In dialogue with the Sports Blog program of the Blu Radio station, the director and member of the AFA Arbitration Commission, Miguel Scime, gave his point of view on the arbitration controversies in South America after what was seen in the Conmebol qualifying rounds towards the Qatar 2022 World Cup.
Miguel Scime, also an instructor and advisor in Fifa, was emphatic in evaluating the work of the Colombian judge Wílmar Roldán, specifically in a play that was seen in the match between Brazil and Peru in which the soccer player was involved. Neymar Jr. by a free kick included in the face to Alexander Callens who was sanctioned with a yellow card.
Although in Uruguay’s match with Ecuador there was also controversy over the arbitration decisions in two kicks that the Ecuadorians claimed as relevant for a red card, Scime focused on the action of the game that the Antioquia referee whistled. About him said that he can be wrong despite being listed as one of the best referees in the South American soccer confederation:
Undoubtedly, I believe that at the moment Wílmar Roldán is one of the best referees at Conmebol, ergo that does not mean that he is wrong or not wrong. For that we have the system and the technology was sought, of which I am an orthodox of the same weight
He examined Neymar’s play in the elbow against Callens and was emphatic that since there was a fault, the criterion of the sanction should have been assisted with the VAR:
There were two specific plays that, apart from the VAR protocol, the VAR could have assisted the referee at least to make an OFR (on field review), rather make an APP of when the play ends in a goal and then make an OFR to that he goes to see the play if there was or was not a lack of Neymar when he disputed the ball, yes, he should have done it.
Scime clarified that the regulation is tacit, alluding that “Any blow to the face of an opponent must be severely punished, especially since it is a part of which the opponent’s physique is in serious danger”.
Given that, he pointed out two specific errors. The possibility of not having assisted Wílmar Roldán in the play calling him to go and review the action and the other than Roldán due to his characteristics is a referee not dependent on the VAR, but that sometimes those who are in the video arbitration seem not to dare to call him despite the fact that the VAR judge was the Uruguayan Esteban Ostojich, with all the authority of the case to ask him to review the play on video.
In the September 10 broadcast of Blog Deportivo, Miguel Scime said that the decisions made in Conmebol regarding arbitration are concerned they pass a question of nationality in relation to suitability:
I was at Conmebol for five years so I know how the arbitration commission is handled. People who have more experience and are more knowledgeable on the continent always explained to me that it is never convenient for the president of the Arbitration Commission to be an Argentine or a Brazilian
He referred to the departures of the Colombian judge Óscar Julián Ruiz and the Uruguayan Jorge Larrionda from the arbitration commission by a Brazilian referee who wanted to give him exposure to new talents:
This is totally dominated by a man (Wilson Seneme) who makes use and right according to his condition and his knowledge. I don’t know if it does it in good or bad faith, but if after all these years of operation there is always nonconformity or malpractice dichotomy, something is not working well
KEEP READING: