player to China, such as 33-year-old Ryan Giggs five
seasons ago, could easily dismiss this as a cultural peculiarity and in
any case would just want to get the match started without fuss. In
hindsight, we know it was an easy 100,000 yuan for a black whistle to
make.
Hence, this simple example of a corrupt coin toss is just the tip of the iceberg for AFC's new task force.
Rational Ref reckons referees on the right side of the law can assist
the task force in its fight against match-fixing. After all, referees
are whistleblowers.
Genuine refereeing howlers are unforgivable, but it's important to know the difference
Errors in applying the laws of the game should be punished
Referees
are judged harshly, especially when they make a wrong call, but it's
important to recognise when the referee is genuinely at fault. Photo:
AFP
Not
all refereeing mistakes are equal; some are more equal than others. So
can soccer lovers distinguish between honest mistakes and the
inexcusable?
Many howlers such as incorrect handballs, offsides and penalties
occur naturally as a consequence of human error, but unfortunately they
obtain huge media exposure when in the English Premier League. If we cut
through all the noise, vitriol and bias, many of these decisions are
forgivable and only a handful are indefensible.
The unacceptable was Jan Vertonghen being adjudged offside when the
Tottenham Hotspur defender should have been celebrating his second goal
against Sunderland during the final seconds of the match.
Replays clearly showed Jan Vertonghen to be inside his own half as he ran clear to score a disallowed goal
Offsides are
straightforward black-and-white judgment calls and assistant referees
get them more right than wrong. These are genuinely honest mistakes,
although referee assessors will still give ARs poor marks for judging
them wrong.
However, the decision against Vertonghen was not a judgment call.
Technically, it was an error in law, and referees know this is the worst
kind of mistake they can commit.
Technical errors that involve incorrect application of the laws is
tantamount to being declared incompetent and unfit for purpose.
Vertonghen was in his own half when the ball was played to him by his
teammate. He cannot be in an offside position, no matter what else has
occurred.
Assistant referee Stuart Burt should have been rooted at the halfway
line because his main task is to keep in line with the second-last
defender or the ball.
Since the Sunderland goalkeeper Costel Pantilimon had gone up for his
team's corner, there was no second-last defender in Sunderland's half
during Spurs' counterattack and obviously the ball was way behind the
halfway line when it was passed to Vertonghen. At the halfway line, Burt
would have realised he was facing a no-offside situation. We can only assume he panicked and flagged.
However, moments later the ball reached Italy's Giorgio Chiellini,
who promptly scored. Unfathomably, Irmatov changed his mind and awarded
the goal, which is a major error in law. Although indefensible, confident referees are chastened by such harrowing experiences and return stronger.
Irmatov quickly bounced back at last year's World Cup to set the
record for refereeing the most number of World Cup matches and this year
became AFC Referee of the Year for the fifth time.
In contrast, errors of judgment are simply honest mistakes. Anthony
Taylor's incorrect yellow card to Chelsea's Cesc Fabregas for diving is
forgivable.
Although not an excuse, the speed of the game can make it difficult
to judge incidents in real time because referees are not infallible.
Referees do not sleep well at night knowing that they have made errors.
Errors aside, the real problem is that players, coaches and
supporters have become stubbornly accustomed to complaining about every
referee decision going against them, regardless of whether it is correct
or not.
In last weekend's Hong Kong Premier League match between Tai Po and
YFCMD, referee Cheng Oi-cho made a courageous and correct call when he
awarded a penalty to YFCMD in the final minute of added time, when the
score was 0-0. Tai Po players were incensed, but video replays
(watch here at 49:30) undisputedly revealed their captain, Lui Chi-hing, had manhandled
YFCMD's Mamadou Hady Barry to the ground.
At the final whistle, Tai Po players rounded on the referee. Li
Ka-chun bodychecked the referee, Jing Teng clapped sarcastically, Sze
Kin-wai hurled abuse and to cap it off the Tai Po coach rushed over and
confronted the referee, too.
The fact that the referee made the correct decision is beside the
point. Players and coaches, no matter what the circumstances, cannot
abuse match officials.
