The first really high-profile court scandal in the new RPL season occurred already in the second round. The match between Akhmat and CSKA in Grozny became historic in every way, but especially in a bad way. However, there were other meetings as well. How did the judges work there?
Especially for the “Championship” arbitration in the second round of the RPL was resolved by the football referee Igor Fedotov. Below is his review.
The maximum score is 8.5. The referee receives it if he leads the match without errors. The score is reduced to 7.9 if the referee makes a key error: incorrect assignment or non-assignment of a penalty kick, showing or not showing a direct 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 the case of the second key error, 0.5 points are deducted. 0.1 points are 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 VAR pointed out the referee’s error on the field, but left his incorrect decision in effect, despite watching the replay. The score in parentheses is the score of the referee who made a key mistake in the match, but performed well without making this mistake.
Analysis of the arbitration in the previous round:
Exclusive
“Only the referee of the match “Zenith” failed. Analysis of arbitration in the 1st round of the RPL
“Wings of the Soviets” – “Dinamo” – 3: 3
The general impression of Lyubimov’s work is neither fish nor bird. That there was a referee, that there was not. It’s like this logic: they named me, I came, I moved around here next to the players. Control of the game was just not. This is not a FIFA referee.
In the 52nd minute, Lyubimov incorrectly showed a yellow card to the Krylia player. And there was also an episode at minute 90+5, which I consider key. One of Mažić’s main requirements is the correct position and movement. If everything is in order with them, the referees are supported. Lyubimov’s position was bad. With the score 3:3, Dynamo passed a serve into the penalty area, the Wings player grabbed the opponent with his hands and simply suspended it. It was necessary to assign a penalty to the gate of Wings. Of course, you can say that the referee behaved intelligently and did not help; this is really what the current department has. But, for me, this is an 11-meter kick.
Lyubimov’s score is 7.8.
Dynamo’s match in Samara turned out to be action-packed:
Zakharyan has the best match of the year! But the Wings came back great with the help of another hero.
Ural – Paris NN – 0:0
But the impression of Chistyakov’s work is very good. A simple game, but the referee read it anyway. I have already said that the previous leadership underestimated Chistyakov. With Mažić, this is the second date in a row for him. I think forward and the third and fourth. If he treats the job the same way, he’ll be a leader this season.
Chistyakov made the right decision in the 52nd minute. The Ural player tried to run away from the opponent, and there was a mutual fight with the hands. The referee awarded a penalty kick in favor of Nizhny. It was possible to continue the game, but for me it is an advantage that Chistyakov did not show a red card.
Chistyakov’s score is 8.6.
Artem Chistyakov
Photo: vk.com/fc_ue
Rostov – Zenit – 1:1
Kukulyak made a good impression in the first half, but lost control of the game a bit after the break. He showed good physical shape, he is generally the best referee in this regard.
In the 29th minute, Kukulyak did not show a yellow card to the Rostov player for foul play, in the 38th minute – to a Zenit footballer for foul play. And then there was a card not shown to the Rostov player for a similar violation.
In the 63rd minute, Claudinho made a tackle and Mironov stepped on his foot, while Kukulyak continued play. Luckily the VAR did not interfere in the elimination. If it weren’t for the proximity to the ball and the movement of the Zenit player, it could have been red.
Already after the final whistle, Kukulyak eliminated Semak. They wrote nonsense in the protocol, which the coach aggressively approached. Majic’s message to referees is to be flexible. And Kukulyak behaved like a direct and stubborn jerk. The score for this is not reduced, because the incident did not occur during the game, and we don’t know what Semak said. But the referee himself is aware of his mistakes and must understand that he will approach him. Why can’t you listen? What is the crown on your head? What should football players and coaches do first, like “Kin-dza-dza!”, do “Ku!” and then ask if you can talk. Or crawl on your knees and kiss your hands? There is nothing complicated in Mazhic’s message. Just don’t put yourself above the players. Everyone came to watch the football, not the referee.
Zenit, of course, must file a complaint, but Semak’s red card will not be canceled due to the rules, which explain how the referee must act if he sees aggressive behavior. The main thing is that there will be no additional sanctions, because Kukulyak did not write anything about insults. It’s just about aggression, but, to me, this is nonsense. Semak is waiting for a disqualification for a match, that’s just a game with Dynamo. Considering Zenit’s ambitions, this is not good for Kukulyak.
The precedent is not dangerous, but stupid. The current leadership has a tough message. This is Ivanov, who did not work before: soft and snotty. Now the judge must be smart, not stupid, like before. Kukulyak moved well, designated an 11-meter free kick. But what happened after the game is a manifestation of stubbornness.
Kukulyak’s score is 8.1.
Rubin – Orenburg – 1:1
Meshkov made a very good impression. A completely simple game cannot be called, there are no such games now. Meshkov handled the game well. True, it was a little slow, but it has always been so: with long legs it is impossible to accelerate sharply.
Meshkov’s score is 8.4.
Vitali Meshkov
Photo: Dmitry Golubovich, Championship
Fakel — Lokomotiv — 1:4
In the 12th minute, Kazartsev credits Loko’s goal. The VAR could not intervene, because the referee, most likely, explained that this was not a violation for him. For me, this is a foul, because the defender of “Fakel” jumped up to play the ball, while Dzyuba was standing still. In this episode, Artyom turned against himself: when the ball flies, he either holds it or pushes it. Kazartsev was 25 meters from the scene, this is a bad position. If he worked for VAR, he would tell her: “Vasya, how can you see from there whether this is a violation or not?” For me, this is a miscalculated goal. A foul by Dzyuba had to be counted, who did not even try to play the ball and went only to the defense.
