“Russian Premier League Chaos: Zenit’s Unsettled Gold Medal Fate and Referee Blunders in 11 Rounds! The third stage of the new Russian Premier League football competition has already been completed. A definite leader is present. A distinct outsider is present. Finally, there is interest! No one has yet placed gold medals around the necks of Zenit players based on the outcomes of the first 11 rounds. There may also be judicial mistakes. Or not?
The third stage of the new Russian Premier League football competition has already been completed. A definite leader is present. A distinct outsider is present. Finally, there is interest! No one has yet placed gold medals around the necks of Zenit players based on the outcomes of the first 11 rounds. There may also be judicial mistakes. Or not?
One would believe that Russian judges are flawless after attentively reading all of the recommendations of this season’s expert-judicial commission overseen by the RFU President. Only one error was noted in the first 10 rounds (88 matches), and it had a significant impact on the outcome. And this occurred over the weekend.
10th round “Rostov” vs. “Ural” – 2:2 Fair outcome: 2:1
ESK: In the match’s 17th minute, the Rostov team’s goal was incorrectly recorded by the official. The decision of the ESC is supported by the fact that the commission members can identify Andrei Egorychev (Rostov)’s offside position in relation to the penultimate player of the opposing team at the time the ball is passed thanks to the available film angles of this episode. There were insufficient grounds for the VAR to intervene in this instance because there was inadequate convincing proof of an assistant’s clear error.
As a result, nothing changes at the honest table from the real one. Only Rostov moves up one spot, to number twelve.
Does this indicate that our judges are no longer experiencing accidents? Let’s avoid jumping to conclusions. After all, we didn’t entirely rely on the ESC’s statements in prior years. And as trustworthy sources, we referred to data from the leading specialists in Russia, namely from the “Ale, Ref” telegram channel, which is considered to be the authority on refereeing. So, other from the Rostov-Ural game, did they discover any other scoring errors?
Let’s first, though, go over the formulas for our calculation. The following mistakes are ones we deem to be operational:
Penalty. erroneously assigned, or not assigned at all. Yes, even if it still needs to be scored, we count the penalty as a goal.
Goals. either mistakenly cancelled or counted.
Deletions. For instance, a player may wrongly not be dismissed yet still score the game-winning goal.
In our situation, each of the aforementioned examples only applies if they had a direct impact on the match’s result. For instance, when the score is 3:0 in either direction, we don’t take into account an unassigned penalty. Because of this, no one lost points as a result of this error.
Let’s leave.
“Wings of the Soviets” vs. “Dynamo” in two rounds, 3:3. Fair outcome: 3:2.
“Ale, Ref”: Lyubimov disregarded a rule infringement that came before Dynamo’s third goal. VAR, however, is unable to affect the episode. The goal’s location was too far away.
“Ural” defeats “Akhmat” in round seven, 0:1. Fair outcome: 1:1
In the extra period of the second half, the referee did not penalise Akhmat.
“Ale, Raf”: I’m curious as to the defender’s thoughts when he played in his own penalty area with one minute remaining in the game. There is justification for imposing a penalty. Amelin was unable.
7th round, Zenit vs. CSKA, 1:1 Fair outcome: 1:2
Danil Krugovoy, a defender for Zenit, joined the pitch during the second half and gave his team a penalty. But the judge did not make a selection.
Ale, Ref: Regrettably, missed foul. There was no fine imposed against CSKA. This, in my opinion, calls for intervention. However, we now follow a strict European strategy, using the barest number of monitors.
10th round “Rostov” vs. “Ural” – 2:2 Fair outcome: 1:1
There was no reason to give Rostov a penalty in this game, aside from the Ural offside goal. We will therefore deduct one goal from Rostov as well. We obtain 1:1 rather than 2:1. The outcome of the fight was unaffected by the referee. But there is some subtlety.
: “Ale, Ref” I wonder if the VAR, by displaying his hand to the referee, warned him that a foul might be called before the ball even touched his hand. I grant that this is a respectable fight for Galimov, just as it was in the scenario before. He thus chose not to look at the push. Dynamically, it appears to be a foul. I think a free kick is the best course of action.
For the time being, only one conclusion can be made: Russian football does indeed have fewer errors that directly effect game results. Out of 88 games, there were just 3 when the outcome might have been different.
Perhaps the quality of refereeing we are providing is indeed evolving fundamentally.