UEFA Referee Observer's Vadims Direktorenko opinion about an incident in Latvian Higher League21/9/2019 Click Read More to find out about Direktorenko's opinion about an incident in Latvian Higher League. Latvian Cup quarterfinal - Liepāja (red) 1:2 (white) Rigas Futbola Skola. Goal canceled (foul by attacker). The referee (Artis Ķēniņš) initially awarded a goal but after direct consultation with the fourth official (Mareks Ķere) he canceled the goal. Correct decision (no goal - foul by attacker). The goalkeeper is trying to play the ball by extending his arms, and in that moment he feels contant from the attacker - of course football and the LotG can't accept that, and the referee has to penalise the attacker by awarding a direct free kick to the defending team. But why did he award a goal initially? I don't know why, but of course he acted metodicaly incorrect in this situation, but, most importantly, the final decision is correct. But of course it is not very beautiful to make the decision with the help of the fourth official in this situation. [Then he is asked whether a referee can change his decision, Direktorenko responds that, yes, he can until the next restart of the play.]
Comments
|
About| This is The Referee blog that contains: Archives
October 2019
Categories
All
What is RSS feed? Click here to find out!
|