former times
On June 28, 2024, the CFA issued a trial version of the 2024 Professional League Referee Elevation Rules. I had thought that with this "curse", the number of controversial penalties might decrease sharply and the referees would be more restrained. However, the second day of the 17th round of the Chinese Super League match between Port and Zhejiang was once again disappointing.
In the 57th minute, Zhejiang launched a counterattack from the right, Owusu tried to break through to the ground inside the penalty area under Fu Huan's tight pressure. The referee immediately awarded a penalty kick, but after VAR intervened, the referee changed his decision and canceled the penalty kick.
The controversy over this goal centered on two points:
Controversy 1: Whether it is reasonable to cancel the penalty kick. The slow-motion camera showed that Fu Huan chased the ball with both hands, both pulling and pushing, which was a clear foul in the penalty area. If the penalty was awarded, Zhejiang could have scored, making the score 2-1 in their favor. More importantly, if the penalty had been awarded, Wu Lei might not have scored a second goal 10 minutes later, and the 2-1 lead in the harbor might not have happened. Even the final result of a 3-1 victory could have been different.
In other words, this controversial call will most likely completely rewrite the final outcome of the game.
Controversy 2: Same ball, different penalties. In the 22nd round of last season, the same Port played against Zhejiang at home. In the 45th minute of the game, Port seized the opportunity of the fast development of the edge ball, Wu Lei entered the penalty area. Liu Haofan, who was chasing the defense, had a pushing action and pushed Wu Lei down. The referee immediately awarded a penalty kick and communicated with the video referee to uphold the decision. Oscar hit the penalty to make the score 2-1 in favor of Port (note that the final score was 3-4 in favor of Port).
History is always strikingly similar. Two seasons, the same two teams facing each other, the same offense and defense, the same controversial calls in the penalty box, the same score after a penalty kick goal.
If we want to find a difference, Fu Huan's push on Owusu was slightly smaller than Liu Haofan's push on Wu Lei. However, the slow-motion clearly shows Fu Huan pulling his left chest shirt and left shoulder with his hand as Owusu entered the penalty area. When Owusu changed direction to cross, Fu Huan pushed him with his right hand, causing him to fall to the ground.
The same action, if the defender is Zhejiang, will be awarded as a penalty kick for Port; on the contrary, if the defender is Port, Zhejiang will not be awarded a penalty kick. In short, the final decision is always in favor of Port, and Zhejiang can only suffer in silence.
The term "port benefit" originated in the era of Chen Xuyuan and was often mentioned by fans or part of the media. Unexpectedly, after Chen Xuyuan was sentenced to life imprisonment, the CFA in the promotion and relegation system introduced the first day, this scene again in front of thousands of fans.
In fact, on June 28, the very day the lift system was released, there were unusually heated discussions in the market. Some people think that the system itself is good and the key lies in the implementation. Some fans also cited a famous international referee as an example, saying that his ability is beyond doubt, but he has been the focus of the league on many occasions, making wrong judgments and misjudgments. How can they just blame the fans for blasting them? It's all a matter of "invisibility" (note that this refers to the match between Dalian Yingbo and Yunnan Yukun in the 14th round of the China First Division League. The former's 49th-minute goal was disallowed, and the post-game comments of the referee committee reported that it was a "very difficult" call because of "invisibility")?
Very often, the policy itself is good, but the fear is of poor implementation.
Countless facts have shown that this situation is no exception in Chinese soccer. This includes the previous referee review system, which is a very good management measure and method. However, it is obvious that it was a wrong judgment and a wrong judgment, but the judges and experts just found excuses for the lack of goal line technology and VAR, as well as "it is almost impossible to arrive in time to accurately judge whether the ball has crossed the goal line" and other reasons.
Even with the introduction of the extremely stringent elevation system, some referees still took the risk of being deducted points for assessment and made a "gourd case", which is really mind-boggling. Or were some referees crazy before the system was implemented?
Still, without strict enforcement, even the best system is just a castle in the air.
