A recent explanation of the rules of football has raised alarm. It seems that a critical error has occurred. During a Champions League match on Tuesday, referee Szymon Marciniak reversed his initial decision and awarded a penalty to Paris Saint-Germain in the final moments of their game against Newcastle. This was due to Marciniak believing that Tino Livramento had illegally touched the ball, resulting in Kylian Mbappé successfully scoring the penalty kick and earning an essential point for the French team. However, it has been pointed out that the decision did not align with any of the established guidelines for a handball offense.
What are the requirements for a handball? Livramento did touch the ball with their arm… However, the referee must consider more than just the contact between the ball and arm (which is defined as starting at the end of the armpit). The most important factor is whether the contact was deliberate, which would result in a handball. But if it is determined to be unintentional, other factors like the player’s body shape at the time of contact come into play. If the player’s silhouette is considered to be “unnaturally large,” a penalty may still be given regardless of intent.
Is this what the laws state? Yes, but the guidance on handball laws is more extensive. According to the International Football Association Board (Ifab), if a player kicks or heads the ball and it then hits their own arm, it is not considered handball unless the ball then goes directly into the opponents’ goal or the player immediately scores. In the Premier League, referees are advised to consider the player’s proximity to the ball when it was kicked and whether their body shape could be considered natural based on their actions at the time. However, in Uefa matches, this leniency is not typically granted.
Is it really as straightforward as it seems? Not exactly. There is also added complexity in this situation, as there is uncertainty about whether referees in Uefa competitions are required to consider the “hit elsewhere on the body first” defense. In April, Uefa’s football board suggested this should be taken into account, but it is believed that the European governing body thought applying it universally (even in cases where the body part was “unnaturally large”, for instance) would go against the laws.
I do not wish to disagree, but I believe I am understanding the referee’s perspective. It seems that Marciniak initially made the correct call, as Livramento did not intentionally make contact with the ball, was not in a position that could be considered “unnaturally big,” and was near Ousmane Dembélé’s cross. These factors, along with the deflection, should have meant that a penalty was not possible. However, the VAR intervened.
I was curious when the abbreviation “TLA” would come up. It appears that even when discussing the complicated rulebook of football, the video assistant referee can still make mistakes. It was not due to the laws that PSG received a penalty, but rather the mistake of an individual. Tomasz Kwiatkowski, the VAR for referee Marciniak, has been removed from his duties for the Champions League match between Real Sociedad and Red Bull Salzburg on Wednesday. The reasons for this decision have not been made public by UEFA, but it is believed that Kwiatkowski made an error in advising his Polish colleague (whom he has worked with many times, including at last year’s World Cup final) to reconsider the decision to leave Livramento alone.
Avoid the newsletter promotion.
after newsletter promotion
Kwiatkowski’s involvement raises one final question: what led to Marciniak’s change of mind? What did he see on the replay monitor that he initially missed, and why was it so significant? It appears that the only possible explanation could be that, to him, Livramento’s body position appeared “unnaturally large”, highlighting the subjective nature of many referee decisions. However, it would be even more concerning if Marciniak saw nothing at all. If he simply reacted based on expectations after being called to the monitor. The VAR was intended to assist referees in challenging situations. If it turns out that it is causing even the best referees to make mistakes, it would be a highly unfortunate and unintended consequence.
Source: theguardian.com
