A victory secures the major league title amid local refereeing controversy.

Al-Nasr team returned to the top of the competition, winning the major league title after a long absence, in a season marked by fluctuations both on and off the field. The victory was not free from discussions, especially regarding the role of local refereeing and its impact on the course of the tournament, sparking a wide debate among followers.

Varied Results with Refereeing Teams

Despite its coronation, Al-Nasr suffered four significant losses against Al-Hilal, Al-Ahli, and Al-Qadsiah in home and away matches, with those games managed by foreign refereeing crews. In contrast, matches officiated by local referees often went in its favor with complete results. This disparity raised questions about the differences in refereeing decisions between local and foreign crews and the extent of their impact on the integrity of the competition.

Refereeing Errors and Their Distribution

Errors were not limited to a specific referee, but varied among different on-field referees and video technology rooms, although some are considered candidates for participation in global events. Several matches witnessed controversial decisions, such as an unpunished expulsion and penalty kicks not awarded, deepening the sense of inconsistency in the application of the rules.

The Last-Minute Penalty Incident Against Al-Fayha

Among the most notable controversial scenes was the confrontation with Al-Fayha, where a penalty kick was awarded in the final minutes in favor of Al-Nasr, despite multiple opinions considering the foul was in favor of the opponent. This incident sparked a wide debate not only because of the decision itself, but also due to the intervention of video technology and the referee’s call to review a scene that seemed to have been initially decided on the field.

Selection of Local Referees for Crucial Matches

The selection of local referees to manage crucial matches, such as the Al-Nasr and Damac game, which held utmost importance for both teams, intensified criticism. Some believe that such matches require foreign crews to reduce pressure and ensure neutrality, especially during a sensitive stage of the tournament. That match witnessed controversial decisions, including a goal for Al-Nasr preceded by a collision that sparked debate.

The controversy was not limited to Al-Nasr alone; it also included other clubs such as Al-Ahli, which faced refereeing decisions in its match against Al-Fayha that led to its exit from the top of the competition. Reactions resonated strongly, with a state of tension emerging between players and referees, reflecting the intensity of the tension that accompanied the season.

In contrast, the runner-up sought to avoid this controversy by relying on foreign referees in all its matches, which was reflected in its results by not suffering any losses in those encounters.

The scheduling factor played another role in Al-Nasr’s advantages, as it played its decisive matches in Riyadh, while its competitors traveled between different cities, affecting their physical and psychological state. For example, Al-Hilal entered its crucial match against Al-Nasr after a series of travels and match congestion, in addition to its coronation with the King’s Cup, while Al-Ahli faced Al-Nasr burdened with the fatigue of the Asian championship.

In conclusion, Al-Nasr’s coronation remains deserved according to the schedule data, but it opens an important door for discussion about developing the refereeing system, reducing errors, and enhancing competitive fairness so that upcoming tournaments are clearer and less controversial.