Honest Mistakes - Week Eleven
A bit of a catch up.
We take in the matches from 29th October through 4th November.
The impact of big calls being incorrect can then be evaluated using the framework outlined here -> Honest Mistakes in the SPFL.
SPFL Game Weeks Ten and Eleven
29/10/23 The Rangers vs Hearts
Incident 1
Referee John Beaton Game Minute 45th Score At Time 0-1
Incident Cantwell goes down in the box Outcome Penalty to TRFC Evidence (5) Rangers 2-1 Heart of Midlothian | Danilo Clinches Late Win! | cinch Premiership - YouTube
At 2:00
Yorkshire Whistler Verdict Cantwell goes down in the penalty area
Initial on field decision: Penalty awarded to Rangers
Cantwell cuts inside the box and then a covering Hearts defender stretches to make the tackle. Cantwell appears to get to the ball first and goes down under the contact. Although Cantwell’s touch is heavy and he is stretching for the ball as a result, it does appear that he just beats the defender to the ball. The defender’s right leg does catch Cantwell on the right ankle, rather than the ball. As such the penalty award is the right outcome.
Verdict: CORRECT decision.
Expected Points
Outcome
No impact
Incident 2
Referee John Beaton Game Minute 90th Score At Time 1-1
Incident Goldson goes down in the box Outcome Penalty to TRFC and YC to Haring after VAR review Evidence (5) Rangers 2-1 Heart of Midlothian | Danilo Clinches Late Win! | cinch Premiership - YouTube
At 3:48
Yorkshire Whistler Verdict Goldson goes down in the penalty area following a corner.
Initial on field decision: Following a VAR review, the referee is recommended to review the incident again on the monitor and a penalty kick is duly awarded. The defender is also cautioned.
In real time, we see the corner delivered, the usual jostling and physical contact between attackers/defenders, and players competing for the same space in attempt to win the ball.
The referee has a wide viewing angle of all the players in the box but perhaps does not see clearly enough the contact on Goldson, which is understandable given the number of players moving in the box.
Irrespective of scoreline or minutes remaining in the game, penalty decisions are always deemed as a key match incident for referees, so the referee must be certain of what he has initially seen here, in terms of a foul being committed, to award a penalty kick.
However, once VAR recommend the on-field review, he is given the opportunity so see again the clear pull on the back of the shirt of Goldson. This is not a fair attempt to challenge or block Goldson by the Hearts defender, irrespective of how easily Goldson goes to ground, once this action is brought to the referee’s attention, the expected outcome here is a penalty decision.
It was brought to my attention, comments made by the Hearts manager that suggest the referee was shown multiple angles of the incident, of which one could potentially have shown a block by Lundstram in the same passage of play.
I have tried to look for the Lundstram block which I suspect occurs at the same time as the Goldson shirt pull, but from the replays presented I cannot see the incident to make a call on how this may have impacted on the VAR team’s thought process, as to what to show the referee.
It is my understanding that if they felt Lundstram had a committed a foul, prior to Goldson’s incident, they should have also brought this to the referee’s attention.
So, either they missed it or felt it wasn’t a foul and so didn’t need flagging with the referee as part of the review. But I must stress, this mere speculation on my part as to how the allegedly Lundstram block may have been considered.
In isolation so Goldson alone, I would confirm the penalty kick award was expected.
Verdict: CORRECT decision to award the penalty
Expected Points
Outcome
No impact
01/11/23 Celtic vs St Mirren
Incident 1
Referee John Beaton Game Minute 72nd Score At Time 1-1
Incident Kyogo goes down in box under challenge from Mandron Outcome No decision Evidence https://x.com/Zeshankenzo/status/1719977391181717682?s=20
Yorkshire Whistler Verdict Kyogo goes down in the box, off the ball with Mandron
Initial on field decision: No foul committed
Kyogo is blocked off by the St Mirren player who is not looking at the ball and clearly catches Kyogo in the face. I suspect the defender is simply looking to block the run of the Celtic defender with his arm, rather than attempt to strike him in the face. However, the defender is not even looking at the ball and does catch/block the Celtic man. This happens off the ball and easily missed by the on-field referee to be fair given how busy the penalty area is and where the flight of the ball is expected.
However, if VAR have seen and reviewed this collision, I am very surprised an on-field review was not recommended and a penalty kick awarded.
Verdict: INCORRECT DECISION. Penalty kick expected outcome
Expected Points
Outcome
Celtic -1 xPts
01/11/23 Dundee vs The Rangers
Incident 1
Referee Kevin Clancy Game Minute 83rd Score At Time 0-3
Incident Dessers scores for TRFC Outcome Goal to TRFC Evidence https://x.com/Bairdric1/status/1720086868606554282?s=20
Yorkshire Whistler Verdict Dessers scores for Rangers
Initial on field decision: Goal awarded
The referee appears to inadvertently block off the Dundee attacker from receiving the ball and Rangers benefit from this collision by launching and scoring from the resulting counter attack.
I have sympathy for both Dundee and the on-field referee here.
Dundee clearly sees their attack break down due to the referee’s position blocking off the player. However, in the law, the referee is powerless to stop the play for this. Crucially the ball itself did not strike the referee.
Under Law 9.1 (Restart of Play) – The ball is out of play if it touches a match official and the team in possession of the ball changes or a team starts a promising attack due to this ball on ref contact. An uncontested drop ball to the team originally in possession would then follow.
As an active referee, I have been in this position once or twice myself and you simply want the ground to swallow you up. You feel you should have seen the change in direction and reacted sooner but can only apologise and hope the other team doesn’t go on score from your perceived positional blunder. Common sense says you should give a drop ball as you have caused the attack to breakdown/possession to change.
However, the law is clear here, unless the ball itself strikes the referee play must continue.
Verdict: CORRECT DECISION to award the goal
Expected Points
Outcome
No impact
Incident 2
Referee Kevin Clancy Game Minute 90th Score At Time 0-4
Incident Dessers goes down in the box Outcome Penalty to TRFC following VAR review Evidence Bing Videos
At 3:00
Yorkshire Whistler Verdict Dessers goes down in the box
Initial on field decision: After VAR recommend an on-field review, penalty awarded to Rangers
As the ball bounces in the Dundee box and is half cleared, Dessers and a Dundee defender both stretch to win the loose ball. In real time it is difficult to see what contact is made from both players, but Dessers does go to ground protesting he has been fouled.
Under VAR review, it appears that Dessers does indeed nick the ball away from the Dundee defenders’ boot and then the Dundee player’s follow through sees his studs catch the top of Dessers’ ankle. Once this footage is presented to the on-field referee, the penalty is duly awarded.
Verdict: CORRECT DECISION to award the penalty kick for the foul
Expected Points
Outcome
No impact
Summary
My thanks as always to the Yorkshire Whistler.
Celtic get their first big call against so far this season, but it is a whopper. Tied at 1-1 the decision not to award a penalty for Mandron’s off ball action on Kyogo could have lost Celtic a whole one expected point due to the game time and score.
In terms of the overall position:
The Rangers have 0.16 less points and Celtic 0.8 less than expected due to the impact of Honest Mistakes. The refereeing calls have given The Rangers an estimated 0.64 xPts advantage so far this season.
Celtic led by five points after 11 matches.