The Referees Committee of the Ukrainian Football Association jointly with consultant Nicola Rizzoli explained interpretations of specific game episodes in postponed matches of the 25th and 26th rounds of the Vbet League-2023/2024.

Round 25

"Metalist 1925" — "Obolon". Referee — Vitaliy Romanov.

15 min.

Field referee's decision: continue play without a foul.

Correct decision: continue play without a foul.

Rationale:«Player No. 2 ("Metalist 1925") risks holding player No. 16 ("Obolon") by the shirt, but this action does not affect the movement of the attacker (to such an extent that he easily and without particular difficulty heads the ball). Therefore, it cannot be considered a foul simply because the jersey is pulled. We must remember that for a hold to be considered a foul, it also needs to have consequences, not just based on the appearance of a tugged shirt.»

For this very reason mentioned above, the UEFA Appeals Body (UAB) limited itself to conducting a silent review.

"Myna" — "Ruh". Referee — Dmitro Yevtukhov.

52 min.

Field referee's decision: penalty without a foul.

Correct decision: free kick without a foul.

Rationale:«Defender No. 32 ("Myna") played the ball with his foot in an offside position, while attacker No. 30 ("Ruh") was preparing to shoot at goal. The defender first correctly played the ball, and then the attacker kicked him on the back of the heel. Although the referee was in a good position, he could not understand the situation described above due to the speed of the defender's intervention and incorrectly awarded a penalty.»

As is appropriate, the UAB correctly recommended that the field referee review the PNPR (Penalty Non-Penalty Review) for the reason mentioned above, having clear evidence, images that are reproduced on screen.

"Shakhtar" — "Zorya". Referee — Oleksandr Kalyonov.

83 min.

Field referee's decision: continue play without a foul.

Correct decision: continue play without a foul.

Rationale:«Player No. 9 ("Zorya") does not make any improper movement, turning and not creating an obstacle for the attacker No. 30 ("Shakhtar"), who instead runs into him. The actions of a player who turns within his own space are not considered a foul, and we always remember that football is a contact sport with many possible bodily contacts.»

For this reason mentioned above, the UAB limited itself to conducting a silent review.

89 min.

Field referee's decision: free kick + red card for serious foul play (SFP).

Correct decision: free kick + red card for SFP.

Rationale:«Player No. 1 ("Zorya") committed a harsh foul against player No. 14 ("Shakhtar") near the edge of his own penalty area. The referee correctly sends off the goalkeeper, as the attacker had a clear goal-scoring opportunity. For determining SFP, all four criteria were present: possession of the ball, direction of attack towards the goal, geographical location of the foul and number of defenders (remember that a foul committed by a goalkeeper outside his own penalty area is an aggravating circumstance because the goal remains unguarded)».

For this reason mentioned above, the UAB limited itself to conducting a silent review.

Round 26

"Dnipro-1" — "Dynamo". Referee — Yuriy Ivanov.

88 min.

Field referee's decision: continue play without a foul.

Correct decision: continue play without a foul.

Rationale:«Player No. 5 ("Dnipro-1"), taking a risk, grabbed player No. 6 ("Dynamo") with both hands. We cannot assert that these actions influence and cause the attacker to fall and constitute holding, which impedes his movement possibilities. Therefore, considering such an incident as a foul due to the lack of any noticeable impact is contradictory. We consider it appropriate to continue play because the act of grabbing does not affect the player who loses balance and falls on the grass, and we do not want to award «light» penalties.»

For reasons described above, lacking clear images showing an impact of the grab on the attacker's fall, the UAB justifiably limited itself to conducting a silent review. We consider it appropriate to note that even in case of awarding a penalty, the UAB could not intervene for the same reasons, as it would be unable to clearly demonstrate any connection between the grab and the attacker's fall.

88 min.

Field referee's decision: free kick + red card for serious foul play (SFP).

Correct decision: free kick + red card for SFP.

Rationale:«Player No. 24 ("Dynamo") commits a serious playing foul, kicking his opponent from behind without the possibility of playing the ball. In such situations, it is necessary to remember FIFA and UEFA requirements aimed at protecting player safety and providing for an obligatory red card for a kick from behind with high speed, jumping (i.e., lack of control over one's body), when there is no opportunity to compete for the ball.»

For this reason mentioned above, the UAB limited itself to conducting a silent review.