Two wrong calls in one game! Ai Kun wrongly disallowed Hu Hetao's goal and Achim Peng's handball
6686 Sports News on November 5 The Chinese Football Association announced the results of the latest referee review. In the 29th round of the Chinese Super League, Chengdu Chengdu 1-2 Henan team, there were two wrong calls: Hu Hetao's goal was called a misjudgement because the opponent player had a handball first; Achim Peng's handball was not called and it was a missed call. The referee of this match is Ai Kun.
Hu Tao's goal was called a misjudgment due to a handball by the opponent's player
After Hu Hetao scored in the 15th minute of the game, the referee whistled that the Henan team's first goal was invalid for handball. The review team stated that the referee should grasp the favorable terms to continue the game and should not rule a handball violation.
Afterwards, Yan Dinghao used the free kick obtained by this ruling to score directly.
Case 1: The 29th round of the Chinese Super League, Chengdu Chengdu VS Henan Club. In the 15th minute of the game, after the players from both sides competed to top the ball near the penalty area of the Henan team, the referee ruled that the Henan team player violated the handball rule, and then Chengdu Chengdu scored. The referee ruled that the goal was invalid, and Chengdu Rongcheng took a direct free kick to resume the game. The video referee did not intervene.
Chengdu Rongcheng Club’s appeal opinion is that the referee’s whistle blowing time is later than the time of the team’s goal, and the goal should be ruled valid.
Regarding this case, the review team unanimously believed that when players from both sides competed to top the ball, the Chengdu Chengdu team member took off first and competed to top the ball, and the contact between his arm and the opponent's player did not constitute a violation. Afterwards, the ball came into contact with the open arm of the Henan Club player and was above the shoulder, which should be regarded as a handball violation. However, Chengdu Chengdu Team got a good chance to score at this time. In this case, the referee had blown the whistle to stop the game before the goal was scored and could no longer rule the goal as valid. Therefore, the decision was made to resume the game with a free kick from Chengdu Chengdu. In addition, this situation does not comply with the intervention principle stipulated in the rules, so the video referee cannot intervene. The review team determined that this was an error in the referee's decision, and the video referee did not intervene. (End)
Achim Peng's handball was not judged as a missed call
In the 48th minute of the game, Henan foreign aid Achim Peng was suspected of handballing in the three-second zone, and the referee ruled Ai Kun to make a ruling. In this regard, the review team believed that the ball should be regarded as a handball violation and ruled 12 yards. The referee made an error and missed the handball violation and 12 yards penalty.
Case 2: The 29th round of the Chinese Super League, Chengdu Chengdu VS Henan Club. In the 48th minute of the game, the Chengdu Chengdu team passed the ball into the penalty area and the ball was suspected of contacting the arm of Henan Club player No. 11 (Achim Peng). The referee did not rule a handball violation and the video referee did not intervene.
Chengdu Chengdu Club’s appeal opinion is that the opponent’s No. 11 violated the handball rule.
Regarding this case, most members of the review team believe that when the Chengdu Chengdu team passed the penalty area, Henan Club’s No. 11 arm dribbled the ball from behind the body and moved to an unnatural position in the direction of the ball. Judging from the existing video footage, the ball contacted Henan Club’s No. 11 arm. Therefore, it should be regarded as a handball violation and the ball was ruled twelve yards. The video referee should intervene. The referee made a mistake and missed a handball violation and a 12-yard penalty. The video referee did not intervene in the error. (End)
