A recent analysis by the Technical Commitee of Referees (CTA) of the Royal Spanish Football Federation (RFEF) has shed light on a controversial decision during the Real sociedad-Real Madrid match. The committee’s second audiovisual program, “Review Time,” examined several key plays from the First and Second Male Leagues, aiming to clarify officiating interpretations.
The most debated incident involved a young central defender from Real madrid. According to Marta Frías,spokesperson for the CTA,the play presented a distinction between a “promising attack” and a “manifest goal-scoring prospect.” The crucial factor in determining the sanction-a yellow or a direct red card-was the presence of a second defender who could possibly contest the ball.Frías explained that if a second defender is deemed capable of disputing the ball, the appropriate sanction would be a yellow card for a promising attack. Though, if the distance to the ball makes a dispute unachievable, as the referee interpreted in this instance, it constitutes a manifest goal-scoring opportunity, warranting a direct red card.
The CTA’s assessment concluded that the criteria for denying an obvious goal-scoring opportunity (dogso) were not fully met. Therefore, the committee determined that “the most appropriate sanction would have been a yellow card.”
Regarding the intervention of the video Assistant Referee (VAR), the analysis highlighted that VAR is reserved for “clear, obvious, and manifest errors.” The play in question was categorized as a “gray area,” admitting multiple interpretations. consequently, the decision was deemed to be within the purview of the main referee, and the VAR’s decision not to intervene was considered correct.
Along wiht the Real Sociedad-Real Madrid incident, the “Review Time” program also analyzed plays from matches including Levante-Betis, Getafe-Oviedo, Valladolid-Almeria (second division), Espanyol-Deportivo, Dux Logroño-Real Sociedad, Levante-Alhama, and barcelona-Dux Logroño.
