The UAF Referees Committee explained the highlights of the past matches of the 13th and 14th rounds of the Ukrainian Premier League. The UAF press service reports this.
13th round. Metalist 1925 – Chornomorets. Referee: Oleksandr Shandor.
9 khvilina Gravets No. 70 FC Chornomorets falls at the penalty maidan through the dynamics of the game without a foul, but the referee has the wrong way to confuse this as a simulation and a stagnant sanction at the sight of the yellow card of the well-known gravts I.
The decision is incorrect, but it cannot be corrected by VAR, as a result of the protocol, this technology cannot be used to make decisions on the same cards..
40 Khvylina Gravets No. 70 FC Chornomorets there is a breakdown that is punishable by technical sanctions in the form of a free kick and penalties in the form of a yellow card. Through those with another card of this player in this match, the referee will present his red card.
The decision is more correct, but the first step forward was bulo hibnim and led to the wrong execution.
The UAF Referee Committee sent a list to the referee, having voted on the given point, and immediately supported the conduct of the matches..
Round 14. Chornomorets - Rukh. Referee - Andriy Kovalenko. 69 Khvilina.
Gravets No. 5 FC Chornomorets is in the middle of the penalty area, destroyed with a seemingly downcast hand, and also crosses the goal. Consistent with the Rules of the Game, such violation of the draft entails a technical penalty in the form of a penalty and disciplinary sanctions, in which case it falls under the typology of “Danger of Obvious Goal Opportunity” (DOGSO), etc. the arbiter selects his lord, showing him the red card.
Based on the VAR protocol, such a solution will require verification from the side of this technology. A review has been carried out and technical and disciplinary decisions by VAR have been confirmed. So, let’s talk about the correct decision, which was accepted by the arbitrator.
Round 14. Kryvbas — Dynamo. Referee - Maxim Koziryatsky. 12 Khvilina.
Gravets No. 11 FC Dynamo launches a counterattack and, while controlling the ball, goes straight to the opponent's goal, which is followed by two FC Kryvbas players. Gravets No. 13 FC Kryvbas from behind makes contact with Gravets No. 11 FC Dynamo and encourages him to fall in and lose control of the ball, thereby reducing his chances of scoring a goal.
Such a violation falls under the typology of “Danger of Obvious Goal Possibility” (DOGSO), and therefore, leads to a technical penalty in the form of a penalty kick (the damage was contained within the boundaries of the penalty area) and disciplinary sanctions for DOGSO, then to red cards.
According to the VAR protocol, the decision was verified by technology, and technical and disciplinary sanctions were confirmed. So, let’s talk about the correct decision, which was accepted by the arbitrator.
Round 14. Obolon — Vorskla. Arbiter - Christina Capricorn. 63 Khvilina.
At the hour of the counterattack, the representative of FC Obolon, who was Volodya with the ball and was in a favorable position to realize a goal chance, recognizes contact from behind the side of the defender of FC Vorskla. This contact will cause the gravel to become unbalanced and fall onto the lawn. The match referee incorrectly respects this contact and has mercy on his decision to continue the game without the same sanction (penalty kick and red card).
According to the VAR protocol, this technology is responsible for rechecking the possible red card, and therefore, the VAR must work in order to request the referee to make a review of the field, as a result of which it would be necessary to make a decision quickly technical and disciplinary sanctions, about.
KA UAF, praising the decision to inform the individuals who are responsible for such a pardon, so that the same visits are stopped before them.
Round 14. Polissya – Metalist 1925. Referee: Yaroslav Kozik. 81 Khvilina.
Gravets No. 3 FC Metalist 1925, not wanting to try to play the ball, puts both hands in the back of Gravets No. 23 FC Polissya, thereby causing the rest to fall beyond the boundaries of the field.
Be aware of the necessary actions that were made with your hands and that were not at fault in order to fight for the ball (Rule 12). Well, these actions were not necessary, such that the guilty ones would be punished with a technical sanction in the form of a penalty kick (as it happened in the penalty area - a penalty).
The arbitrator's decision is correct. Once again, VAR, with the corresponding protocol, also verified and confirmed its correctness.
Previous Football. ua having analyzed and selected the bags of the last 14th round of the UPL.