Monday, May 24, 2021
“Collina’s heirs” breathe a sigh of relief
The VAR annoys Cologne residents, but it is correct
By Alex Feuerherdt
When 1. FC Köln scored late in the game against Schalke 04 and seemed to avoid direct relegation, the VAR burst into the cheers. The rules are complicated, but the referee rightly withdraws the hit. The excitement is great – but shortly before the end, Cologne scored a regular goal.
At this point you can hardly help but use the subjunctive: If Sebastiaan Bornauw had not won 1. FC Köln in the match against FC Schalke 04, who had already been relegated, with his header in the 86th minute and thus the Jump to 16th place in the table, but if it had remained a goalless draw – which would have meant direct relegation from the Bundesliga for the Rhinelander – then there would undoubtedly be heated debates about a decision by referee Daniel Siebert a quarter of an hour before the goal of the day given.
The referee from Berlin canceled the hit from Cologne’s Sebastian Andersson after an on-field review, which was carried out on the recommendation of the video assistant. And this scene was tough in terms of rules. The goal was preceded by a free kick around 30 meters in front of the guests’ housing, in which Jonas Hector hit the ball into the center of the box. There Schalke Timo Becker and Shkodran Mustafi missed the ball, then goalkeeper Ralf Fährmann felt the same way. Andersson, however, reached the ball on the left goal post and pushed it over the line.
Özcan is sidelined and blocks Sané’s run …
The referee first gave the hit, but then the VAR stepped in. Because when the free kick was executed, there was a duel between Salih Özcan and Schalke’s Salif Sané in a central position on the edge of the penalty area, in which the Cologne player had blocked his opponent’s path into the penalty area. Not necessarily by a foul, but by blocking the path with the arms and upper body – from a close offside position. The question now was whether this offside was to be punished.
To get closer to an answer, it is helpful to take a look at Rule 11, which says: “If a player who is moving from an offside position or is in an offside position is in the path of an opponent and the movement of the opponent to the ball it is an offside offense if it interferes with the opponent’s ability to play the ball or engage in a duel for the ball. ” One thing is certain: Özcan was offside and blocked the run of Sané, who could not get into the penalty area and therefore not near the ball.
… but does it also deny him the opportunity to get the ball?
But did the Cologne man also influence the Schalker’s ability to play the ball or fight for it? That is crucial, because without this possibility, being in the way is not to be punished as an offside offense. The question is not easy to answer, however, because Özcan blocked Sané as he started running and then fell to the ground. However, if you take into account that Becker and Mustafi were positioned to the left and right of Sané when taking the free kick and both ran into the center of the box, where they then missed the ball at the height of the penalty spot, it is likely that Sané also wanted to go there and would have.
So you can actually come to the conclusion that Özcan influenced Sané’s ability to get the ball and that it was therefore a criminal offside. This is by no means a mere theory: If Sané had been able to support his two teammates in defending Hector’s cross, Schalke would have been three in the center of the penalty area and it would have been less likely that Andersson would have scored. Whether Sané would have actually got the ball is of secondary importance – the main thing is that he was denied the opportunity to do so.
Not a wrong, but a lack of perception by the referee
It remains to be clarified on what basis the intervention of the VAR took place. This was not about a clear and obvious mistake, not about a wrong decision that resulted from an error of perception on the part of the referee. Rather, it was a so-called “serious missed incident”, a serious overlooked incident that resulted from a lack of awareness: The referee team on the field was either hidden from Özcan or his “block” against Sané from an offside position – or even both.
The video assistant therefore recommended that the referee do a review on the monitor – not to check the offside position as such, because that would not require the referee’s view. Rather, to assess whether Salih Özcan has impaired Salif Sané’s ability to play the ball. Daniel Siebert made the right decision in the end by denying the goal and awarding Schalke an indirect free kick for offside. Nevertheless, he will probably have been happy that it didn’t depend on this scene whether the hosts end up in 16th or 17th place. Due to Bornauw’s late goal, the canceled goal was ultimately irrelevant.
What else was important:
In the other two encounters, which revolved around relegation and relegation, the referees were also not an issue after the final whistle. Felix Brych brought the game between Werder Bremen and Borussia Mönchengladbach (2: 4) over the stage in his 300th Bundesliga match, as usual, while his colleague Tobias Stieler had the game of VfB Stuttgart against Arminia Bielefeld (0: 2) firmly under control. The penalty, which the guests from East Westphalia turned into the opening goal, was also a perfectly correct decision: After losing the ball, Naouirou Ahamada had held his opponent Masaya Okugawa by the shirt for several meters and only let him go in the penalty area. When the Bielefeld went down, there was consequently a penalty. Because with a holding offense it does not matter where it begins, but where it ends: “If a defender begins to hold an attacker outside the penalty area and continues to hold him into the penalty area, the referee decides on a penalty,” it says in Rule 12.
Three referees chaired their last Bundesliga game on this 34th matchday because they have reached the age limit of 47 and it does not look as if the referee’s sporting management is considering following the appeals to reconsider this regulation. Guido Winkmann said goodbye while leading the game 1. FC Union Berlin – RB Leipzig (2: 1), Markus Schmidt was in the match between FC Bayern Munich – FC Augsburg (5: 2), Manuel Gräfe supervised the game Borussia Dortmund – Bayer 04 Leverkusen (3-1). And everyone will keep their final in special memory: At Winkmann’s game, 2,000 spectators were allowed to celebrate the Union qualification for the European Cup frenetically. Schmidt sprayed a heart on the lawn of the Munich arena with his free-kick spray and organized a La Ola wave with the 250 spectators. When Gräfe left the field, both teams even stood in line for him. This has not happened to many referees either.
.