17 RSAURU Busacca
Uruguay scored a three-nothing win against South Africa which would prove both in nature and in result a terminal blow for the host nation's chances of progressing. The game turned on a penalty to Uruguay and an ensuing red card for goalkeeper Itumeleng Khune, who was correctly sent off, but both Busacca and his assistant Matthias Arnet failed to detect an offside in the build up.
Let's start with that highly interesting incident:
Key Match Incident
76' - Red Card to Itumeleng Khune; offside?
Firstly, the DOGSO question was correctly solved, despite Busacca initially reaching for his yellow card pocket - once whistling for a penalty, Khune had to go.
But both Matthias Arnet and Busacca himself failed in detecting Suárez's offside position. While he was onside from Diego Forlan's later-deflected shot, the potential touch by Edinson Cavani would have made him offside.
At first I had probably the same doubt that Arnet had (the ball was spinning before), but this super slow-motion shows it quite clearly.
We don't know whether Arnet asked Busacca in the comms kit about the touch and the referee didn't respond in the affirmative, or whether they both missed it. Quite intricate teamwork was needed here, but that could also be expected at the World Cup finals from regular trios. Actually, this wasn't the only such incident in the tournament.
CRUCIAL MISTAKE
Balance
Even besides that mistake, I don't think this game was the best showcase for Busacca. In terms of foul detection (9', 26', 51', 63'), disciplinary control (49', 57', 60', 63') or communication / manner (9', 49', 76'), one could have expected better of the Champions League final referee from the previous year. I would also argue that 63' is a clear second yellow card.
You can make your own mind up if Busacca's impression was sufficiently motivated for this match, but in my eyes he can have no complaints about this being his only inset of the tournament. I suppose one cannot really speculate about how motivated or not some referees were for their games (see Archundia), but in my eyes, the proof is in the pudding, and the evidence from this match is, for me, pretty unequivocal. In any case, such an important crucial mistake against the host nation is always likely to end your tournament.
Besides the aforementioned Key Match Incident, Matthias Arnet and Francesco Buragina were pretty quiet.
| Massimo Busacca - 7,8 (8,0) Matthias Arnet - 7,9(4) Francesco Buragina - 8,4 Wolfgang Stark Jan-Hendrik Salver SUI – GER | South Africa 0-3 Uruguay Group Stage 16 June |
 Pienaar (5') - SPA (Handling) Dikgacoi (42') - SPA (Tackle) | |
 Khune (76') - DOGSO (Foul) |
I changed the Archundia report and wrote this one in differently to how I might have done. Whatever our views, we should accept that what FIFA determines is good refereeing, IS good refereeing, for the protagonists involved.
ReplyDeleteHowever, to clarify my view - I found the attitude shown by those two referees in question very disappointing, and it is my strong conviction that World Cup refereeing can (and should) do better than performances like that.
Just one annotation and correction: Ahead the DOGSO, there was another touch by an attacking player. You can clearly see that from the live camera. This makes it offside.
ReplyDeleteIndeed, you can see it clearly here:
Deletehttps://streamable.com/ju0mrj
7,9 for me ;)
Speaking of motivation, why would any referee in the world be not motivated by a World Cup match??? That is everyone's dream in refereeing.
DeleteMikael,
DeleteIMHO, just because "FIFA likes it", doesn't make it good officiating and/or good for the game.
As a Mexican referee I had/have no complaints about your initial report on Archundia. He may be my compatriot. But bad is bad and wrong is wrong. It's perfectly fine to point it out when a referee is deficient.
My thoughts from 2010 are linked to below.
ReplyDeleteI was actually surprised to see your initial post, Mikael, because I thought it was well-known this situation was deemed offside and the penalty should have never been awarded.
If you examine my final post below, too, you'll see the point about "moving towards an opponent's goal" in the LotG. Direction is a requirement, not a consideration. Obviously, attackers go around keepers all the time and--for a short time being--are not heading "directly toward goal." But in this situation, watch where the ball goes from Suarez's touch. It heads toward the penalty spot while Suarez continues laterally across the top of the goal area. After initially thinking otherwise, I concluded the direction requirement for DOGSO was not present. Honestly, when you look at where the ball goes and where Suarez is heading, there is an argument that a South African defender would be able to challenge him for possession if not for the foul.
Ultimately, my understanding is that FIFA deemed this wrong on both counts (offside and red card). And, with South Africa's political pull at this particular tournament, it ended Busacca's event (contrary to my hypothesis in the immediate aftermath of the match). Do I have that wrong?
https://www.bigsoccer.com/threads/analysis-rsa-uru-busacca-sui.1461637/page-2#post-21023305
https://www.bigsoccer.com/threads/analysis-rsa-uru-busacca-sui.1461637/page-2#post-21023471
https://www.bigsoccer.com/threads/analysis-rsa-uru-busacca-sui.1461637/page-2#post-21023987
https://www.bigsoccer.com/threads/analysis-rsa-uru-busacca-sui.1461637/page-4#post-21035442
Offside 100%. I believe otherwise it would have been DOGSO, but I understand your analysis.
DeleteThanks again for the comments!
ReplyDeleteAnonymous: indeed, that's what I find so frustrating!
Modern: to be clear - my view on ITAPAR has not changed, but IMO it is important to assess the performances in a fair and consistent way.
usaref: you can guess how much of a muppet I felt this morning thinking that I had it right in 2020 and not 2010!
re. DOGSO, it is a really 'weird' situation and hard to find a precedent. Maybe Abal's penalty given against Buffon at CC 2013 (in terms of DOGSO), but in this situation there are a line of defenders who have all stopped for thinking Arnet was going to flag. I think Suárez might well have gotten a touch with his right leg, taking the ball towards goal, had he not been fouled. So ultimately, I would call this a genuine grey area, though with a preference for RC.
I always had the impression that FIFA had supported Busacca re. the red card, and Busacca fell foul of a very angry and ad hoc powerful association, circumstance, and also compared with other UEFA refs, I don't think the Swiss compared favourably. Maybe one can compare to Brych in 2018.
Interesting comparison to Brych... never thought of it, but now I see it. By the way, 2 years after WC18 and I am still not sure what exactly happened between Brych and Zwayer... do you have inside info?
DeleteHaving watched this match: I found Busacca very poor. The penalty scene is quite difficult - I always felt the RC was harsh (although DOGSO is supportable) but the offside was hard to detect. But apart from that, as you mentioned - he was poor. For me, 63' was a crystal clear SYC in my eyes. His presetation and general behaviour were phlegmatic. It was well-deserved he wasn't appointed further.
ReplyDeleteReview by MARCA.com: 4/10. So-so, he sent off Khune with a straight RC.
ReplyDelete