RPL returned after the international break and immediately gave us an exciting tour. There were sensations and beautiful goals. But the refereeing, to which there were practically no questions in recent weeks, still collapsed.
What did the referees get wrong? Football referee Igor Fedotov answered this question especially for the “Championship”. Below is his analysis of the refereeing on the eighth day of the RPL.
The maximum score is 8.5. The referee receives it if he directs the game without errors. The score is reduced to 7.9 if the referee makes a key error: incorrectly or not awarding a penalty kick, showing or not showing a straight red (to a player or members of the coaching staff), showing or not showing a second . Yellow card (to a player or members of the coaching staff). In case of a second key error, 0.5 points are deducted. 0.1 point is deducted for incorrectly showing or not showing a yellow card (to a player or members of the coaching staff), as well as for missing three to five violations. 1 point is deducted if the referee in the VAR pointed out the referee’s error on the field, but left his incorrect decision in force, despite watching the replay. The score in parentheses is the score of a referee who made a key error in the match, but worked well without that error.
Analysis of judging in the previous round:
“Fernández’s campaign is a provocation. This is more important than a fight.” Analysis of the refereeing in the 7th round of the RPL
“Dinamo” – “Paris NN” – 1:1
Once again, referees make incomprehensible mistakes after training camp. In this match, Kukulyak did not concede a penalty in the seventh minute. Yes, it was a difficult moment, the referee did not see it: it was difficult to see the tackle and the blow to the Dynamo player’s leg. But the VAR came in and the error was corrected.
In the 66th minute, Kukulyak incorrectly awarded a penalty to the Dynamo goal. Here he usually had an open position, so the valuation is reduced. Now there are new recommendations: in 90% of the cases in which the VAR intervenes, the score is not reduced because the moments are difficult. But when the episode is open and the decision is still wrong, this is already a problem. And Kukulyak has that problem. What did he see there? That the Dynamo player raised his arm in an unnatural position and stuck out his elbow? I still do not understand. The VAR intervened and annulled the penalty.
And in the 89th minute, Kukulyak did not show the second yellow card to Juran. The coach was hysterical in the technical area, so he had to be sent off. If you already showed the first yellow one, then be a man and show the second one. I wouldn’t lower my grade for this if he were in the department, but I would postpone the next appointment.
Kukulyak’s score is 7.9.
Photo: Alexander Safonov, “Championship”
CSKA – “Wings of the Soviets” – 2:2
In the 29th minute, Lyubimov encountered a difficult episode: it was not easy to see a violation of the rules in the Krylya area. The goalkeeper flew out of the goal, spread his arms to the sides and hit the CSKA player on the head. The referee was called to the monitor and awarded a penalty: he did the right thing.
As for Roshi’s sending off in the 62nd minute, he could have been shown a second yellow card earlier, when he showed with all his appearance that he had been hit in the face, although there was no blow. That is, it caused the judge to punish his opponent. But it was in the 62nd minute when Lyubimov mistakenly showed Roche the second yellow card. The CSKA player played the ball and put his foot on the grass, and the Krylya player put his foot under it. Lyubimov could not understand it, but for some reason the substitute referee Bulanov decided to understand it and got involved in the episode. Very strange. Lyubimov is not a personality on the field. Now the department, represented by Milorad Mazic, has a demand: the referee must be an individual and make as many decisions as possible independently. And it wasn’t about anything at all. And throughout the match, Lyubimov miscalculated the episodes and whistled some incomprehensible fouls. This also reduces the score.
Lyubimov’s score is 7.8.
Details of the crazy match in Moscow:
Crazy CSKA game! Ten of us were saved against the main RPL sensation team.
“Akhmat” – “Krasnodar” – 1:1
Good work Moskalev. The only point: in the episode of Krasnodar’s goal in the 39th minute, many thought that there was a rebound from an Akhmat player. The assistant was blocked, could not determine what happened and finally gave the offside signal. The VAR intervened. The replay shows that the Akhmat player moved his foot and consciously played the ball, passing to where the Krasnodar striker was. Correct decision: count the goal.
Moskalev’s score is 8.4.
“Spartak” – “Sochi” – 1:0
A difficult match for Chistyakov. Initially, the referee tried to let him fight, but it turned out that the fight was only allowed in one direction. The Sochi players beat the Spartak players and yellow cards should be shown for such actions. As a result, this impunity went further and rudeness began on the part of both parties.
