Is there any precedent for changing referees in the middle of a football match in the world?

Source: Chengdu Daily, September 5, 2005:11:38.

FIFA's historic revision-the first time the result of the match was changed due to misjudgment

FIFA has decided that due to the serious technical error of Japanese referee Yoshida Shouguang, the result of Uzbekistan10 victory over Bahrain in the Asian World Cup qualifier is invalid, and the two teams will play a rematch in the original stadium. In the history of modern football, this is the first time that the result of the game has been changed because of the referee problem.

On September 3, Uzbekistan played Bahrain at home in Tashkent. In the 39th minute of the first half, Uzbekistan won the penalty, and Geparov hit the penalty, but the referee Yoshida Shouguang declared the goal invalid on the grounds that Uzbek players entered the penalty area in advance. Just when everyone thought that the penalty would be severely punished according to the rules, Yoshida Shouguang made an incredible judgment-he motioned Bahrain to punish an indirect free kick. After the game, the competition director said that Yoshida's judgment was executed according to the new rules of FIFA, and the Uzbekistan Football Association immediately filed a formal complaint with FIFA, demanding that the result of the game be changed and Uzbekistan win 3-0.

The third paragraph of chapter 14 of the new FIFA rules stipulates that when the team player of the penalty player enters the penalty area in advance or is less than 9. 15 meters away from the penalty point, if the ball enters the goal, it should be kicked again; If the ball doesn't enter the goal, the defender should kick an indirect free kick. Obviously, Yoshida Shouguang confused the rules and made a big joke. The referee once made a joke in the East Asian semi-finals, and now he has once again proved his poor level. FIFA finally ruled that the referee did make a serious technical mistake and the result of the match was invalid, so the two teams had to play another day. At the same time, the Ukrainian Football Association's request to change the judgment to 3: 0 was rejected. World football is not without precedent, but it is the first time to change the result of the game because of referee problems.

The rematch between the two teams will be held in Tashkent on June 8th, 10, while the second round match originally scheduled for this Wednesday in Manama, Bahrain, has been postponed to June 10+02. Our reporter Zhu Xiao.

Bilateral reaction

Ukrainian Football Association: The semi-final started in the 38th minute.

Uzbekistan Football Association is not satisfied with FIFA's decision. They think it's unfair. Uzbek Football Association spokesman Rizayev said: "For us, the result of FIFA's handling is very unfair. We have won the game with the result of 1:0, but we have to play again because of the technical problems of the referee. The fact is that the referee deprived us of a penalty. FIFA will hold a meeting in Morocco on 10, when we will continue to complain about the' penalty incident' and the unfair handling result of the replay. Even if they can't judge that we won 3-0, we also ask for a replay from the 38th minute and a penalty in the replay, which is fair to both sides. "

Bahrain Football Association: I don't mind playing again.

Regarding FIFA's rematch decision, the president of Bahrain Football Association said: "We don't mind rematch. This has a positive side for us-some of our injured players can return to the national team and the team can have more time to prepare. " For Bahrain, after the game date is postponed, national team striker Ala Hubail will return from injury. He missed the whole 1/4 final because of injury. Gregorian calendar

Expert review

Lu Jun: FIFA's ruling is just right.

Yesterday, Lu Jun, a member of the AFC Arbitration Commission, interpreted FIFA's ruling from a professional perspective in response to FIFA's decision to ask the two teams to have a rematch in Upa. He believes that according to the principle that "the referee has no right to announce the result of the game", this ruling is just right.

Lu Jun said: "The referee only records the time and events of the game. As for the result of the game, the referee has no right to say. " He also gave an example to illustrate, "For example, in a certain game, one team beat another team 8-0, but the referee has no right to announce the victory or defeat of the game. He just recorded the fact of the game 8-0. He reported this fact to FIFA or the organizer, who decided who would win or lose. As we all know, this 8: 0 ratio has no reason to be considered as 8 wins and 0 losses. So the referee has no right to announce the specific result of that game. "

Finally, Lu Jun explained the difference between the rules of the game and the rules of the game: "Rules are those clauses in the rules executed by the referee. The rules stipulate how to deal with special situations in the game, including some thorny issues. The final interpretation right lies with FIFA. " Gregorian calendar

Interpretation of revision of sentence

Reasons for the rematch and the maintenance of sacred justice

FIFA President Blatter has a famous saying: "Misjudgment is part of the football match." Under this principle, the biggest misjudgment is that the relevant referee is punished and the result of the game can never be changed, but this time the situation is different.

Accurately speaking, Yoshida Shouguang is not a misjudgment but a technical error. The difference between the two is that misjudgment is a wrong penalty caused by the referee's failure to accurately identify the situation. The most typical example is diego maradona's "hand of God"; A technical error is that the referee knows the situation but makes a completely irregular penalty, such as a foul in the middle circle. The referee's "technical mistakes" will cause confusion in the game and violate the principle of fair play. If it is not corrected, it will have a bad influence on future games. FIFA categorically ruled that the game was invalid, which was based on the spirit of safeguarding "sacred justice".

On the surface, the rematch is not good for Uzbekistan. After all, even the original 1: 0 victory was not saved. It seems that the Ukrainian team that took the initiative to appeal has not picked up watermelons and lost sesame seeds. But this is not the case. For Uzbekistan, the best result of the appeal is of course that they won 3-0, but the referee, not Bahrain, made a technical mistake, so this request is unreasonable.

It is more beneficial for Uzbekistan to change the sentence after the replay.

The rematch seems to be unfavorable to Uzbekistan, but it is actually much better than upholding the original judgment.

As the main venue is still in Uzbekistan, this means that Bahrain must travel long distances to Tashkent again. Uzbekistan's home court is notoriously difficult to play, and off-court factors and venue factors make it a hell for visiting teams. Judging from the situation of the first battle between the two teams, Uzbekistan has great hope of winning again, and at worst, it can keep the score of 1: 0. In addition, the rematch date is scheduled for June 8th 10, and the second round is on June 8th 10, 12. Not to mention whether Bahrain can adapt to the low temperature in Tashkent, it is obviously better for Uzbekistan to postpone going for a month. The home and away system in the play-offs determines that 1∶0 is not an insurance score, which is why Ukraine insisted on appealing after winning. Our reporter Zhu Xiao.