Explanation by the UEFA Arbitration Committee regarding the referee's interpretation of game episodes in Match No. 11 of the Vbet League between "Olexandria" and "Kolos"
The arbitration committee of the Ukrainian Association of Football explained the interpretation of certain game episodes from the match in the 11th round of the Vbet League between "Oleksandria" and "Kolos," which took place on November 5.
Photo from upl.ua
The Arbitration Committee of the Ukrainian Football Association explained the interpretation of certain game episodes from matchday 11 of the Vbet League between «Oleksandria» and «Kolos», which took place on November 5.
The head expert in arbitration at the UFA, Nicola Rizzoli, commented on specific episodes of refereeing during matchday 11 of the Vbet League between «Oleksandria» and «Kolos».
52 min. Awarding a penalty kick for handball in favor of FC «Kolos».
It should be noted that the defender of FC «Oleksandria» attempts to intercept a pass from the right flank with his left foot and succeeds, playing the ball with his knee. After this, the ball clearly changes its trajectory upwards, where it then hits the defender's right hand, who at that moment could not avoid contact with the sphere. Although one can understand the complexity of assessing the dynamics and trajectory, it would have been more appropriate to continue play, considering this incident as an accidental contact caused by the defender himself.
60 min. Awarding a penalty kick for handball in favor of FC «Oleksandria».
The ball, after being played with the head by two players, bounces off the grass and hits the defender's arm, who has no opportunity to avoid this contact. The unpredictability of dynamics and trajectory, as well as the close distance, leave no other decision but to consider this a situation not deserving punishment, thus it would have been more appropriate to continue play.
67 min. Awarding a penalty kick for a foul in favor of FC «Oleksandria».
The defender of FC «Kolos» does nothing to commit a foul, and it should be noted that his movement is interrupted in an attempt to avoid contact with the opponent—he immediately stops just outside the penalty area. And here it is precisely the attacker who creates contact by attempting to enter the penalty area, engaging in one-on-one play with the defender. Therefore, such actions should be considered a normal game contact. It is important to consider the objective difficulty—whether or not the contact occurred within or on the line of the penalty area—is hard (even with video assistance) to determine.
