Fahad Al-Mirdasi says Al-Hazem should have been awarded a penalty during their match against Al-Ittihad after identifying what he described as a clear foul inside the area.
The former referee and current refereeing analyst said the incident occurred in the 32nd minute and that the decision not to award a spot-kick was incorrect. His assessment adds to the continuing debate over controversial officiating decisions in the Roshn Saudi League, particularly those involving incidents inside the penalty area.
Speaking on the television programme Nadina, Al-Mirdasi said the challenge met the requirements for a penalty and that the on-field referee had made a significant error by allowing play to continue.
He explained that Al-Ittihad player Stefan Keller had committed a clear foul on Al-Hazem’s Bololo. In Al-Mirdasi’s view, the contact was sufficient for the referee to point to the spot and award Al-Hazem a potentially important opportunity.
The refereeing expert also criticised the role of the video assistant referee in the incident. He said the error was not limited to the original decision on the field, because VAR should have intervened and asked the referee to review the footage.
“the VAR referee should have called the match referee to review the incident again,” Al-Mirdasi said.
His comments focus on the process as well as the outcome. While the on-field official did not award a penalty, Al-Mirdasi believes the VAR team had a further chance to correct that decision by recommending an on-field review. In his assessment, that intervention should have taken place.
The incident has renewed scrutiny of refereeing standards in matches in the Roshn Saudi League. Penalty-area challenges are often among the most closely examined moments in a game, particularly when video technology is available to review whether a foul has occurred.
Al-Mirdasi’s conclusion is that Al-Hazem were denied the chance to take a penalty during the contest with Al-Ittihad because neither the referee nor the VAR official acted on the incident. His comments therefore place responsibility on both levels of the officiating team rather than attributing the controversy solely to the match referee.
The assessment was made during his appearance on Nadina, where he discussed the disputed moment and explained why he believed the correct decision should have been a penalty for Al-Hazem.
