FA’s Latest Referee Review: Beijing Institute of Technology Loses to Ganzhou Ruishi, Two Penalty Kicks Missed by Beijing Institute of Technology

On the evening of September 19, the official website of the Chinese Football Association (CFA) published an article stating that the CFA Referee Committee Evaluation Group conducted the twenty-second referee evaluation of this season.

Notably, this round evaluated four cases. Among them, in the 23rd round of the China League Two, Beijing Institute of Technology lost 0-1 to Ganzhou Ruishi. The evaluation group confirmed that Beijing Institute of Technology had two missed penalty kick opportunities.

Case One: In the 23rd round of the China League One, Guangzhou Club vs Suzhou Dongwu, at the 72nd minute, player No. 18 of Guangzhou Club fell down when competing for the ball with opponent No. 35 of Suzhou Dongwu in the penalty area. The referee judged that No. 35 of Suzhou Dongwu fouled and awarded a penalty kick.

Error occured while playing， Please close or refresh

code：4400

vid:

uuid:38B1F33B-0BF5-484C-968D-FEE478B04E94

requestId:7B1FA05C-CC31-40D5-84AF-A8ECB4B7F75A

Time：2024-10-08 23:24:40

Message

For this case, the evaluation group unanimously agreed that No. 35 of Suzhou Dongwu pulled on the opponent, affecting their ability to compete for the ball, which should be considered a defensive foul. The referee’s decision to award a penalty kick was correct.

Case Two: In the 23rd round of the China League One, Nanjing City vs Wuxi Wugou, at the 49th minute, player No. 11 of Nanjing City scored a goal, seemingly with a handball beforehand, but the referee ruled the goal valid.

Error occured while playing， Please close or refresh

code：4400

vid:

uuid:38B1F33B-0BF5-484C-968D-FEE478B04E94

requestId:850F6947-3ADB-4CB7-8987-0E5CDCB17CD3

Time：2024-10-08 23:24:40

Message

For this case, most members of the evaluation group believed that when player No. 11 of Nanjing City competed for the high ball, his arm touched the ball. His arm was in a normal and reasonable position for the action, and he could not predict the direction of the ball when competing with the opposing goalkeeper. The contact between the arm and the ball was accidental and should not be penalized as a handball. Subsequently, the goalkeeper of the defending team Wuxi Wugou kicked the ball into their own net, so the goal should be valid. The referee’s decision was correct.

Case Three: In the 23rd round of the China League Two, Beijing Institute of Technology vs Ganzhou Ruishi, at the 62nd minute, a shot by Beijing Institute of Technology, with a suspected handball by a Ganzhou Ruishi player in their own penalty area, did not result in a handball penalty.

Error occured while playing， Please close or refresh

code：4400

vid:

uuid:38B1F33B-0BF5-484C-968D-FEE478B04E94

requestId:7B33AE31-37EA-4B4F-B1BC-5D62FBD016B5

Time：2024-10-08 23:24:40

Message

For this case, most members of the evaluation group believed that from the available video evidence, there was contact between the ball and the arm of the Ganzhou Ruishi player. The player’s arm moved towards the ball’s trajectory and enlarged unnaturally, which should have been penalized as a handball and awarded a penalty kick. The referee’s decision was incorrect, missing the penalty kick.

Case Four: In the 23rd round of the China League Two, Beijing Institute of Technology vs Ganzhou Ruishi, at the 85th minute, players from both teams competed for the ball and fell down in the Ganzhou Ruishi penalty area. The referee ruled that the attacking player from Beijing Institute of Technology fouled and showed a yellow card to warn the attacking player.

Error occured while playing， Please close or refresh

code：4400

vid:

uuid:38B1F33B-0BF5-484C-968D-FEE478B04E94

requestId:2168697D-5747-45CC-82D8-733E0F264C55

Time：2024-10-08 23:24:40

Message

For this case, most members of the evaluation group believed that during the two consecutive contacts within the Ganzhou Ruishi penalty area, the first contact involved no fouls from either side, while the second contact saw the attacking player from Beijing Institute of Technology touch the ball first, with the defending player from Ganzhou Ruishi kicking the opposing player due to a late action, which was deemed reckless and should have been penalized as a foul, awarding a penalty kick. The referee’s decision to penalize the attacking player from Beijing Institute of Technology was incorrect, missing the penalty kick and making a wrong call.

The Chinese Football Association will continue to adhere to the principles of fairness, justice, and transparency, actively accepting feedback and appeals from clubs, and conducting evaluations on key cases and typical cases with high social attention and beneficial to unifying refereeing standards, publicly announcing evaluation results, and imposing internal penalties on referees involved in wrong or missed calls.