The RFU agreed with the decision of the arbitrator not to put a penalty in the gate of “Rostov”

The RFU called the right decision of Lyubimov not to put a penalty on the Rostov goal

MOSCOW, 19 Nov – The Expert Referee Commission of the Russian Football Union (ESK RFU) considered the decision of the arbitrator Artem Lyubimov not to appoint a penalty kick against Rostov in the match of the 17th round of the Russian Premier League (RPL) with the Wings of the Soviets to be correct.
“Rostov” on November 12 beat “Wings of the Soviets” in Samara with a score of 3:1. Lyubimov decided not to put a penalty at the gates of the guests for a possible foul of the defender Kirill Shchetinin on the midfielder of the “Wings of the Soviets” Sergey Pinyaev in the end of the first half. The Samara club addressed a question about this moment to the RFU ESC.
Also, the RFU ESC came to the conclusion that Lyubimov mistakenly did not record a violation of the rules against the Rostov player Viktor Melekhin by the Wings of the Soviets football player Roman Yezhov. The referee was supposed to appoint a free kick towards the gates of “Rostov”.
In addition, following the results of the 17th round of the RPL, the ESC of the RFU recognized the decisions of the chief arbiter of the match “Orenburg” – “Krasnodar” (5: 1) Kirill Levnikov not to fix the offside position in the attacking phase of “Orenburg” in the 22nd minute of the meeting, and also not to assign a penalty to the gates of “Orenburg” in the 25th minute.
“The referee did not correctly assign a 11-meter kick to the goal of the Orenburg team at the 25th minute of the match. The decision of the ESC was motivated by the fact that the contact of the foot of the attacking player of the Krasnodar team Nikita Krivtsov with the foot of the player of the defending team Orenburg Ezequiel Mansilla after the shot on goal , according to the majority of the panel members, was not punishable. It happened due to inertia. The defender did not act recklessly, directing his leg to the side while trying to block the kick, turning his ankle without using open spikes towards the opponent. For these reasons, the panel supports the decision of the referee continue the game in this game episode,” the message says.

.

Leave a Reply