Friday, 21 June 2019

2019 FIFA Women's WC - Referee appointments for group stage

Referee appointments for last games of group stage.
Match 31 (Nice)
19 June 2019, 21:00 CET
Japan - England
Referee: Claudia Umpierrez (URU)
Assistant Referee 1: Luciana Mascarana (URU)
Assistant Referee 2: Monica Amboya (ECU)
Fourth Official: Maria Carvajal (CHI)
Fifth Official: Queency Victoire (MRI)
Video Assistant Referee: Carlos del Cerro Grande (ESP)
Assistant Video Assistant Referee 1: Jose Maria Sanchez (ESP)
Assistant Video Assistant Referee 2: Leslia Vazquez (CHI)

Match 32 (Paris)
19 June 2019, 21:00 CET
Scotland - Argentina
Referee: Hyang Ok Ri (PRK)
Assistant Referee 1: Kum Nyo Hong (PRK)
Assistant Referee 2: kyoung Min Kim (KOR)
Fourth Official: Lidya Tafesse Abebe (ETH)
Fifth Officil: Makoto Bozono (JPN)
Video Assistant Referee: Bastian Dankert (GER)
Assistant Video Assistant Referee 1: Drew Fischer (CAN)
Assistant Video Assistant Referee 2: Katrin Rafalski (GER)

Match 33 (Reims)
20 June 2019, 18:00 CET
Netherlands - Canada
Referee: Stéphanie Frappart (FRA)
Assistant Referee 1: Manuela Nicolosi (FRA)
Assistant Referee 2: Michelle O'Neill (IRL)
Fourth Official: Salima Mukansanga (RWA)
Fifth Officil: Stephanie-Dale Yee Sing (JAM)
Video Assistant Referee: Felix Zwayer (GER)
Assistant Video Assistant Referee 1: Sascha Stegmann (GER)
Assistant Video Assistant Referee 2: Neuza Back (BRA)

Match 34 (Montpellier)
20 June 2019, 18:00 CET
Cameroon - New Zealand
Referee: Kateryna Monzul (UKR)
Assistant Referee 1: Maryna Striletska (UKR)
Assistant Referee 2: Oleksandra Ardasheva (URK)
Fourth Official: Sandra Braz (POR)
Fifth Official: Julia Magnusson (SWE)
Video Assistant Referee: Massimiliano Irrati (ITA)
Assistant Video Assistant Referee 1: Bastian Dankert (GER)
Assistant Video Assistant Referee 2: Lisa Rashid (ENG)

Match 35 (Le Havre)
20 June 2019, 21:00 CET
Sweden - United States
Referee: Anastasia Pustovoitova (RUS)
Assistant Referee 1: Ekaterina Kurochkina (RUS)
Assistant Referee 2: Petruta Claudia Iugulescu (ROU)
Fourth Official: Esther Staubli (SUI)
Fifth Officil: Susanne Kung (SUI)
Video Assistant Referee: Danny Makkelie (NED)
Assistant Video Assistant Referee 1: Chistopher Beath (AUS)
Assistant Video Assistant Referee 2: Chrysoula Kourompylia (GRE)

Match 36 (Rennes)
20 June 2019, 21:00 CET
Thailand - Chile 
Refereee: Anna-Marie Keighley (NZL)
Assistant Referee 1: Sarah Jones (NZL)
Assistant Referee 2: Maria Salamasina (SAM)
Fourth Official: Gladys Lengwe (ZAM)
Fifth Official: Bernadettar Kwimbira (MWI)
Video Assistant Referee: Paolo Valeri (ITA)
Assistant Video Assistant Referee 1: Drew Fischer (CAN)
Assistant Video Assistant Referee 2:Mihaela Tepusa (ROU)

58 comments:

  1. IMO wrong penalty awarded for Brazil by Lucila Venegas.Very hard decision!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. How is it possible that the VAR supports this PK decision? This is hilarious. Del Grande...

      Delete
    2. Even Marco Antonio Rodriguez was unsure of the PK (so am I). He labeled it a "grey area" type of call. He there were merits for a foul to be called just like there were merits for a "play on". And because it could very well be considered a "grey area" call, VAR was never going to intervene.