Competition organisers must publicly support referees, and the HKFA
must punish Tai Po in the strongest possible terms for their
unacceptable behaviour.
"The best way to rig a match [is] to award penalties"
Referees already know this ... and if you look at the example here of Niger Referee Ibrahim Chaibou on 1 June 2011, it is quite obvious that he is fixing the match. So what has FIFA or Interpol done about charging Chaibou?
Singaporean businessman and match fixer Eric Ding Si Yang. Pic from AFP
Referee given match-fixing tips on YouTube, court told (SCMP; paywall)
Jailed official tells court he received links from businessman on how to make 'wrong decisions' Tuesday, 16 July, 2013, 3:59am
Agence France-Presse in Singapore
A Lebanese referee jailed for accepting sex to rig matches testified yesterday that a Singaporean businessman used YouTube to show him how to fix a game.
Ali Sabbagh, speaking on the first day of the trial of Eric Ding Si Yang, said the businessman sent him "20 to 30" YouTube links by e-mail to "teach me how to make wrong decisions".
"The videos had too many decisions where the decision made by the referee is not the right decision," he said.
Ding is accused of providing Sabbagh, 34, and two other Lebanese officials with women who gave them free sexual services before a match in Singapore in April..
Sabbagh and the other two officials were withdrawn from duty and placed under investigation before the match. He was found guilty in June and sentenced to six months in jail, while his assistants - Ali Eid and Abdallah Taleb - were also convicted and have since been released and deported.
Sabbagh said that in a series of e-mail exchanges late last year, Ding told him that the best way to rig a match was to award penalties. Sabbagh quoted Ding as saying that "nobody will stop you, nobody will do anything ... When the corner comes, just blow and say pushing and pulling ... If there is anything in the penalty area, you can blow your whistle".
He said Ding gave him assurances that he would not be asked to rig matches that would affect his career within the Asian Football Confederation (AFC).
Sabbagh, who is scheduled to be released from jail on August 3, told the court he was the one who first proposed that Ding "arrange for girls" when the three match officials were in Singapore for the AFC Cup tie between Singapore's Tampines Rovers and India's East Bengal in April.
Sabbagh said Ding asked them to choose between Colombian or Asian girls and "we all told him we want Asian girls".
He added that Ding had likely offered the free sexual favours with the expectation that they would help rig unspecified AFC Champions League matches to be held in South Korea, Qatar and Iran. "He [Ding] is very interested in these matches, there is too much spectators, there is too much goals," Sabbagh said in stuttering English.
Ding seemed relaxed but appeared to show disapproval at parts of Sabbagh's testimony.
He faces a maximum of five years in jail and fines of up to S$100,000 (US$80,000) for each of three counts of corruption. He separately faces two charges of stealing evidence and obstructing police after declining to disclose the password to his laptop computer. He denies the charges.
Three months later, the match officials have been sentenced in Singapore. The two ARs, Ali Eid, 33, and Abdallah Taleb, 37, were sentenced to three months in jail. The judge deferred sentencing Referee Ali Sabbagh, 34, who is considered the "most culpable".
More must be done to track and hunt down the real perpetrators, such as Eric Ding Si Yang, 31, the Singaporean businessman who allegedly supplied the prostitutes, and his associates.
Lebanese referees admit agreeing to fix soccer match for sex in Singapore (SCMP; paywall)
Tuesday, 11 June, 2013
Agence France-Presse in Singapore
Three Lebanese referees pleaded guilty yesterday to accepting free sex from a gambling-linked global syndicate in return for agreeing to rig a match.
A Singaporean district court judge jailed assistant referees Ali Eid, 33, and Abdallah Taleb, 37, for three months.
He deferred sentencing until today for referee Ali Sabbagh, whom prosecutors said was the most culpable.
The assistant referees broke down into sobs and repeatedly looked up as if to thank God when Judge Low Wee Ping said they could be freed by today, after remission for good behaviour and due to time already served while awaiting sentencing.
Turning to Sabbagh, 34, the judge said: "I need time to consider your sentence. I don't, for the moment, accept that you should be sentenced to six months."
