I know that “sofa refereeing,” from the comfort of our living rooms or studios, is different from the “game played” on the field, without slow or fast cameras, amid heat, sweat, and emotion. Therefore, we must understand some controversial situations and decisions by the refereeing (often different from what appears correct to those watching) in Corinthians 1×0 Palmeiras.

Before discussing the plays, we questioned “which Wilton Pereira Sampaio” would be on the field: the one from the Club World Cup or the one from the Brasileirão? See here: https://wp.me/p4RTuC-1931. And neither the Club World Cup referee nor players with Club World Cup behavior were present… (to the sadness of football). It seems the atmosphere influences things too much; a button is pressed and everyone wants to complain, stop the game, and “to hell” with playing time (and no “Léo Jardim” is needed to cool down the match – we also talked about him here: https://wp.me/p4RTuC-18ZO).

Let’s look at the 5 moments to debate:

1. Gustavo Gómez’s (SEP) penalty on Memphis Depay (SCCP): I would have called it, without a card (I understood that he hit both the ball and the opponent with a raised sole, which is prohibited by the Rule), but I respect those who would let the play continue. Let me explain: the defender goes with a high foot to challenge the attacker and risks hitting him.
   • a) If he goes lower, nothing to call.
   • b) If he only hits the ball, the referee could call an indirect free-kick (because it’s a raised sole, the popular “dangerous play,” a two-touch foul situation inside the area).
   • c) If he hits the ball and then the player, a direct free-kick for imprudent use of the sole, without a card (and inside the area, it’s a penalty).
   • d) If he only hits the opponent, a penalty for reckless action and a yellow card.

     Many such plays are not called because they are fast and interpretive. What’s not valid is: stating it was a serious foul because it tore the sock, as this is a consequence of a game with physical contact and is not necessarily an indicator of a foul. Thus, don’t crucify the referee for the decision (apparently, he saw it as a legal play and VAR prompted him to understand situation “c”).

2. At 49 minutes of the first half, Rodrigo Garro (SCCP) breaks into attack, and Facundo Torres (SEP) tries to stop him and manages to grab his opponent, running alongside him without preventing him from advancing. Since 2020, this is no longer a foul, and it should only be called if the grab unbalances the opponent or has a real impact on the play. Abroad, such plays are uncommon and don’t cause repercussions, but here in Brazil, grabs and pulls are frequent and discussed. The truth is: as was often done in the old days, Garro felt the physical contact and gave up on playing, asking for a foul and a card. He needs to know the Rule… That’s why I advocate for referee instructors in clubs, because if the Corinthians player knew the Rule, he would advance further in the play and perhaps the opponent would commit the foul closer to the penalty area. Or, who knows, he might release him himself for fear of a card. The referee made the right call.

   For these plays, I invite you to watch videos of Lionel Messi at Barcelona, who, when grabbed or knocked down, persists in the play, getting up and insisting on the sequence (and it usually yielded good results for him).

   By the way: the Argentine received a Yellow Card for complaining about this situation.

3. At 19 minutes of the second half, a referee error: Vitor Roque (SEP) makes a beautiful play, and upon feeling Raniele’s approach, he extends his arm which hits his opponent who remains standing in the challenge. Immediately, the Corinthians player also opens his arm and hits the Palmeiras player. However, the attacker falls, simulating being assaulted and on the ground, rolls, asks for medical attention, screams, and gestures. A total unfair-play… Raniele, indignant with the foul call, also received a Yellow Card.

   Remember: the VAR does not review yellow cards and/or infractions of this nature outside the area, there’s nothing to be done. It is solely the referee who decides.

   By the way: Vitor Roque, unfortunately, is becoming known for attempts at drawing fouls, non-existent penalties, and simulations of assault. It’s like the children’s story “The Boy Who Cried Wolf.” When it’s real, a sturdy referee might not call it.

   (While all this was happening on the field, caught by TV Globo cameras, Palmeiras coach Abel Ferreira was asking for a Corinthians red card, imprisonment, and excommunication for the player, yelling his disagreement about the Yellow to the fourth official – and note that the coach had already received his Yellow Card 3 minutes before this moment).

4. Maurício’s (SEP) disallowed goal, for Gustavo Gómez’s offside: Here, many important things to consider. The first and obvious one is that our VAR seems analog, with lines drawn in questionable pixels. We need FIFA’s VAR, promised by the CBF, but which I doubt will be implemented soon (here are the reasons: https://wp.me/p4RTuC-191E). In addition, there are always the entity’s off-field problems, like yesterday’s (we talked about them here: https://wp.me/p4RTuC-193C).

   There is no “half-offside” in active offside plays, just as there is no “half-pregnant woman.” Either you are or you are not. Even millimetrically, he was offside, and the referee was correct. With the semi-automatic offside from the World Cup, it would have been decided and the game would continue normally, with no complaints in the locker room. However, as the Brazilian VAR frequently draws lines with difficulty, controversy arises. But using the artifice that “a little bit offside should be allowed” will make football even more controversial and lead to discussions about: what is the limit of “a little bit”? So, change the Rule to full-body offside, as is the proposal still debated and unresolved between IFAB and FIFA.

   Oops: notice the offside line in the image below, it is drawn not from Gustavo Gómez’s shoulder, as many have said, but from his head compared to the opponent’s shoulder, as these are the last “playable” parts, since the arm doesn’t count (the image is perpendicular, there’s parallax effect, etc.).

5. And goalkeeper Hugo telling the opposing players to “go away” (according to lip reading), during the celebration of the goal that was later disallowed?

   Huh, go away, where? It’s a game with a single fan base, “over there, over here, over everywhere…” even if he went to the substitutes’ bench, he would be surrounded by home fans.

   It seems the goalkeeper wanted to “play to the crowd” and score points. It’s like that athlete who sees the ball going out of bounds, knows it’s impossible to reach it, and slides to get his uniform dirty and expect applause from the fans. In Hugo’s case, this only creates chaos and inflames tempers.

No one helps each other in football, regrettably. Matches are overly complained about, with time-wasting, arguments, and little actual playing time. And I’ve already bet: the CBF will assign Ramon Abatti Abel to the return leg, justifying that in both Derbies they placed the two referees who were at the Club World Cup (even with a contested performance in Flamengo 1×0 Atlético, here: https://wp.me/p4RTuC-18YD).