      Delete
  2. Why has no.18 for Jamaica been allowed to wear earrings???

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Somebody else wrote a similar comment earlier in tournament. So I ask, did you actually see earrings on her ears? Because that earlier comment was based on a player wearing tape on her ears. Now that tape could very well be covering up earrings. Which of course would be wrong. However as someone else said, the tape could be just covering up enlarged earlobe holes.

      Delete
    2. Looked like earrings to me.
      https://streamable.com/w2ukp

      Delete
    3. I'll be honest with you Jackson. I can't tell either way based on the video footage. But if she did indeed play with earrings. Shame shame shame on that 4th official for not properly doing her job.

      Delete
    4. That's reflective tape.

      Same as what we saw earlier.

      Do you REALLY think that the 4O would've missed that? Honestly?

      Delete
  3. WOMEN'S WORLD CUP
    GROUP STAGE / 2ND MATCHES

    NIGERIA vs KOREA
    Anastasia Pustovoitava(RUS)
    Carlos del Cerro Grande (VAR)

    (-) 17.25 AR2 missed offside
    (+) 18.07 Accidentally step on foot.No faul is correct decision
    (+) 28.30 Correct goal.No handball.VAR review took about 3 minutes
    (+) 48.03 KOR 10 yellow card for simulation
    (+) 57.13 KOR goal correctly disallowed for offside
    (+) 60.12 NGA 10 yellow card for illegal use of arm
    (+) 70.13 KOR 4 yellow card for reckless (step on foot)

    GERMANY vs SPAIN
    Kateryna Monzul (UKR)
    Danny Makkelie (VAR)

    (-) 00.37 ESP 16 should recieve yellow card for SPA
    (-) 27.18 ESP 7 should recieve yellow card for reckless (step on foot).Referee didn’t whistle for free kick.AR must help the referee in this situation
    (-) 36.39 GER 13 should recieve red card for serious faul play.Referee didn’t whistle for free kick.4th offical must help the referee.VAR should intervene
    (-) 47.59 AR1 Wrong offside flag. Delebrate play by defender
    (+) 51.18 Possible penalty situation (GER) for handball. Play on was the correct decision (short distance - naturel position-deflection from body)
    (+) 61.54 GER 17 yellow card for SPA.I don’t consider dogso because of speed of the ball
    (-) 86.49 AR2 wrong offside flag
    (-) 88.08 possible penalty (ESP).There is a clear contact so penalty should have been whistled.VAR also should intervene
    (+) 91.40 Possible penalty situation (ESP) for handball. Play on was the correct decision. (naturel position-deflected from her knee)

    FRANCE vs NORWAY
    Bibiana Steinhaus (GER)
    Felix Zwayer (VAR)

    (-) 01.25 AR 1 incorrect offside flag. Defender plays the ball
    (!) 08.37 The moment of AR's flag is broken
    (+) 24.30 Possible penalty situation (FRA) Play on was the correct decision. (normal challenging)
    (+) 55.01 FRA 9 yellow card for reckless (step on foot)
    (+) 67.50 Correct penalty was given to FRA after OFR.NOR 14 yellow card for reckless.good intervention by VAR

    RF

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. AUSTRALIA vs BRAZIL
      Esther Staubli (SUI)
      Bastian Dankert (VAR)

      (+) 12.50 BRA 8 yellow card for reckless (step on foot)
      (+) 19.05 Possible penalty situation (AUS).Referee did not whistle for penalty.For VAR it was a clear and obvious mistake so it is penalty for him.But Intervention not only for a possible penalty but also offensive handball in the beginning of the attack.Good apporach
      (-) 24.50 Soft penalty decision (BRA) for holding.Better to say play on in my opinion.VAR can not intervene since there is a even very light pulling.
      (+) 34.06 Possible penalty situation (AUS).It was again handball from the attacker which was missed by the referee at the beginning.But this time VAR did not intervene like the previous situation.
      (+) 39.15 Possible penalty situation (AUS) Play on was the correct decision (very light contact/hand on the shoulder).
      (-) 65.37 AUS scored a goal. AR raised her flag for offside.Then VAR Intervention.Goal was given after OFR.Goal should have been disallowed for offside - interfering with an opponent.Anyway VAR intervention for this situation unacceptable since there is not a clear and obvious one
      (+) 84.18 BRA 7 yellow card for illegal use of arm
      (+) 86.48 BRA 18 yellow card for reckless (tackle)
      (-) 91.17 Possible penalty situation(BRA) for holding.Difficult to see for the referee but VAR must intervene for this clear holding

      SOUTH AFRICA vs CHINA
      Katalin Kulcsar (HUN)
      Christopher Beath (VAR)

      (-) 7.50 CHN 17 should receive yellow card for holding
      (+) 82.35 RSA 4 yellow card for reckless (tackle)

      JAPAN vs SCOTLAND
      Lidya Tafesse Abebe (ETH)
      Massimilliano Irrati (VAR)

      (-) 11.15 The ball touched the referee and play continued. (The game must stop and restart with dropped ball)
      (+) 18.39 JPN 3 yellow card for reckless (tackle)
      (-) 21.26 AR2 Wrong offside flag.Very clear onside
      (+) 26.40 Possible penalty situation (JPN) for handball.correct play on.(deflection from body)
      (-) 28.00 SCO 22 should recieve yellow card for reckless
      (+) 35.06 Correct penalty decision. (JPN) SCO 3 yellow card for holding
      (-) 44.36 AR2 wrong offside flag. No -Never- interfering with an opponent.
      (+) 56.45 Possible penalty situation (SCO). Play on was the correct decision. Defender played the ball clearly then normal contact
      (-) 78.05 Possible penalty situation (SCO).Attacker touched the ball defender hit opponent foot so it must be a penalty kick and VAR Intervention was needed
      (-) 83.26 Possible penalty situation (SCO) for handball. Referee didn't whistle for penalty. It must be a penalty kick for handball. VAR intervention was needed

      RF

      Delete
    2. JAMAICA vs ITALY
      Anna-Marie Keighley (NZL)
      Danny Makkelie (VAR)

      (+) 8.10 Correct Penalty kick was given (ITA) after OFR. Good intervention by VAR.Clear careless tackle.Then Penalty kick retaken by VAR and yellow card to GK because of the infringement of GK.
      (+) 57.55 JAM 11 yellow card for reckless (scissors kick)

      ENGLAND vs ARGENTINA
      Liang Qin (CHN)
      Felix Zwayer (VAR)

      (-) 13.38 ARG 3 should receive yellow card for reckless (tackle)
      (+) 26.20 Correct penalty decision- tackle (ENG)
      (+) 37.57 ARG 6 yellow card for SPA
      (+) ENG 16 yellow card for SPA/holding
      (+) 50.30 Possible penalty situation (ENG) for handball.The game restart after VAR review. Play on was the correct decision. (naturel position)
      (+) 67.55 ARG 2 yellow card for reckless (tackle)

      NETHERLANDS vs CAMEROON
      Casey Reibelt (AUS)
      Paolo Valeri (VAR)

      (-) 13.15 CMR 2 yellow card for SPA but could have been avoid it.Direction of the ball/player towards touch line
      (-) 17.30 Referee gave direct free-kick in favour of Cameroon and werbal warning to Dutch player which was correct.Then she forgat how to restart game.She started to talk with players,her team,maybe with VAR.But I never seen this kind of poor managment so far in this tournament
      (-) 25.42 Direct free kick and yellow card (NED 2) should have been given after faul committed very close to the penalty area.Referee didn’t whistle for a freekick
      (+) 36.08 CMR 20 yellow card for reckless (high foot)
      (-) 61.30 Referee should give an advantage instead of whistling after delay flag
      (+) 67.07 CMR 8 yellow card for reckless (tackle)
      (+) 69.15 The ball touched the referee. The game stopped by the referee and correctly restart with dropp ball.

      CANADA vs NEW ZEALAND
      Yoshimi Yamashita (JPN)
      Jose Maria Sanchez(VAR)

      (+) 41.30 Possible penalty situation (NZL) for pushing. Play on was the correct decision for me because of the low intensity
      (-) 59.25 It should have been direct free kick and yellow card (CAN 8) because of reckless tackle
      (+) 87.18 Possible penalty situation (CAN).correct play on.(normal challenging body to body)
      (-) 90.37 CAN 10 should receive a yellow card for reckless (step on foot)

      SWEDEN vs THAILAND
      Salima Mukansanga (RWA)
      Felix Zwayer (VAR)

      (-) 26.30 The ball hit the referee and play continued. The game must stop and restart with dropped ball.(Swedish player was controlling the ball)
      (+) 43.45 THA 17 yellow card for reckless (step on foot).But better to whistle immediatley instead of giving advantage.She showed yellow card very late
      (+) 92.26 Penalty was given to SWE after OFR. THA 3 yellow card for handball-getting body bigger (shot at goal).Correct intervention by VAR

      USA vs CHILE
      Riem Hussein (GER)
      Clement Turpin (VAR)

      (-) 16.50 ABD 2 should receive yellow card for reckless
      (+) 21.40 CHI goal correctly disallowed for offside ( interfering with an opponent)
      (-)22.35 USA 9 yellow card for several offences.She could avoid the yellow card with strong managment
      (-) 41.40 Poor managment by the referee during the free-kick.Very slow action while she was talking/warning the players inside the penalty area.Also USA 12 should receive yellow card for not waiting for the referee's signal but because of the wrong managment
      (+) 75.44 CHI 4 yellow card for tactical faul
      (+) 77.15 Correct penalty kick was given (USA) after OFR. Good intervention by VAR. Faul inside the penalty area and the ball was in play. CHI 19 yellow card for holding
      (+) 87.40 USA 20 yellow card for illegal use of arm
      (+) 93.02 Correct yellow card (CHI 15) for reckless (tackle)

      RF

      Delete
  4. Good 1H by Ri Hyang-Ok in the Scotland - Argentina game. A couple of studs tackles which played the ball that could have merited a YC, but Korean was satisfied with just a whistle, which were acceptable choices IMO. Good warning at 7' for a SPA-esque foul (although no television footage to support). A couple of warnings issued were quite 'policeman-esque' where it was perhaps possible to better 'connect' with the players; on the other hand, such firm and distant approach can be the best one in this winner-takes-all game.

    Any words on Claudia Umpiérrez in Japan - England (hard to keep across two final candidates at once :-))?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Not at all impressed by her disciplinary control in the second half. Two brutal tackles result only in one YC for Argentina, while the Scotland player who got fouled delayed the restart and got a card and a warning that was extremely strict. Now the game is getting really heated.

      Delete
    2. Penalty in 90' for 3-3, correct? Without VAR?

      Delete
    3. It was correct with VAR and then retaken as VAR spotted that the keeper came of her line early. However, she did not include the time it took for the penalty as extra added time and blew after 4 minutes indicated, for me that was very poor and Scotland are understandably fuming

      Delete
    4. Umpierrez was expected level in an easy match, maybe missed one YC if clutching at straws but was always in control and had great player management and communication. Was impressed with her

      Delete
    5. She is one for the finals

      Delete
    6. At least 7 minutes from the initial var call to the penalty being retaken and she added only 5 mintes? A joke of a ref.
      Var decisions were correct of course

      Delete
    7. Penalty decision was given by OFR after VAR check however the whole situation was atrociously managed.

      Firstly, Scottish Sub #20 has barely entered the FoP as the initial free kick is taken from which the resulting situation comes in the second phase.
      Secondly, she waves it away far too convincingly, I have questions about her angle on the challenge as it seemed clear to everyone else on commentary and on first look. The actual tackle takes place in the 86th minute. VAR check is ongoing at 86:22. OFR takes place, penalty given at 89:00
      Scottish captain allowed to dissent too long, should've been booked, arguable delaying the restart by Scotland #1 and #10 as well as unsporting by Argentine #6 in my opinion an earlier card for the Captain would've stopped the nonsense that occurs.
      Penalty saved initially at 91:23, ball has been out of play for 5 minutes at this point. Correct VAR intervention (by strict interpretation as seen in recent FIFA tournaments not imo but that's not for me to say) and YC for Scotland GK.
      Retake scored at 93:23. Commentary on the game said no added time shown until 95th minute of game time, which was apparently 4 minutes, but whistle was blown at 95:09. Poor time management given the length of VAR intervention, which was approximately 7 minutes on its own, and ignorant of the time wasting for which a Scottish player had been previously booked.

      My takeaway from the incident is that while VAR correctly intervenes, the inability of the referee to show cards earlier on the game as noted by Howard caused a heated game and then she refused to use them to control the silliness in the penalty as well as atrocious time management ruined the end to the game.

      Delete
    8. There is no way that this isn't a penalty record for most penalties per game in a world cup man/woman?

      Delete
    9. Give me and a few hours and I can wip out a statistic. Very good comments above about the performance and the penalty.

      Delete
    10. For 2 referees that were contenders for a final/semi final, Umpierrez has enhanced her chances but Ri has ended any chances all together because the penalty decision you can forgive but the time management you cannot at all

      Delete
    11. 2019 Ri is a shadow of her former self. A version that allows an overly physical type of game to develop which in turn combative in nature.. A version who willingly overlooks fouls. Which in turn leads to heavy challenges going unpunished. A Ri, who places more emphasis on cautioning dalays of restarts. Yet always talks her way out of SPA cautions, reckless challenge cautions, persistent infringement cautions. For the first time at this world cup, I see a referee surrounded and mobbed by players after the final whistle. A consequence of her own making.

      Delete
  5. This infringement by goalkeeper gets ridiculous by the day. How can you expect me to stand still until exactly when the attackers leg touches the ball. How do I even know when it touches and when I should move. With all this the ball is on the back if the net even before I could try moving. See the Scottish keeper barely moved for the 2nd pk and the first was very tight from her side

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. OMG, you can move! You just have to have a bit of one foot on or over the goalline! It's really clear. I don't know why you all have such problems with that!

      Delete
    2. Obviously you don't have a problem with that because you are not a goalkeeper go and be one and try saving a penalty and come back let's discuss. So many stuff runs through the mind of a goalkeeper and now to add that one has to make absolute sure that he/she has a foot on the goaline exactly when the ball is truck is close to impossible. Ones the ball is struck most of the time you have no chance of saving them. And when I mean movement I do not mean moving to the left or right that doesn't help I mean making a dive because there is a higher chance that's when you can save it

      Delete
    3. Chiagozie Obviously you don't get it. You are basically in your comments admitting why this new rule came. Because it has been too easy the past years for goalkeepers to cheat and not be on the line and save penalties. I remember many penalties being saved because the goalkeepers have been way over the line. The problem has more been about referees not enforcing the law rather than the law itself.

      With VAR of course it must be enforced if this is the law.
      Goalkeepers can move sideways until they make their jump. Just keep a foot on the line, easy, no problem.

      Delete
    4. You are wrong. It's never that easy. We all write different things because we are in such position but it's the rule so be it. I don't like the rule and thank God premier league wont be using VAR for encroachments and it will be left to the on field referee as announced earlier today

      Delete
    5. Why not go back to the rules in the 1980's (Goalkeeper isn't allowed to move until ball is struck). In those days goalkeepers had even less chance.
      And let's not forget that it isn't called a PENALTY for no reason.

      Delete
    6. Because it's a penalty it must always be a goal. By your logic why don't we remove the goalkeeper from the post and allow a free shot from the attacker since it's calied a PENALTY for a reason

      Delete
  6. Why not let the goalkeeper move 2m? For the free kick opponents must remain 9m distance from the ball. Penalty kick is from 11m.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. And then we strictly punish, if the GK is 2,01m away from the goalline? That only moves the problem of the decision two meters forward.
      If we want to make it easier for the goalkeepers (and the referees), we could allow any movement from the moment of the whistle. Would also be nearer to the rest of the game (where we can also have such 1-1 situations)
      Of course, it would decrease the scoring chances. But maybe that is good, because on the other hand the number of penalties is increasing?

      Delete
    2. Spot on and well said. We all will have our opinions either for or against the goalkeeper and we can't impose any of our idea on one another that's why these blog is exciting . Only the law makers are to be blamed

      Delete
    3. I don't like the strict VAR enforcement, but can live with it. However, the yellow cards for the GK are a bit too much. Why give a card for such a technical infraction of a few centimeters? Isn't the re-taking of the PK enough? At this rate, surely there will be some unfortunate GK who gets a second yellow for this. That would be outrageous.

