A&H

Euros

Status
Not open for further replies.
It was simulation (in my opinion).
There is very little, if any, contact from the first player and sterling is horizontal before the 2nd player is even close.

I'm usually one to back faster players, being reasonably quick myself, but I think the ref, and the VAR, have been had off on this one.

Gary Crisps disagrees.

I am open to being told I am wrong and why - Is the contact enough? No and I feel he is already going down pre contact.

 
Last edited:
The Referee Store
Re the back pass: Sure, there’s a decent argument for a back pass there, but reasonable minds can differ on the level of control versus poke away on that play. And you put the gloss on that it would be the first back pass called in the tournament the early minutes of a semi final--no ref at that level is going to make that call, which would be perceived as making the game all about the ref. The pass back may not have gone the way of 6 seconds, but I think it takes something more clear than that in the modern game.

Re the PK: I think it’s a soft PK, but it was a foul (or two). Sure, Sterling is hoping to get fouled and makes sure the contact is seen, but his leg is clipped by the first defender, and it doesn’t take a lot of contact to mess up someone’s balance when they are trying to dance between people. To me, this is a border line case where either call on the field stands as not clearly wrong. Grey exists.

Re whether this is an argument to abolish C&O: IMO, heck no. As I said, grey exists. Re-refereeing by video is not the solution. Nor is a challenge system—this is still a judgment call than people may differ on, and having it raised as a challenge instead of the automatic check wouldn’t change that. Our world of false precision (e.g. reports of handheld times measured in 100ths of a second) wants every call to have a perfect answer, which just isn’t so. One of soccer’s challenges is that it actively uses video review on judgment calls, not just objective calls—that will inherently always leave room for debate and dissent.
 
So van Boekel is the VAR for the semi because Blom screwed up the handball in the first match of the tournament and now he doesn't get to be the main VAR on the final because he got put into a position because he couldn't have Makkelie overturn that PK because it wasn't a clear and obvious error. Brutal.
You’re making a lot of assumptions about assigning there . . .
 
I think you pretty much gave what I would have said.

Yes he was already diving.
And I would not call that a knock. Its hardly 'contact'. Still image is misleading here. And even if contact is made, contact does not equal foul.

Sterling is known for milking penalties. I am surprised Makkelie fell for it.
For me justify a foul because there was body contact is no different to justifying no foul because there was ball contact (I got the ball ref).

On the wall, most camera angles were deceiving. Shuffling to on side is not an offence, getting closer than 1m is. The wall line was 1m away from the 18 yard line. Attackers move but stayed on the 18 yard line.

View attachment 5042
The Dane turns and runs towards goal. Show the frame where the ball is kicked;)
 
The Dane turns and runs towards goal. Show the frame where the ball is kicked;)
This is a virtually impossible rule to really manage except in the setup or blatant cases If we were to really mean no one can get within a yard in the flow. I don’t think in writing this provision IFAB remotely considered there would be discussion about invalidating a goal like this. The point was to get rid of the jostling nonsense in walls. If this had been called back, it would have been far more controversial than the PK.
 
If you watch the sequence (and someone else mentioned part of this), the Danish players stay on the penalty area line and shuffle to their right, but the English players in the wall shuffle forward, making that distance less than the 1m... but are also encroaching on the distance set at the same time...



Potential pass to the GK:
LoL. Backpass all day long. Whoops.
 
Don't think it's a pen but once it has been given then VAR can't overuke due to there being contact by the 2nd defender. Its a little unsatisfactory if we're honest but I totally understand why the "we don't want to re referee the game policy" is there. I've believed from day one that we will see that stance wane away and it will be a case of the VAR referee making pen calls. Refs are going to leave more and more pen calls to VAR, its a natural process of self preservation for all really.

I thought the ref was a little hesitant all night. There were some very clear shirt pulling incidents which everyone expected to be a yellow but were just given as a foul. Poulson on Maguire 2nd half was the easiest yellow ever at it wasn't given and he did it twice more and still avoided a yellow. Maybe its a directive to avoid carding so much in the ko's? But it seemed way out of kilter with modern expectations. Almost as if he was overthinking the management of the game. I'm not blaming him here, hea not been bad but imo slightly lower than the exceptionally high quality we've seen this tournament. I actually think that refereeing may see a bit of a bounce following how positive the refereeing has been recieved and appreciated in the UK during the tournament.
PGMOL will soon ruin that.
 
What would you do after a penalty is scored directly, your AR brings this to your attention?

Screenshot_20210709-180929.jpg
 
Tbh, I think foul throws need redefining.
I think it has become completely lost on folks what it is and isn't a foul throw and I am talking about refs here too.
There were a couple in this game that looked untidy but were legal
At the end of the day, with the exception of long throws into the box which yield a result every now and again it really is just a method of returning the ball to play.
 
The main aim of the Danish movement in the wall was sideways to block Pickford's view through the gap. Then one player turns so is facing to run through the gap to pick up any rebound. Great tactics.
 
How much contact does there have to be for it to be a penalty ? Penalties are like eggs. There are soft ones and hard ones, but a soft egg is still an egg !
The law doesn't say much about contact (other than if there is contact, it's a direct free kick) but what it does say is that it's a direct free kick offence if a player challenges an opponent in what the referee considers to be a careless manner.

I thought it was perfectly reasonable to see the knee-to-knee contact by Maehle on Sterling as careless.

There was a good still of it posted earlier, here's another one from a similar angle (and as you can see, it was one of the angles used by VAR).

IMG_20210708_174126.jpg

Although it's true that a still image capture doesn't always give the most accurate portrayal of things, I think that in this case it pretty much does - and it supports the idea of a careless challenge.

I don't have a video of it to post but I did watch the replay from this angle several times and as far as I'm concerned, it also clearly shows that there was a careless challenge by Maehle.

I didn't see anything in the clip that made me think Sterling was guilty of simulation.
 
Random question, during the tournament has any referee worn black shirts? I don’t remember seeing it in any game.

Will we see black in the final?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top