The Argentine referee Nestor Pitana is still in the crosshairs after the action that it validated, with the support of the VAR, in the match between Brazil and Colombia. While the Conmebol authorities agree with Pitana, the controversy is on.
(You may be interested in: Colombia requests suspension of referees who called a match against Brazil)
In less than four hours, Conmebol made public the video of Pitana’s conversation with the VAR judges, the Argentine Ezequiel Brailovsky and the Bolivian José Antelo, with which they end up supporting the performance of the central defender.
“At 77 minutes there is an attack by the yellow team, where the ball touches the referee, turning back to a teammate, who plays laterally, not constituting a promising attack. The referee allows the game to continue, making a decision that conforms to the rules of the game, since the ball does not go directly into the goal, does not change possession and does not initiate a promising attack, which are the three actions by which the game should be stopped and resumed with a boat to land ”, says the video published by Conmebol.
However, there is no unanimity, even if the arbitration authorities agree with Pitana, on the decision made by the Argentine judge. In fact, the Colombian Football Federation sent a protest note (see box).
(Read also: Listen to the VAR audios on the controversial Brazilian goal play)
“It is a human error, no bad faith or anything crooked goes through our heads, only a human error by a referee who has lately been described as one of the best on the planet,” said Ramón Jesurún, president of the Colombian Football Federation, to Blu Radio.
“It is sad because a good game had been planned by Professor Reinaldo and the players had been working with a lot of discipline and the referee error generated a result of a match, which is lost when we did not deserve that to happen,” he added.
Feedback
You cannot give the advantage, and, on top of that, the VAR reviewed it and did not correct it: very badly the referees there
Former referee Rafael Sanabria explained what happened and stated that Pitana failed in the decision: “The judge is wrong. Contact with the referee interferes with the behavior of the players: (Wílmar) Barrios raises his arms and stays next to the referee and stops; (Gustavo) Cuéllar, who was behind, could intercept the ball, but he didn’t. You cannot give the advantage, and, on top of that, the VAR reviewed it and did not correct it: the referees there were very bad, “he said.
Sanabria also gives responsibility for what happened to the video refereeing judges: “They simply tell him that the contact does not interfere and that the goal is valid, but it is totally wrong: even in Ospina it interferes, because he expects the referee to sanction. It seems terrible to me that concept of rules of the referees that ends in this, “he added.
José Borda, another referee analyst, agreed that, according to the regulations, a “land bounce” should be sanctioned by the referee’s touch of the ball, which is fortuitous but affects the play.
The regulation itself explains that the ball will not be in play when “it touches a member of the refereeing team, remains on the pitch and, furthermore: a team starts a promising attack, or the ball goes directly into the goal, or the team in possession of the ball change ”. The ball was left to Firmino and it was an absolutely controversial goal for the partial 1-1.
(Read also: Brazil vs. Colombia: this is how the press reacted after the controversial move)
Nestor Pitana. Back, Neymar.
Wilmer Barahona, a former international referee and now an analyst, also disapproved of the Argentine central defender’s performance. “The referee Nestor Pitana was wrong. Rule number 9 says that when the ball hits the referee and a promising attack comes, it must stop play and drop the ball. The referee was unconcentrated, and the VAR, which should have helped, did not inform him of the situation either, “said Barahona on his YouTube account (Front Arbitration). “It is a very serious error, of ignorance of the rules of the game, and for that reason they should not only sanction Pitana, but the entire referee team,” he added.
For his part, the Argentine analyst and former referee Javier Castrilli he did side with the judge and the VAR: “When the ball hits the referee (…). The game must be cut off if the ball changes team possession … or generates a clear goal opportunity … Pitana’s terrible location, but the ball goes to the point and possession belongs to the same team … ”.
The brazilian Arnaldo César Coelho, who directed the final of the World Cup in Spain 82 and is now a commentator, considered that Pitana failed: “Yesterday’s play by Brazil was irregular. The rule is clear: when the ball touches the referee and a new attack begins, it has to stop the game immediately, and Pitana did not do it, “Coelho told Blog Deportivo, from Blu Radio.
Pitana is still in the eye of the hurricane. He has the backing of Conmebol, but the complaints about his performance do not stop. Will you be reappointed?
SPORTS
More sports news
–The guardianship that seeks to annul the Brazil vs. Colombia
–The jokes of Arturo Vidal and James Rodríguez
–Florentino uncovered: he spoke about Zidane, Ramos, Ancelotti and more
.