Pascal Garibian: “This Paqueta goal should have been maintained” during OL-Lille

“Why did Mr. Turpin refuse this goal which seemed valid to Lyonnais Lucas Paqueta?
I will be very clear. With my colleagues from the technical direction of the arbitration, we analyzed the images and the management of the video assistance on this action. It is considered unfortunate that not all angles could be appreciated by the head referee when he went to view the screen.

That is to say ? On the edge of the field, he had an angle of view that could suggest an excess of commitment from Mr. Paqueta when the goalkeeper tried to clear. But another angle, specifically the left magnifying glass, showed that the initial decision to allow the goal was correct. Mr. Turpin was well placed, in the diagonal and he had judged well by validating the goal. But not all angles were then made available to him, for various reasons.

“All of the video streams left no room for obvious error”

So Paqueta’s goal was valid.
Yes, for us, this goal should have been maintained. Especially since we consider that all the video streams left no room for an obvious error.

So the images shouldn’t even have been sent?
That’s it, or else they should have all been sent. That is an error on our part.

“The referees are match officials, they don’t have to justify themselves in the media, especially when it’s hot”

An error by Mikaël Lesage, the referee in charge of VAR?
I don’t want to go into details. We will be on training tomorrow all together, we will share with the whole group. When we observe errors, which is in the DNA of the DTA in order to understand whether the problem comes from the interpretation or from the process, we then refine the analysis. But today, we can already recognize on this action a failure in the treatment of the image. It lacks an angle that would have convinced the referee to stick to his initial good decision. And then in the spirit of video assistance, there was no need to send the images.

Acknowledging an error and explaining it always calms a controversy. So why not let the referees express themselves after the matches, like the other players in the game?
No, no, it’s not that at all. We are getting off topic a bit and we should write an article only on that. But today, FIFA and UEFA do not allow referees to communicate. The latter are magistrates of the match, they do not have to justify themselves in the media, especially hot.

We always want to hear the referee when there is a controversy, but the FFF follows the line taken by FIFA and UEFA. By contrast, umpire leaders can communicate and manage the crisis when an incident occurs. But the time for media analysis is not the time for technical analysis. »



Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *