NZF L3 ref here.
Over my years of many assessments and so on, the general message I get is on a penalty decision, you need to be 100% sure as whether you make the right or wrong decision is a likely a key match decision, whereas a foul in most other areas of the field this is not the case. (Keep in mind we don’t have VAR in NZ league)
This is why referees are reluctant to give penalties in an era where VAR can overturn a non call, which looks much better than overturning an on field penalty decision.
One might think that the introduction of VAR would turn referees to back themselves more and call more penalties, knowing that VAR can save them if they made the incorrect call.
But what it seems to be doing is refs are more hesitant to call penalties, as in a pre VAR age if they don’t call a penalty they know there is no going back, making them more decisive then and there in the moment.
We have been on the extremely unlucky end of edge cases the last two weeks with these penalties. Refereeing is so subjective and it can sometimes feel a ref is talking themselves into or out of a decision as it seems like a logical process in the moment.
Any questions please reply. Refereeing plays on the mind, and also I believe watching these refs these last two home games, they are just not cut out for it.
Clearly not sure to the naked eye but a referees eye, they are flustered on all these decisions by body language and just can’t cope with the level of pressure the decision has. Only the few Full time refs in the league seem to be better at this, being consistent throughout games, overall fairer calls and a style that better matches the flow of the game Eg, Alireza, Alex King, Shaun Evans, Kersey
Over my years of many assessments and so on, the general message I get is on a penalty decision, you need to be 100% sure as whether you make the right or wrong decision is a likely a key match decision, whereas a foul in most other areas of the field this is not the case. (Keep in mind we don’t have VAR in NZ league)
This is why referees are reluctant to give penalties in an era where VAR can overturn a non call, which looks much better than overturning an on field penalty decision.
One might think that the introduction of VAR would turn referees to back themselves more and call more penalties, knowing that VAR can save them if they made the incorrect call.
But what it seems to be doing is refs are more hesitant to call penalties, as in a pre VAR age if they don’t call a penalty they know there is no going back, making them more decisive then and there in the moment.
We have been on the extremely unlucky end of edge cases the last two weeks with these penalties. Refereeing is so subjective and it can sometimes feel a ref is talking themselves into or out of a decision as it seems like a logical process in the moment.
Any questions please reply. Refereeing plays on the mind, and also I believe watching these refs these last two home games, they are just not cut out for it.
Clearly not sure to the naked eye but a referees eye, they are flustered on all these decisions by body language and just can’t cope with the level of pressure the decision has. Only the few Full time refs in the league seem to be better at this, being consistent throughout games, overall fairer calls and a style that better matches the flow of the game Eg, Alireza, Alex King, Shaun Evans, Kersey
Again, as I saw it, the defender attempted to play at the ball as it looped in the air, raising his knee and leg towards the path of the ball trying to do so. When he didn't get to it, and his leg was accross Ishige's path, I am inclined to agree with their captain post match, that the defender actually tried to pull his leg away.
That's when Ishige ran into his leg, trying to run through to get the ball, but with Ishige also off balance after stretching to get his knee on the ball in the first instance.
Between those two things going on I said it was closer to a dive than serious contact. Not meaning that it was a dive, but that Ishige had somewhat fallen into the contact and that I didn't think the contact was really what brought Ishige down. Nor was that heavy. Others differ.
I think the ref ruled contact between two players, neither having or gaining possession, with both reasonably trying to get to and play at the ball. Nothing too different from two players trying to get up to head a ball, in contact doing so and neither getting to it. Both are entitled to contest space so long as they are attempting to get to the ball, not just obstructing or pushing or holding the other player.
This was not a popular comment in the thread on the night, but that's also pretty much how Chief saw it post match. Not in possession. And a melee of players trying to get to the ball.
I thought we had a chance of getting the pen, especially when VAR intervened.
I did a fair bit of club refereeing at lower levels and attended three referee training programs for club referees. Which, of course doesn't make me an expert. But it gave me more of a refs perspective on the rules on contact, obstruction and fouls.
I've also been convinced about fouls and pen shouts watching Nix games live and realised after watching TV replays that my initial impression was wrong and the ref got it right. I've become somewhat circumspect about jumping to criticise the refs as a result.
I saw it as a call of neither player being in possession and two players reasonably contesting space attempting to play the ball. Hence contact but no foul (including no obstruction), as the ref called it.
Reasonable interpretation?
And, all that said, I still thought we might get the call. As you say - interpretation.