"The picture was used for clarity": how the RFU explained the strange editing of the episode with the removal of Moses

"Has a higher resolution relative to the video broadcast camera"

The Russian Football Union (RFU) may dismiss the editor who prepared a video about an episode of the 1/8 finals of the Russian Cup between Dynamo and Spartak, in which a controversial penalty was awarded to the red-and-white goal for playing with Viktor Moses.

This information appeared in the media after Spartak fans on social networks began to accuse the RFU of deliberately incorrect editing of this moment.

The video was published on the Youtube channel of the Russian Football Union on February 28, but the scandal broke out only on Tuesday.

Kirill Gavrilov, an employee of Sport-Express, drew attention to the oddities of the video.

He noted on social networks that Moses in the freeze frame with violation of the rules significantly differs from the players around him and is portrayed more clearly.

His suspicions were caused by the "obviously photoshopped ball" and "the rest of the ball in its original position."

Such moments aroused fears among Spartak fans that the RFU had specially improperly edited the controversial episode and showed it in this form to the members of the Expert Judicial Commission, who recognized Kirill Levnikov's decision on the appointment of a penalty kick to be correct.

The union, in response, confirmed that the installation did take place, but only for a clear demonstration of the moment of violation.

They explained that a communications officer had superimposed a photograph of a Sport-Express photographer on the video.  

“Because of the dynamics of the moment in the freeze frame, the footballer and the ball are out of focus, in contrast to the photograph.

In addition, it has a higher resolution relative to the live video camera.

The picture was used for clarity of the ball hitting the hand, as it clearly shows the black line on the football player's uniform, with which the ball is in contact, "- the RFU" Championship "responds.

The organization emphasized that to make the final decision, the members of the expert-judicial commission did not use this video, but studied the source files: broadcast recordings, VAR recordings with negotiations, photographs.

One way or another, later it became known about the beginning of an internal audit, as a result of which "appropriate decisions must be made."

The unwitting culprit of the outbreak of the scandal - the same editor - did not become silent either.

He refused to speak to journalists on record, but explained his vision of the situation in a comment to Eurosport.

According to the RFU officer, he really inserted a brighter photo into the video, but he did not cut out a ball from it, but "half of Moses' body."

He also stressed that the members of the ESC did not watch this video and could not even see it, since it was made after the meeting.

At the same time, according to Eurosport, there is still no exact information on the alleged dismissal of an employee.

In addition, the publication claims that the editor contacted Kirill Gavrilov, but he refused to accept his arguments.

The sensational video caused an ambiguous reaction in the world of Russian football, but few believed that the RFU could deliberately distort the controversial episode for the members of the expert-referee commission.

“There are several foreigners sitting in this ESC!

Some!

How do you even imagine this?

Take photoshopping in front of foreigners ?!

Are they all morons, in your opinion?

The team has no coach for which season, this is the problem, not the conspiracy and photoshop, ”wrote the famous commentator Georgy Cherdantsev on his Twitter.

His colleague Dmitry Shnyakin, in turn, called the video editing a shame, although Levnikov's decision was generally considered fair.

He was supported by the former captain of the Russian national team Roman Shirokov.

“I don’t even know how to evaluate it.

Firstly, there was no mistake there, the penalty was assigned correctly.

And, secondly, the use of a different image lies on the conscience of the RFU.

Most likely, they didn't do it on purpose, I don't even know what they wanted to achieve.

I'm not a fake news expert.

There was a hand, there was a penalty.

What they posted there is their problem.

Let the RFU now deal with this, "- quotes the words of Shirokov" Sport-Express ".

"The final decision of the arbitrator is unanimously supported"

The controversial episode involving Moses took place in the 12th minute of the match between Dynamo and Spartak.

The Nigerian after a corner kick at his own goal, trying to interrupt the opponent's discount, played the ball with his shoulder.

Referee Levnikov initially continued the game, but after a tip from his colleague on VAR Pavel Kukuyan, he went to watch the replay and eventually awarded a penalty.

The penalty spot was scored by Daniil Fomin.

In the 70th minute, Konstantin Tyukavin doubled the advantage of the blue and white.

As a result, they won and reached the quarterfinals of the Russian Cup.

Spartak players were extremely dissatisfied with the appointment of a penalty kick.

In particular, Moses assured that the ball hit him in the shoulder.

“The judge considered that if I made a movement with my hand, then I broke the rules.

He also gave a yellow card.

I didn't understand this solution.

Whether I raised my hand or not - what's the difference?

The ball hits the shoulder!

And the referee didn't stop the game initially.

Only then VAR intervened in the matter, ”the press service of“ Spartak ”quotes Moses as saying.

However, on February 27, the commission of the ESC RFU recognized Levnikov's verdict to appoint a penalty spot absolutely correct.

“The final decision of the arbitrator was unanimously supported.

Plus, we received a detailed conclusion by David Ellerey, Advisor to the RFU Secretary General, explaining the correctness of the VAR in this episode, "Sport-Express, the head of the referee committee, Ashot Khachaturyants, quotes.

Later on the official website of the RFU posted a detailed analysis of the controversial episode.

It says that Moses "deliberately put his hand in the direction of the flight path of the ball."

In this case, the projectile touched the upper part of his arm, below the armpit line, which is a violation.