Speaking to Radio Manà Manà Sport, journalist Riccardo Trevisani commented on Inter‘s performance in the match against Venezia, focusing both on the flow of the match and on the refereeing incidents.
According to Trevisani, the Nerazzurri team showed clear signs of fatigue: “Inter played a match that wasn’t beautiful, but they had the strength, the ability to suffer, the champions, all things that great teams have, including luck, and they brought it home.” The journalist placed this drop in a broader context, comparing it to what was seen with Roma and Milan, citing the six matches played out of nine in 29 days as a decisive factor.
On the refereeing front, Trevisani identified at least two questionable incidents. The foul by Bisseck on the opponent — with repeated contact on the calves and ankle — should have resulted in a penalty, just as the touch by Carlos Augusto in the action that led to the 1-0 goal was, in his opinion, irregular. He also mentioned the possible penalty on Sucic, but judged it less clear-cut than the Bisseck incident.
The journalist then broadened the reflection to the overall quality of Italian referees, arguing that certain technical limitations do not depend on the referee selector: “You could even put Guardiola in charge of the referees, but those who have the technical characteristics to be Sozza, Colombo, Doveri, will never have them with any selector.” It’s always the same names — Pairetto, Fabbri, Di Bello — that come up in controversial cases, he pointed out.
However, Trevisani was keen to clarify that Sunday’s mistakes do not change the judgment on Inter: “It’s not like Inter is coming from a season of favorable refereeing decisions.” He recalled unfavorable incidents for the Nerazzurri in previous matches, such as the missed penalty on Thuram against Fiorentina and against Bologna, and a possible handball by Lobotka in Inter–Napoli. The conclusion is clear: Inter remains a team of a higher level regardless of any refereeing incident, whether favorable or not.
CONTINUE READING