In the 22nd minute, a yellow card should have been shown to the Sochi player for rough play, and in the 45+3 minute – to the Spartak footballer, for hitting an opponent in the face with his hand. And in the 90th + 6th minute the Sochi player had to be punished for rough play, when he hit Promes in the legs from behind him without trying to play the ball. For some reason this was the norm for Chistyakov, and this impunity became an explosion.
There are moments of 50/50, and in those situations you have to keep the game going. But Chistyakov did not hold back. There were open episodes that he missed or called infractions and didn’t show anything. And before that, there was a period when Sochi players simply hit their opponents every minute or minute and a half. I understand that the purpose of these interruptions is to break the rhythm. But the referee must control the situation.
Chistyakov’s score is 8.1.
“Baltika” – “Rostov” – 2:2
Good job turbine. But I think in the 16th minute there was a foul in the initial phase of the attack by a Rostov player. The paths of the players crossed, the Baltika player approached the ball and the rival knocked down his leg. Why didn’t the VAR, represented by Kukuyan, intervene? Most likely, you haven’t found the right angle. The broadcast showed a good overview of the moment, but was cut off. And yet it was a miscalculated goal. The goal should have been disallowed and a penalty kick awarded to Baltika.
The turbine score is 7.9.
Interview with the hero of a spectacular match in Kaliningrad:
“Now it’s uncomfortable to poke Ignashevich.” The former CSKA player made a dream debut in Kaliningrad
“Ural” – “Fakel” – 0:0
Bezborodov returned to work. I don’t know if he was worried, but he couldn’t tell from the game. Everything was clear, Bezborodov allowed us to fight even with the use of our hands. This is his vision of the fight and I like it.
In the 25th minute, Bezborodov did not show a yellow card to the Urals player for rough play by hitting his rival in the face with his hand. And in the 84th minute, the Urals footballer used his elbow in an uphill fight, the attack continued and a goal was scored. The referee’s view here was probably blocked by a Fakel player. The VAR, represented by Panin, intervened, Bezborodov watched the replay and disallowed the goal. This is different from the Turbin story: the video assistants were activated and the decision was changed. Today there is no grade reduction for this. They would have reduced it if Bezborodov had looked at that moment and said: “Fuck you, for me this is not a foul.”
Bezborodov’s score is 8.3.
“Rubín” – “Zenit” – 0:3
A difficult match for Shafeev. The scoreboard neutralizes all the heat that was on the field. In the 18th minute, the referee correctly showed Kabutova a yellow card for rough play. The Zenit footballer realized that he was screwing him and a few minutes later the same Rubin player hit him on the leg. I am not going to assess the degree of contact, because during the match there were many similar episodes and Shafeev blew the whistle. Here the referee did not call any foul. For me, this is not showing a second yellow card for interrupting a promising attack: there was an open area and the Zenit player was able to break into the area, where two more teammates were.
Aside from this episode, Shafeev earned an overall rating of 8.5 for the game. But I don’t understand why the moment with Kabutov is not a fault for him.
Shafeev’s score is 7.9.
Tour team. There are several Zenit players there:
RPL 8th round team. Zenit stars, Spartak defender and authors of comebacks
Lokomotiv – Orenburg – 0:2
Fedorov calmly left the game: hit each other, kill and I won’t get anywhere. And well done indeed! He seemed to call the infractions, but he did not hand out yellow cards. Fedorov judged the teams equally and acted consistently. He is calm, does not give emotions and does not interest the players. I didn’t even admire Dziuba’s torn shirt. I think Fedorov chose the right tactic.
Now about the moment with Dziuba. Well, there was some kind of contact, someone caught his little finger on his shirt, well, it ripped. Perhaps Dziuba even cut him off in the locker room, to later show the referee that he was caught at the entrance to the area. Why not? That’s what I would do if I were him. This is the same factor for the referee when calling a penalty: he sees that the shirt is torn and makes a decision. The players held onto each other’s shirts throughout the game, none of them tore, but Dzyuba’s suddenly tore.
Fedorov’s score is 8.4.
Dziuba’s t-shirt is one of the highlights of the entire tour:
This is Dzyuba going crazy! I tore my shirt into pieces by the referee’s decision. Video