We wanted the video truth? We got it.
Defeat from CSKA the Spartak club did not explain the referee’s intrigues. Shamil Gazizov reported that no complaints about Sergey Karasev does not have, however, asks the RFU Expert Judicial Commission to clarify some of the referee’s decisions. The corresponding letter was sent to the ESC.
At the same time, almost all the speakers of the red and white community in their comments agreed that the arbiter should have interpreted the controversial episodes differently. And by and large there were two subjects for dispute.
First: CSKA defender clash Vadim Karpova and the forward of “Spartak” Jordana Larsson in the first minute at the border of the army penalty – yellow or red?
Second: the collision of the same Karpov with the left wing of Spartak Ayrton at the 32nd minute inside the army penalty area – simulation or foul and penalty?
Here are some considerations of the former Spartacists, which appeared hot on the heels in the public field.
– There was a red card for Larsson. Let me explain: Karpov had no attempt to play the ball – a clear red card. Karasev did not have enough eggs in the 2nd minute to remove (in fairness, few people would have had enough).
– Karpov deserved to be sent off in the moment with Larsson in the first minutes. It was a last resort foul.
– In the second minute the judge had to show a red card to Karpov, who overwhelmed Larsson, who was running away one on one with Akinfeev. And references to the fact that there was still someone from the army defenders on the left are inappropriate here. There was a pure foul of the last resort, which means that the player must be sent off. And in the case when the same Karpov flunked Ayrton in the penalty area, there was a one hundred percent penalty. Here and no consultation with the VAR is needed. Thus, I do not want to question the victory of CSKA. But there are rules by which football lives. And decisions must be made by following them, and not at someone’s discretion.
And here is the ESC meeting by letter “Spartak” took place. The commission’s summary should be recognized as sensational. Not only the opinion of the red and white did not find support – this could be expected – but also the opinion of Karasev! It was not that difficult to predict this, it was simply impossible.
In Ayrton’s case, however, there were no surprises: Karasev’s decision was recognized as correct.
CSKA Moscow – Spartak. Ayrton falls into the box and receives a warning
Official comment: “The referee did not correctly assign a penalty kick to CSKA in the 32nd minute of the match. The decision of the ESC RFU is motivated by the fact that Ayrton, after throwing the ball to himself on the move, begins to fall before possible contact with the defender. This action is caused by the striker’s desire to get an undeserved advantage in a situation when he realizes that he will not be able to catch the ball thrown to the side, and the defender who has not played the ball will almost certainly not be able to avoid physical contact with the striker.
But in the episode with Larsson, it really boomed. It turns out that not only the red one, which Spartak dreamed of, but even the yellow one, which Karasev took out, is inappropriate here – experts believe that there was no violation at all.
CSKA Moscow – Spartak. Karpov at the entrance to the penalty area knocks down Larsson
Official comment: “The referee erroneously recorded a violation of the rules of the game by Vadim Karpov in the 1st minute of the match. Jordan Larsson falls near the CSKA penalty area after light physical contact in the shoulder area. According to the members of the commission, the striker himself initiates this contact with the defender and, feeling the opposition of the defender, unnaturally falls on the lawn after him. In this case, there is no violation of the rules in the legs, so the referee should have continued the game. This would correspond to the requirements of the Refereeing Department, which criterially assess this type of single combats as performed within the framework of the rules of the game. “
Just in case, here is the composition of the RFU expert and judicial commission: Chairman Ashot Khachaturyants, Deputy Chairman Sergey Zuev, Head of the Refereeing Department Viktor Kashshai, Head of the Inspection Department Sergey Fursa, experts Nikolai Levnikov, Yuri Baskakov, Frank De Blakere, Wolfgang Stark, Executive Secretary Pavel Kamantsev …
The conclusion that suggests itself after the fresh decision of this respected Areopagus does not apply to “Spartak” or the conspiracies inspired against him. The conclusion applies to football in general, since before the appearance of the ESC verdict, the fact of violation of the rules in the first minute of the derby was not disputed by a single living soul. And the gloomy conclusion is this: the world of football and the world of refereeing understand each other less and less.
And the root cause of such misfortune is seen where salvation was expected. The fascination with video, which was believed as the only criterion of truth, in fact leads you further and further from the truth. Any delayed and repeatedly scrolled replay leaves nothing from the truth of life, and only hours of waste at the monitors can explain the nature of those passages that we find in the decision of the ESC – that Larsson himself initiates and himself falls, and that violations are not was because there was no disturbance in the legs.
The most annoying thing is that there is nothing to complain about. We wanted the video truth? We got it.
– .
