MilanNews.it
© photo at www.imagephotoagency.it
With the cancellation of Bennacer’s goal in the return derby of the Coppa Italia, the list of referee oversights that have disadvantaged Milan during this season grows longer. After undergoing questionable choices in the Championship and Champions League, the national cup was missing. The decision to cancel the Algerian’s goal, due to an offside by Kalulu that would have obstructed Handanovic’s view, has aroused much controversy and has given rise to many statements from employees and former professionals who express their perplexity about the choice of the referee Mariani. The same designator of the referees, who in any case defended his man, made it clear that the goal could be validated because two images proposed by the Var could leave room for different interpretations. This is a very surprising aspect, since offside is one of the few objective rules of the game of football.
Having said that, let’s retrace all the controversial cases that characterized Milan’s season, adding a chapter dedicated to Inter, both in terms of the double cup match, and in terms of the sensational mistakes in the league matches against Turin. and Juventus.
NAPOLI – The goal of the Neapolitan advantage comes from an oversight by the assistant, who assigns a throw-in to the guests instead of the Rossoneri. But the real crime comes in the final, when the referee Massa cancels Franck Kessie’s equalizer for an “offside” position by Olivier Giroud. In addition to the damage, also the insult. After the natural controversy following the unfortunate decision, the AIA has “filtered out” an interpretation on the active / passive offside rule, explaining that “when there is physical contact between a player in an offside geographical position and a defender, the attacker is considered to be in an illegal position, regardless of the clear intention to interfere with the opponent. The contact, with the addition of the movement of Giroud’s legs, between the Frenchman and Juan Jesus is enough to consider the cancellation of the Rossoneri’s goal correct ”. But between what the AIA communicated and the regulation there is a great inconsistency. According to the regulation, a player in an offside position when the ball is played or touched by a teammate must only be punished if he is involved in active play. According to the regulation, therefore, the offside position of an attacker is to be considered active if he intervenes:
– Interfering with play, playing or touching the ball passed or touched by a team-mate or
– Interfering with an opponent: By preventing him from playing or being able to play the ball, by clearly obstructing the line of sight, or by contesting the ball, or by clearly attempting to play the ball that is nearby when this action impacts the opponent, or by taking an obvious action that clearly impacts the opponent’s ability to play the ball.
In that specific case Giroud lets Juan Jesus intervene without trying to hinder him in any way. In summary, just the call of the VAR for an On Field Review, Mass’s decision to cancel the network is meaningless and the attempt to put a piece of the AIA with a “note” that goes in contrast with the written regulation is crazy. In short, a nice mess that penalized Milan in a direct match.
SPICE – In the minutes of injury time of the match between the Rossoneri and La Spezia, the result at 1-1, Rebic receives the ball on the trocar in a more or less central position. The Croatian turns and tries to head towards the opponent’s goal, but is fouled by a defender from Spezia; the ball continues its run and reaches Messias in the penalty area, who had already coordinated for the first shot. The Brazilian scores with an excellent conclusion on a lap that he had left Provedel stunned, but a few seconds before the crime was consummated: when the Rossoneri number 30 had already started with his leg to finish on the net, the referee whistled a foul on Rebic, thus making the 2-1 of the former Crotone invalid. You read that right: the referee, positioned in an excellent position and with an excellent view of the action, whistled a foul without giving the Rossoneri the advantage and without waiting for the conclusion of a potential goal action. After the convict’s whistle, the referee immediately noticed the incredible nonsense committed and apologized to the players on the pitch, but his decision was a match.
UDINESE – In the 66th minute of the Milan-Udinese, the guests equalized with Udogie who scores with one arm after a confused beat and replies in the Rossoneri area. The Friulian player himself, in exultation, appears incredulous and his reaction (“I saw the linesman who was undecided, but it went well with me”) is the outline of the various protests of the Milan players for the irregularity, which unquestionably c ‘is: Udogie, in contrast in the small area with Romagnoli, pushes the ball with his left hand into the opponent’s goal defended by Maignan. the defender’s irregularity is evident but the VAR Guida does not notice the gross error and validates the goal, then assigned by the referee Marchetti. The oversight inevitably causes the ire of the Rossoneri environment which at the end of the match reacts with words the intervention of the Director Paolo Maldini to the microphones of MilanTv: “Both today and in Salerno we went ahead, which is the most difficult thing, but then we got ourselves back together. The VAR should remove the doubts, used this way it hurts and why it’s not the first time. It is an obvious episode, whoever decides must understand football. And I say another thing: Milan are in the lead and cannot always have a rookie referee at San Siro. It is not easy to referee at San Siro. Unfortunately the referee made mistakes, he played very little. “Clear words that carry the rumble of the famous straw that broke the camel’s back of the elegant and admirable Rossoneri patience.