Deputy public prosecutor Asoka Markandu described Sabbagh as the most culpable as he was the one who was approached by the syndicate and persuaded the two linesmen to accept the sexual bribe.
The three men were arrested and charged on April 4 with corruption for accepting sexual favours in exchange for agreeing to fix an unspecified match.
They had been abruptly pulled out of an Asian Football Confederation Cup match that they were scheduled to officiate on April 3 between the Singapore-based Tampines Rovers and India's East Bengal.
The three match officials were denied bail and have been detained at Singapore's Changi prison since April 4.
Eric Ding Si Yang, 31, a Singaporean businessman who allegedly supplied the prostitutes, has also been charged with corruption and granted bail.
Defence lawyer Gary Low cited his clients' previously unblemished records, their guilty pleas and the fact that their acceptance of the sexual bribe did not ultimately result in any football match being rigged.
"The gratification was arranged by Mr Ding Si Yang with a view to fixing a football match in the future," Low said. "Our clients did not reach an agreement with Ding to fix a particular football match.
"In these circumstances, our clients' conduct did not in any way affect or influence the outcome of any football match," the lawyer added.
Manchester City's Vincent Kompany was sent off by Referee Chris Foy for lunging at an opponent with both legs in a scissors formation (please see Part 1 and Part 2).
Serbia forward Mateja Kezman will be ending his football career (i.e. hanging up his boots) in Hong Kong after he plays his two final matches in the city on 23 and 26 January 2012. See excerpts of news story below.
Question:What do the above two statements have in common? Answer:Mateja Kezman was sent off at the 2006 World Cup in Germany for doing exactly what Vincent Kompany did in Manchester in 2012. Furthermore, Kezman has chosen to end his football career in Hong Kong which coincidentally brings in the 'Hong Kong connection'.
The following incident occurred during the 2006 World Cup group match between Argentina and Serbia on 16 June 2006. The match finished 6—0, and the goal of the tournament also came from this match (i.e. Argentina's 24 or 25 pass move that came several years before the appearance of the current Messi-Xavi-Iniesta-inspired Barcelona side who now 'routinely' produce such wonderful goals every time they play! Messi was a 74' substitute in that 2006 Word Cup match).
At 1:20 of the highlights videoclip which corresponds to the 65' of the match, Mateja Kezman (white 8) lunges at Javier Mascherano (blue 8). Here are the freeze frames:
Camera view 1
Camera view 2
Referee Roberto Rosetti sends off Kezman for SFP
There was nothing wrong with Italian Referee Roberto Rosetti's performance; he ended up refereeing a total of 4 matches at the WC in Germany.
Kezman sarcastically claps the Referee's decision while also trying to appear to clap for the fans
CONCLUSION Kezman's two-footed lunge at his opponent is the same as Vincent Kompany's two-footed lunge at his opponent. Both were correctly sanctioned with a DFK to the other team and a red card to the offending player.
Follow Up: FIFA's Disciplinary Committee gave Kezman a two-match ban for SFP (note: since then Serbia has never called up Kezman to play for his country again). The FA's Disciplinary Commission upheld Kompany's three-match ban for SFP (note: as a result of a previous red card earlier in the season, Kompany received an extra one-match ban).
I repeat. Chris Foy should be applauded for taking a firm stand against the expectation of leniency in the Premiership. Given the EPL's reputation, popularity and global following where entertainment is apparently prioritized over player safety, Chris Foy has clearly demonstrated Pierluigi Collina's Principle:“The best referee is one who has the courage to make decisions even when it would be easier not to.”
Aside: The interesting thing is that Mateja Kezman spent four months in Hong Kong in early 2011 and really got to like the place and its people. Toward the end of 2011, Kezman didn't appear to be having the best of times in terms of football (i.e. he played 11 games for Belarusian side BATE Borisov; 6 in the league and 5 in the Champions League, without scoring). Therefore, he announced he will end his career in Hong Kong this month, playing in an exhibition international four-team tournament called the Lunar New Year Cup.
