15 ROUCOL Lim
Romania defeated Colombia by a solitary goal in an exciting game in Lyon. Less spectacular goals than their 1994 meeting, but no less excitement, and ultimately Romania probably deserved to run out winners in the final analysis.
The referee in charge of their meeting in the United States was long gone on a World Cup level, but it was a fellow 1994-attendee who got this important Group G game, Lim Kee Chong from Mauritius. Rejected after Brazil - Russia stateside, he faced the same fate here after a performance which FIFA predictably assessed as too lenient here.
Big Decisions
Mauritian might have issued a red card in the first ninety seconds, for a potential SFP-from-behind by Freddy Rincón. I don't agree with Lim that the tackle was not worth a yellow card - it clearly did - but this was not worthy of a straight red in my eyes.
The contact was not dangerous (on the foot) and his opponent deliberately put his leg across - reckless. The same could be said of Dan Petrescu's caution at 78', from behind and in 1998 probably right on the borderline, but the lack of force makes it a simple reckless standing leg tackle in my eyes.
Iulian Filipescu was more fortunate however - surely most referees would have shown him a yellow card (for the second time) for his holding foul on Carlos Valderrama, 67'.
There are some arguments against SPA, running wide(?), however I would assess this as a 70-30 (S)YC. The Mauritian referee let him off though, which was probably consistent with his approach to this match.
Fortunate too, was Ever Palacios - his clear impeding foul at 48' was really a case of DOGSO, but referees scarcely ever punish such fouls in those positions, and Lim gave us the go-on in this scene.
Managing the Game
Lim Kee Chong's performance had little relevance to the Laws of the Game when it came to disciplinary sanctions, putting forward without doubt the most lenient way of refereeing we have seen so far at World Cup 1998.
There were numerous incidents where a yellow card was basically mandatory according to the LotG, and referee Lim saw clearly, but took no action against the offender (2', 28', 43', 51', 67', 89').
However, his use of cards as a tool was both smart and consistent - with perhaps one exception. Lim was consistent in two comparable scenes, the latter the SYC one (43' - 67'), but he have a caution at 47' for a holding foul. Though given it kind of added a tackle from behind (clearly careless), I suppose it was coherent with all the other calls.
I was a bit disappointed by the Mauritian official's mimics and gestures - he presented a diligent enough impression, but he really lacked body tension in his signals; this performance would have been better if Lim presented himself as more visibly sure of himself and his approach (eg. warning at 43').
However, his use of cards as a tool was both smart and consistent - with perhaps one exception. Lim was consistent in two comparable scenes, the latter the SYC one (43' - 67'), but he have a caution at 47' for a holding foul. Though given it kind of added a tackle from behind (clearly careless), I suppose it was coherent with all the other calls.
I was a bit disappointed by the Mauritian official's mimics and gestures - he presented a diligent enough impression, but he really lacked body tension in his signals; this performance would have been better if Lim presented himself as more visibly sure of himself and his approach (eg. warning at 43').
It is this point, more than the missed cards, that I find irksome in this match. I guess he was focused on keeping the bigger picture view, and didn't want to shoot any ammunition without absolutely needing to. However, he didn't stand up enough for fair play enough, there was no effort made to try and positively mould the players behaviour on the pitch.
To boot, there were slightly too many perception mistakes in this showing (29', 31', +47', 69', 70') - to be fair, my impression was that Lim probably saw most of these right, but didn't want to take a risk by playing on.
To boot, there were slightly too many perception mistakes in this showing (29', 31', +47', 69', 70') - to be fair, my impression was that Lim probably saw most of these right, but didn't want to take a risk by playing on.
Assistant Referees
Mostly correct calls by Mohamed Al-Musawi and Halim Abdul Hamid on this afternoon. While the Omani played a good crossover onside at 4', Malaysian Hamid flagged at 50' when he shouldn't have (minus 0,1 in UEFA).
Balance
I have mixed feelings about this performance - on the one hand, I thought Lim Kee Chong did pretty well with a classic really lenient approach, and was consistent in his calls. However, seeing a number of clearly reckless and tactical fouls go unpunished was not ideal, and there were some other things counting against this performance too.
In conclusion, I guess I found Lim's performance a bit cheap, his style worked, but he took the easier way out - I was most disappointed by his presence, he didn't take the initiative as a leader at all. To be fair to FIFA, in 1998 they didn't really have much choice even if there was quite a lot going for the Mauritian by the same token.
In conclusion, I guess I found Lim's performance a bit cheap, his style worked, but he took the easier way out - I was most disappointed by his presence, he didn't take the initiative as a leader at all. To be fair to FIFA, in 1998 they didn't really have much choice even if there was quite a lot going for the Mauritian by the same token.
Lim Kee Chong's performance in this game was rejected by FIFA.
What did you mean by "rejected by FIFA"?
ReplyDeleteFIFA Referee Assessor recommends that the performance dictates no further matches for the official in question.
Delete