By drawing up a first balance, based on two factors such as ascertained errors and results at the triple final whistle (not the performance itself or other possible occasions that occurred during the individual matches), then the Rossoneri can claim about 6 points: 1 point lost with Napoli for the draw canceled in Kessie, 3 with Spezia for the goal canceled by Messias (which would almost certainly have closed the games) and 2 with Udinese for the goal validated by Udogie. As written at the beginning, the intent of this piece is not to denounce who knows what plot against the team coached by Mr. Pioli, but simply to underline, regulation in hand, objective facts that have penalized (or risked doing so) the Rossoneri during this season. On the other hand, in the past years to highlight and take into account every penalty assigned to the Rossoneri (right or wrong decision that was obviously not of interest) has been an exercise that has kept a large part of football Italy busy, so we think that a clarification like this (but which unlike the others is explained and argued in detail) is certainly not to be considered out of place. Winning or drawing by playing badly is not illegal but losing points (or risking doing so) due to clear errors is unfair and compromises the regularity of results which can mean a lot from many points of view.
INTER – The chapter concerning the Nerazzurri team is broader. The last “crime” in chronological order is the one concerning the goal canceled by Ismael Bennacer in the derby valid for the second leg of the Italian Cup. Already in the first leg, the referee Mariani had overlooked a suspicious contact on Giroud, embraced by Skriniar in the penalty area, but above all on a hammer foot of Lautaro Martinez on Maignan’s wrist who had anticipated him at the exit. Needless to say, Martinez, with a direct red would have skipped the return match. A race that, in fact, saw another controversial episode happen like the one that sees Bennacer, Kalulu and Handanovic as protagonists. The feeling is that it cannot be established with certainty whether Pierre Kalulu is going to disturb the goalkeeper of Inter, so much so that even the same designator Rocchi has confirmed that the goal could be validated since the image behind the goal, the AC Milan’s number 20 does not seem to obstruct Handanovic’s view with the ball that bags itself several meters away from the Slovenian. However, the image that was decisive is the one behind Bennacer: in fact, we see Handanovic moving towards his left to try to see the ball, because it is blocked by Kalulu’s passage but above all by at least 3 of his defenders. This last aspect is so evident that even the former referee Mauro Bergonzi told TMW Radio: “Those who disturb the view are the Inter players and not Kalulu. I would not have had the goal canceled”. He is not the only former race director who has opposed the decision made by Mariani. Luca Marelli also said about him: “As far as I am concerned, this network should not be canceled”, you can find HERE his full statements. Last in order of time, came the statements of Paolo Casarin, issued to The newspaper: “In fact there was no participation (from Kalulu, ed) and Handanovic’s vision was covered by his defenders instead of by the AC Milan player. If Mariani had validated, there would have been no objection”. In short, a decision, the one taken by the referee Mariani more than doubtful and which greatly influenced the final result: Milan, in fact, would have had about half an hour to try to find the equalizer and qualification goal, also taking advantage of the emotional wave.
But Milan and Inter are also playing at a distance another game, the one that sees them against each other to win the Scudetto. In recent weeks there have also been some very serious arbitration cases in the matches played by the Nerazzurri, in particular the two away matches in Turin against Toro and Juventus. In the match against the grenades, with Juric’s men already leading by a goal, in the 36th minute of the first half the Gallo Belotti falls into the penalty area after a crash by Ranocchia. Guida lets it go but the images immediately show how the defender of Inter, in an attempt to catch the ball, only takes the support foot of the captain of Toro who, caught in the moment of the shot, loses his balance and falls. The game stops for a few moments but the Var does not call the referee to the monitor. Inter will draw the match at the end and, considering the only – virtual – advantage that the Nerazzurri have over Milan today, the one they won against the grenades could prove to be fundamental.
Another extreme case, again in Turin and this time against Juve, a few days later. Without considering that Lautaro Martinez could have been expelled for a blow to Locatelli’s face, the most sensational episode takes place ten minutes into the second half. Irrati whistles a punishment for the bianconeri at the edge of the area, near the right side. There is a silent check by the Var to verify the position of the contact between Bastoni and Zakaria. The referee confirms the punishment and continues to play. The images that flow shortly afterwards, however, speak for themselves: the touch on the ankle of the Juve midfielder takes place exactly on the line of the penalty area: therefore a shot from 11 meters had to be granted. The fact that The Hague then justified the referee’s work with the “lack of images” is even more sensational since it was the images transmitted shortly after that brought to light what was evidence. Again, other potential spots left on the plate.