In the 38th minute, Kazartsev made the right decision. The ball hit the Lokomotiv defender’s arm, and she was in a natural position, so the referee did not award an 11-meter penalty.
Kazartsev’s score is 7.8.
How Loko won in Voronezh:
What is Tiknizyan doing! With a new goalscorer, Loko crushed Evseev’s team
Krasnodar – Sochi – 2:0
Very good job Moskalev. He showed excellent physical shape, moved well, endured a high level of martial arts. The case when a person went out, worked, deservedly received money and went home.
Moskalev’s score is 8.5.
Vladimir Moskalev (in pink in the center)
Photo: vk.com/fckrasnodar
Akmat – CSKA – 2: 3
The ninth minute episode is difficult for Bezborodov and his assistant. The main referee, although he was in the recommended position, was blocked, and the blow was too strong for the assistant, and he probably considered that the ball hit the Akhmat player in the chest. If the ball hits directly in the hand, it is an 11-meter kick and a red card for depriving a clear scoring opportunity. If first on the chest, and then on the hand, the same thing, the hand is punishable. I do not see the third option that the ball hit only in the chest here – the hand was safe. Ivanov did the right thing by calling Bezborodov to the monitor. The episode is difficult, but the referees solved it.
It is also true that Bezborodov scored the first goal from 11 meters at the gates of CSKA, and alone. He can say all he wants that the leg did or did not go to the side. He is a contact due to the defender’s negligence when trying to play the ball. And in this case, only the referee’s interpretation is important. For Bezborodov, these 11 meters are everything. The same episode was in the case of a foul on Zabolotny and a penalty on Akhmat. The referee showed consistency: he interpreted the moments in the same way in both directions.
The episodes with penalties at 45+6 minutes and 76 minutes Bezborodov also interpreted in the same way. Both here and there, the defending player was pulling on the opponent’s shirt. The referee at all times with 11 meters acted consistently and correctly. But unfortunately, we have to talk about the fourth penalty separately.
Bezborodov signaled an 11-meter kick and showed Gaich a yellow. This is his decision, he was in the recommended position and saw that the CSKA player grabbed the opponent’s shirt. The VAR check begins. What should the referee do in such a situation? Explain what you saw and why it is yellow to him. And the VAR is there to react. Judging by the picture, after Bezborodov’s decision, the VAR was silent. The referee talked to the players and a lot of time passed. This was followed by a signal for the execution of 11 meters, Oleinikov hit, and Akinfeev hit the ball. Bezborodov had a whistle in his mouth all the time, so the main question is: when did he whistle? For me, after Akinfeev’s save, because then the referee put his finger to his ear. Then Bezborodov was called to the monitor, but the VAR represented by Ivanov and his assistant had no right to do so.
I saw an assumption that the signal was lost and the refs had no connection. But in such situations, when the ball is already in play, VAR cannot interfere. So this theory can be dismissed out of hand: it leads in the wrong direction. At that time, Bezborodov had gone to VAR three times; of course, this is stressful. I do not forgive him: the whole team, including Vladislav, is to blame in this case. But first of all, the VAR in the person of Ivanov is to blame. As a result, Bezborodov went to the monitor, changed the card to red, and the blow was interrupted.
How to save the referees of the CSKA match? It is very easy to conclude that the whistle was blown before the blow, although no one heard it. Because if it is, then there is no protocol violation. Bezborodov in this case had every right to go to the monitor and do whatever he wanted. I don’t have a record of the negotiations, but I just don’t see any other option here.
CSKA did not protest because they won. But they complained about the red Gaich. After the arbitration department released its explanation of the moment, where it admitted the error of the judge and the VAR.
Here an analysis of the moment from the RFU
RFU: the referee mistakenly allowed to take a penalty in the match “Akhmat” – CSKA
From this it follows that now Gaich’s red card can be easily canceled – they will cancel it. As a result, CSKA will not file a protest, and the RFU will cancel the Gaich card: both the wolves are full, and the sheep are safe. As for the punishment of the referees, only one of the seven referees involved in this scandal can be fired – we are talking about Kobzev (the referee ended his career as the main referee and worked for AVAR.-Approx. “Championship”). Kobzev worked for AVAR, and it was he who controlled the situation on the field, while Ivanov (VAR) controlled everything. Bezborodov will be suspended for two to six games, as will Ivanov, and then they will return.
Bezborodov saved himself with the CSKA victory. After the first half, there was no point in him watching football anymore, because CSKA had to win anyway. This does not mean that the arbitrator would have sued, everything went in his favor. If the match ended in a tie or Akhmat won, then there would be a replay. That’s the rule, there’s nothing you can do about it. But do you have any idea what a repeat is in terms of finances and everything else? This is horrible. So the judges and the organizers were lucky.
Bezborodov’s score is 6.9.
CSKA’s match in Grozny could become even more historic:
It is a pity that CSKA scored the third penalty against Akhmat. We have lost the historical repetition.
Spartak – Baltika – 2:1
Kukuyan did a good job. He managed the game well, he kept the bar. I liked him, like the whole team. As for the collision between Zobnin and the Baltika player, the arm and, in particular, the elbow of the Spartak footballer were in a natural position. So articulation is the opponent’s problem.
Kukuyan’s score is 8.5.
Contradictory victory of “Spartacus”:
Ignashevich surprised Spartak. But against such Promes and Bongonda there is little courage