It is nice to hear that Kezman has a fondness for Hong Kong and he is probably a nice guy. However from a Referee's perspective, on the pitch Kezman generally does not respect match officials and has a tendency to get himself in trouble during matches (e.g. Nicky Butt Sees Red in Hong Kong).
HKRef wishes everyone a prosperous Chinese New Year of the Dragon! Thank you for visiting this site.
Serbian striker to appear for South China in Asian Challenge Cup before hanging up his boots for good SOCCER Chan Kin-wa Jan 19, 2012
Former Serbia international Mateja Kezman will finish his glittering career in Hong Kong after playing for South China in the Asian Challenge Cup next week.
The 32-year-old striker, whose former clubs include PSV Eindhoven, Chelsea and Paris Saint-Germain, will return to Hong Kong tomorrow after agreeing to play for the Caroliners in the four-team tournament to celebrate Lunar New Year.
"Kezman likes Hong Kong very much and has had a lot support from fans during his time here," South China convenor Steven Lo Kit-sing said.
"If he wants a place to call it a day in his soccer career, there is no better place than Hong Kong. This is an honour for Hong Kong soccer. We will arrange some activities for him on the second day of the tournament, which will be Mateja's last match as he bids farewell to a career of almost two decades. We will reserve the number 38 jersey he used in Hong Kong."
Kezman joined Zemun in Belgrade as a 15-year-old before moving to Partizan, the country's leading club, four years later. He then joined Dutch side PSV Eindhoven from 2000 to 2003, scoring 35 goals in 2003 to help them win the league title. After playing for a long list of European clubs, he moved to South China in December 2010, along with former Manchester United star Nicky Butt.
The Serbian scored seven goals during his four-month stint with the Caroliners.
The influence of [Kezman and Butt], however, was not enough to help South China progress beyond the group stage of the AFC Cup. The Caroliners also lost the all-important local league title to Kitchee, a result which kept them out of this season's AFC Cup.
In the 71st minute, a combination of defensive errors by Japan resulted in a situation where Iran referee Mohsen Torky made a tough decision. During the whole incident, the referee was composed, cool, calm and confident (at least on the outside). Please see the SUMMARY, after the freeze frames, to ponder and deliberate whether the referee made the correct decision.
Japan goalkeeper (yellow) is about to (mis)kick the ball with his left foot towards the Syria player standing in the middle of the field.
Did the Syria player (red with white boots) or Japan player (blue with black boots) kick the ball back toward the penalty area?
As the ball returns to the penalty area, the Japan goalkeeper (yellow) fouls the Syria player who is behind him and in an offside position.
Referee Torky ushers Japan coach off the pitch, while behind him players are surrounding the AR.
It took 5 minutes from the moment the Japan goalkeeper fouled a Syria player to the completion of the penalty kick.
Referee Torky decided that it was a Japan player who last touched the ball into the penalty area. Subsequently, the Syria player who was standing in an offside position behind the Japan goalkeeper, could legitimately play the ball. The Japan goalkeeper fouled the Syria player, and the referee awarded a penalty kick and then sent off the goalkeeper for DOGSO.
THE ISSUES TO CONSIDER
First and Foremost, the only real consideration to ACCEPT is that the referee at the time of the incident made a decision based on the best of his ability and experience. To his credit, he made the decision quickly and confidently. Furthermore, the referee kept cool, calm and composed throughout, despite how many times the players continuously argued with him and the fact that it took 5 minutes from the time of awarding of the penalty kick and send-off to the completion of the penalty kick. This is something POSITIVE to take from this incident. Torky was Composed and Confident, and remained Cool and Calm in the face of adversity.
The following issues are technical points, and should be taken in the context of being considerations only for post-match analysis. We have the benefit of repeat views, slow-motion replays, reverse backward, pause, magnification and several camera angles. Therefore:
1) Repeat views. Even after repeat views of the incident it is still not 100% clear which player—Syria or Japan—made the crucial touch that pushed the ball in to the penalty area. Without any definitive camera angles and close-ups, it could have been either player or both who touched the ball.
