UAF created the Commission for History and Statistics
Explanation by the UEFA Arbitration Committee regarding the interpretation of game episodes by referees in the 9th round of the Vbet League-2023/2024 (Note: There seems to be a discrepancy as "УАФ" typically stands for Ukrainian Football Association, but the content mentions UEFA. I have translated it as is, keeping "UEFA" and "Vbet League" verbatim.) For accuracy, the correct translation should be: Explanation by the UAFA Arbitration Committee regarding the interpretation of game episodes by referees in the 9th round of the Vbet League-2023/2024
The arbitration committee of the Ukrainian Football Association explained the interpretations of game episodes from matches in the 9th round of the Vbet League-2023/2024: "Shakhtar" — "Vorskla" and "Minaï" — "Obolon".
The Ukrainian Football Association's Committee of Referees explained the interpretations of game episodes in matches from the 9th round Vbet Liga-2023/2024 «Shakhtar» — «Vorskla» and «Minay» — «Obolon».
The main expert on refereeing at the UFA, Nicola Rizzoli, commented on episodes of officiating in matches from the 9th round Vbet Liga-2023/2024 «Shakhtar» — «Vorskla» and «Minay» — «Obolon».
«Shakhtar» — «Vorskla». Referee — Viktor Kopiyevsky.
21 min.
Decision on the field: penalty without a card.
Correct decision: penalty without a card.
Explanation/Reasoning: The referee correctly awards a penalty for the actions of defender No. 19 from FC «Shakhtar» against an opponent's attacker. In fact, the player from FC «Shakhtar» is challenged by an opponent who plays the ball while the defender delivers a clear kick to his foot. Awarding the penalty without applying disciplinary sanctions is the correct decision.
VAR: The VAR correctly limits its review of events. If the referee had not awarded the penalty, then the VAR should have intervened, suggesting that the referee view the incident on the field (PAN) to review the video and award a penalty.
«Minay» — «Obolon». Referee — Oleksandr Afanasiev.
88 min.
Decision on the field: no penalty, no card.
Correct decision: penalty without a card.
Explanation/Reasoning: Although the referee is in a good position, he incorrectly fails to award a penalty for pushing player No. 17 from FC «Minay». Defender No. 19 from FC «Obolon» actually shoves an attacker in the back in an obvious manner causing him to fall and hindering his ability to continue playing. The referee should have awarded a penalty. In such a situation, assistant referee No. 1, who was in an ideal position, should have helped the referee make the correct decision.
VAR: Unfortunately, there was no VAR for this match, but if it had been present, it would certainly have drawn the referee's attention to this episode and suggested that he review the video in order to award a penalty.
