The situation in the last second of the extra time of the Livesport Superliga duel between the home team Tatran Střešovice and the visiting Vary Bohemians, when Filip Forman scored a goal after play, which was first recognized and after a video review was called off, has its official opinion. According to the Commission of Referees and Delegates, based on the video, the referees should have stayed with their original decision and recognized the goal.
It was played in the last second of overtime and Filip Forman was able to score. The game should end like this and the Vary Bohemians team would score an extra point for the win in overtime. The referees recognized the goal at first, but based on the video review, they changed their conclusion and in subsequent raids, Tatran won an extra point.
According to the KRD’s opinion, the referees did not make a mistake in the basic procedure: first they recognized the goal on the pitch (i.e. made a decision), which they then checked with the help of video, which is also correct, because it is possible to investigate whether the goal was scored in playing time.
Ondřej Zamazal already talked about the logic of counting floorball time in the broadcast of Czech Television, KRD’s opinion in this direction is only a clarification. “Instructions for the use of the video system allow in these cases to verify whether the ball crossed the goal line before the end of the playing time. However, in order to assess such a situation, it is necessary to have a recording with a live view of the official indoor timer and the goal in which the goal fell,” explains KRD.
However, it is the absence of an official indoor timer that will prove to be key. “It is very important to emphasize that the time that viewers see in the video broadcast is not the official match time. The time displayed in the video broadcast graphics is usually controlled by the broadcast production staff and runs independently of the official hall timekeeper. This time is intended as a guide for viewers watching the broadcast, but it is not the official game time. This time cannot be taken as official even if the production is connected to the official hall timekeeper, due to the delay that occurs during the broadcast of data on the route between the timer and overhead.
Thus, when reviewing the video, the referees cannot judge whether the goal was scored on time, based on the time shown in the video transmission. For the conclusion of the video, only the time from the official timer in the hall, visible directly on the shot, is valid.
There was no footage available in the match that showed the goal in which the goal was scored and the official timekeeper in the hall at the same time. Thus, in this situation, there was no footage available to show that the referees made a clear error by awarding a field goal. The correct procedure should have been to uphold the decision from the field, i.e. the recognition of the goal, because the review of the video footage was inconclusive,” explains KRD.
According to the final opinion, the repeated challenge of Varů Bohemians coach Michal Jedlička was not permissible. “The commission notes that the referees correctly decided to award the goal directly on the field and requested a review of the situation on the video recording. Since there was no conclusive footage with the official timer and the goal in which the goal fell, there was no reason to change the decision made on the field and the award of the goal should have remained valid. A repeated review based on the coach’s call in the same stoppage should not have been allowed according to the valid instructions and the whole the situation should have ended after the first review of the video footage,” reads the conclusion of the Commission of Referees and Delegates.
Author: Michal Dannhofer