2) Pace of the ball and players’ body position. As the ball rebounds from the player(s) towards the penalty area, look at the pace of the ball. The pace of the ball indicates that there was good, solid contact (since the ball does not bobble up but instead rolls back along the ground at similar speed). Now look at the players. The Japan player, by desperately lunging, is overstretched and the weight of his left foot movement is mostly downward toward the ground rather than at the approaching ball. From simple mechanics, the ball would be hitting his foot (rather than his foot hitting the ball) and then would rebound (but this would not likely be a solid rebound and a “bobble” is likely). Contrast this with the Syria player who does not overstretch and appears to casually just jab (or toe-poke) the ball. From simple physics, the ball’s rebound movement implies that it made contact solidly and cleanly (i.e. the ball was kicked or toe-poked), mostly likely by the Syria player.
3) Players’ attitude and reactions. Now let’s look at the reaction of the two players. The Syria player had a casual attitude when competing for the ball. He did not appear too concerned about stretching himself, possibly because he knew he would get to the ball first (without overstretching himself). And, assuming he got to the ball first, because he could not control the ball (which rebounded from him right back to the penalty area), and since he knew that his team-mate was obviously in an offside position, he therefore wasn’t too concerned about heading enthusiastically towards goal. Furthermore, let’s assume it was the Japan player who actually played the ball back towards his own goal, then the Syria player’s reaction would have been to exploit the situation by either yelling at this team-mate and his team to play on, and/or he would do his utmost to move towards the goal and ball. The Syria player’s non-reaction perhaps tells us the real answer! But then again, the Syria player could have just been really tired (but these are meant to be professional players, so this explanation is probably difficult to accept).
In contrast, the Japan player was committed to tackling and winning the ball. He just kept on running into the penalty area after the ball, most likely because his commitment to trying to win the ball and his momentum carried him on into the penalty area. So either he didn’t touch the ball and didn’t think about the fact that an opponent was in an offside position and so continued running towards the ball, or he did touch the ball and thought he had better continue in his pursuit of the ball. Whatever scenario for the Japan player, it is difficult to fathom the real reason why he continued running into the penalty area after the ball. This is why it is better to look at the reaction of the Syria player.
Even another attacking Syria player (#6) closest to the AR stopped, and therefore possibly knew that his team-mate was in an offside position. Syria player #6 had the same thought (and similar viewing angle) as the AR. That is, both the AR and Syria #6 thought the ball was kicked forward by Syria and therefore the most forward Syria player was offside.
SUMMARY
The referee made his decision quickly, confidently and remained cool and calm to sell his decision. Whether it was the right decision, technically, is difficult to call. This is because, even after repeated views of the incident it is still not obviously clear which player—Syria or Japan—made the crucial touch that pushed the ball in to the penalty area.
Only with careful deliberation, countless replays, assessing factors for and against, and all the rest of the things we do in evaluating, can it be said that the referee probably got his decision more incorrect than correct. And if the referee was not 100% sure that the ball did come off the Japan player, then it would be a very brave referee indeed to make that call. As we saw, the referee made a bold decision and sold the decision well. He remained cool, calm, and confident and was very well composed. All credit to the referee. No one can really step in his shoes at that moment, so his brave decision must be applauded (and must be accepted by players, coaches, fans and everyone else).
Here are some videoclips of the incident:
This one in particular has a well-balanced and intelligent analysis, as well as some interesting comments and views.
NOTE: Another technical point is that the referee sent off the Japan goalkeeper for DOGSO. However the Syria player, who was behind the goalkeeper, was not heading towards goal. Technically, this is one of the conditions that referees are taught to use when considering whether there has been a denial of an obvious goal scoring opportunity. Common sense tells us that had the Syria player not been fouled, he would have had time to turn and create an obvious goal scoring opportunity before being challenged by other players. However it can be argued that, technically, the player was not heading towards goal.
Following a successful guest appearance for South China last week, Nicky Butt will return to action in Hong Kong in late January 2011.
