World

Referees

Strict Mexican Trio Officiates England’s Opening Victory

June 10th, 2006 | By: Aaron | 8 Comments »

Well, it wasn’t pretty, but England managed to take all three points in their opener as the 4th minute own-goal by Paraguay was all that separated the two teams in Frankfurt. The 1 – nil result would go down as the first-ever such result in World Cup history in which the goal would be recorded as an own-goal.

As with yesterday’s games, this match was free from controversy for the most part. It seems that the players have all been coached to be mindful of the strict refereeing that will be enforced in Germany this year.

I did find it a little unusual that Marco Rodgriguez invoked the rarely used six-second rule against Bobadilla, Paraguay’s substitute keeper, in the 11th minute when it took him too long to return the ball back to play. Usually a warning is given before whistling for an indirect free kick inside the penalty box. So it didn’t surprise me later in the match when there were two or three foul throw-ins either.

In all, there were three cautions issues in this relatively tightly called match. Gerrard went in studs-up in the 19th, Paraguay’s fleet-footed forward Valdez swept out Beckham’s legs a few minutes later, and Crouch earned a stupid card for dissent in the 63rd.

In general, I think it’s good that the ref set the tone early by showing that he would issue cards when necessary. It sets boundaries that the players quickly learn to recognize.

A few situations puzzled me, however. Like when Cole was hit after releasing the ball in the 33rd minute, but England had advantage. It seemed a card might have been warranted after the play had ended for the player who came in late on Cole. And I also thought Paredes deserved a caution in the 76th for a challenge on Lampard (I believe it was) that wasn’t even called for a foul.

But in general, it was a solid match by Rodgriguez and his assistants and I doubt you’ll find many complaints from either side in the wake of this result.

As for me, I’ll be out on the pitch for most of the weekend, so don’t expect any timely reportage from me. I do, however, hope to share my opinion on all the matches at some point.

Until next time…

peace,
ac

Tags: England, Lampard, Paraguay, Referees, World Cup

Referees World Cup RSS Feed

del.icio.us:Strict Mexican Trio Officiates England's Opening Victory

digg:Strict Mexican Trio Officiates England's Opening Victory

newsvine:Strict Mexican Trio Officiates England's Opening Victory

reddit:Strict Mexican Trio Officiates England's Opening Victory

fark:Strict Mexican Trio Officiates England's Opening Victory

Y!:Strict Mexican Trio Officiates England's Opening Victory

stumbleupon:Strict Mexican Trio Officiates England's Opening Victory

Comments

By Razzle | June 10th, 2006 at 8:48 pm

Dont know about other guys but I’ve recently started taking more interest in the referees performance on the pitch as well.

Question comes to my mind is suppose a ref gives a wrong penalty in the first half on which a goal is scored. The ref finds out during the half time break that it was wrong and the penalty should never have been given. Will he try to atone in the second half by giving the other team an equally dubious penalty or something similiar??

Posted from United States

By Razzle | June 10th, 2006 at 8:50 pm

… and does Fifa say anything about such a situation? Any rules governing such a situation? Because if you look at it historically referee errors *do not* balance out. Some teams really do end up suffering. Think WC 2002.

Posted from United States

By eric | June 10th, 2006 at 9:19 pm

Razzel,

No the Referee will not look to make another incorrect call. He might have a tendencey to call something that would be a normally be a fifty fifty call but these referees would almost certainly not even do that.

Posted from United States

By eric | June 10th, 2006 at 9:20 pm

My question on this game was that Rodriquez seemed to be unbalanced on Crouch. Was this just my view or did anyone else see it that way?

Posted from United States

By owen | June 11th, 2006 at 3:44 am

I have to agree – I thought the ref was a little too pro paredes who got away with some diving/simulation and got away with some bad late tackles and too touch on crouch who was rarely at fault (except for dissent which is just stupid) – I thought it the worst reffing job to date with a clear edge toward paraguay – no problemn with the poor throw ins though – they were and there isn’t an excuse for that at this level

Posted from United States

By Scott | June 11th, 2006 at 5:04 pm

I agree, worst called game thus far. Keep an eye on this guy. FIFA will tighten the screws on him and he will be a bit less central/south america biased.

Posted from United States

By Vinay | June 12th, 2006 at 9:50 am

Matches were awesome. With such attacking football and so many goals its just a treat to watch and read stuff on the beautiful game.

Football Fever has caught up with our ePaper rEvolution Http://PressMart.net. Also check our blogs which includes http://footballove.blogspot.com

Posted from United States

By Oli | June 13th, 2006 at 2:38 am

I have to agree on the anti-Crouch bias. The BBC commentator put it best when he said, after yet another myseterious call against the gangly lad “I don’t know what that was for – unless it was for being awkward-looking.” Worst officiating – tied with Japan’s goal today.

Posted from Canada