Nicky Butt with South China (Pic courtesy BBC sport)
Butt is expected to play until May, with the main goals to help the reigning Hong Kong league holders retain the First Division title and to progress significantly better than ever in the AFC Cup. Along the way, Butt is expected to help nurture and guide his new team-mates.
South China chairman Steven Lo Kit-sing said the club would pay Butt similarly to an English Premier League player, which means the 35-year-old former England player could be earning between £25,000 and £30,000 per week.
Following his Hong Kong and Asian adventure, Butt has plans to start his coaching career in Europe in May.
Hong Kong’s oldest club South China Athletics Association is in the midst of enticing Nicky Butt out of football retirement. The former Manchester United, Newcastle United and England player hung up his boots last season, after helping the Magpies secure promotion from England’s Championship to the Premiership.
However, Hong Kong has clearly embraced Nicky Butt and relevant parties are currently negotiating a short-term contract so that Butt can primarily help South China in its quest to win the AFC Cup.
As a tantalizing prelude, on Tuesday 30 November 2010 Nicky Butt made his South China debut in front of 8,253 fans, the largest crowd this season in Hong Kong. The 1st Division league match between South China and TSW Pegasus was played at the Hong Kong Stadium, and the match finished 2—1. Butt scored South China's equalizer from a free kick in the 65th minute, missed a penalty in the 70th minute, and helped set up the winning goal in the 90th minute. [Match highlights can be viewed here]
At least two little lessons were picked up from Nicky Butt’s debut
Lesson ONE
To quote a cliché, Nicky Butt was head and shoulders above everyone else on the pitch. He was composed, always made himself available to his team-mates, read play well, and perhaps unexpectedly spread the ball around the pitch as if he was a clone of Paul Scholes or David Beckham. The surprising thing (because this is expected of him) was that he did not appear to want to tackle and when he did attempt to tackle, his timing was way off, as could be seen for instance in the 85th minute when he made a late lunge at an opponent about to counterattack. Butt did not make contact with the ball or the player and fortunately, as he stretched despairingly at his opponent, did not injure himself.
He also scored from a direct free kick. Here is a clip of Nicky Butt’s debut goal in Hong Kong.
Take home message:Six months after hanging up his boots, this performance says a lot about Butt’s quality … and also says something about the quality of Hong Kong football.
Here is a clip immediately after the referee awarded a penalty to South China, with the score level at 1—1. The TSW Pegasus players (yellow) are incensed at the decision and attempted to crowd and exert pressure on the referee. This is why the nearside AR has run over to support his colleague.
Nicky Butt shoots from the penalty spot and hits the crossbar. The ball rebounds towards Butt, who cannot resist the urge to have another crack at goal. Unfortunately for Butt—for all his experience as a professional player at the highest levels of football—his second attempt at goal automatically became void as soon as he touched the ball. The nearside AR instantly spots this and flags for an indirect free kick to the defending team.
Take home message: The nearside AR did an excellent job in assisting the match referee prior to and during the penalty kick.
The first goal for Muangthong United was a nicely-worked goal. There is no controversy here, and from the referee’s perspective it is always nice to be a nearby witness to a well-crafted football move that results in a goal.
However, the second goal is controversial for two main points. First, it appears that the Muangthong United attacker (red) is guilty of simulation. Watch closely, as he intentionally drags his right foot as if “trawling” for a foul. However, this is the match referee's decision to give the penalty; the referee calls it as he sees it. Second, the penalty kick should have been disallowed (and retaken) because it did not meet the requirements of Law 14.
Can you spot the breach in Law 14 from the following three pictures?
[The decisive spot kick; but should it have been allowed?]
The placement of the ball is clearly NOT on the penalty mark. Again, this is not optimum officiating.
“The best referee is one who has the courage to make decisions even when it would be easier not to.” — Pierluigi Collina.
This blog agrees with Collina's definition and therefore advocates optimum officiating for the good of the game. A good game is fair, safe and enjoyable, with the Referee playing a part.
NOTE: Time and effort is used to post match analyses and observations here so that other Referees can learn from the mistakes {and successes} of high-profile Referees. Please use the content presented here and take heed of the following quote: "Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it." — George Santayana.
Posts