      Delete
    4. Double punishment.
      The GK is cautioned and the PK will typically be scored on the second opportunity.

      Delete
  7. Penalty changed to FK by Frappart after OFR:
    There were two contacts between defender and attacker, one outside and one inside the penalty area, so she changed her mind, which was the decisive contact after seeing the pictures.
    IMO, the penalty was something between "very soft" and wrong. So, it can be discussed, whether the VAR intervention was justified or not. The FK given was still soft, no foul might have been the better decision.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I agree. The contact was made outside the PA and therefore the intervention was correct. However, this is a factual decision so why an OFR?

      Delete
    2. Because there was also a contact in the PA, so they needed to verify, that the referee doesn't want to give a penalty for that.

      Delete
    3. Correct procedure by VAR there, Frappart in this way has checked both situations and she has decided for free kick (first foul).

      Delete
  8. 38': advantage? The worst choice by Frappart there...

    ReplyDelete
  9. Maybe I am overthinking this but why would the individual/committee appoint a referee from New Zealand to oversee the Group F game for third place if it could affect whether the New Zealand team advances to the knock-out round? If New Zealand win their game, the outcome of the Chile -Thailand game could effect whether the New Zealand team goes through. I'm not questioning the referee integrity, but questioning the choice made by the appointer. Thoughts?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Not sure, whether you always can cover all possibilities in this system with the 3rd place qualification. But in this case, it could be expected and therefore avoided.
      However, New Zealand needs to win, before that gets relevant...

      Delete
    2. The Ref Comm must be able to foresee these situations. A large amount of referee's from multiple countries are selected for the competition. I would say that there are always other options available in order to avoid any sort of sticky situation.

      Delete
  10. I wrote that comment and a couple seconds later Cameroon scored.

    ReplyDelete
  11. 50' interesting situation in Pustovoitova's game, VAR check for a possible offside before 0-2. Referee was called to monitor to decide whether punishable or not.
    Goal was allowed after OFR. I agree with this decision.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. 58' YC after advantage: very close to SFP.

      Delete
    2. They ask a Center Referee to decide an offside decision? Something that has to do with what an Assistant Referee would call?
      Then why have a specific AR in the VAR room? Can't that AR who is in the VAR room decide on her own if there was or wasn't an offside offence?

      Delete
    3. On last question: final decision must be always taken by officials on the pitch, so in a situation in which there isn't a 100% correct interpretation, it will be always referee to decide.
      But I agree with you when you say that an assistant referee should judge that, I would change the protocol and then if an offside position must be assessed punishable or not, I would send to monitor the assistant referee responsible for the action on the pitch.
      This would make more sense.
      However, we should also add that, at this level, all officials must have a deep knowledge about offside.

      Delete
    4. Or both, referee and assistant referee involved. Even better...

      Delete
    5. I agree on the principle of all referee's having a high level of knowledge. But 2019 referee's are specialized. During their career they either choose or are given the path of being a center referee or an assistant referee.

      But yes, VAR which is currently in its infancy does require certain tweaks to make it better. One of those being AR's going to the monitor for offside decisions.

      Delete
    6. And yes, two (CR & AR) will always be better than one.

      Delete
    7. They work together on the pitch. Why not also at the monitor.

      Delete
    8. The VAR protocol already allows it, that the AR participates in the OFR. It was done on the last Bundesliga match day (by Gräfe and Kleve), who were praised for it (although the decision remained controversial).

      Also without VAR, the decision, whether an offside position is punishable is often taken by the referee. E.g., when he knows better, who played the ball or whether the player was in the GK's line of vision.

      Delete
    9. Exactly my point. Why the referee was called Sheriff it's because it is a matter of interpretation and the protocol calls for the centre referee when it's not factual. We might say offside is black and white but it's still left maybe it's is punishable or not and that's why Anastasia was called

      Delete
    10. This is correct. The offside situation was a matter of interpretation; challenge/impact. In that case the referee must make the final decision when see wasn't aware of a deliberate play of influence. So now after the OFR nobody can say that the referee or the VAR were sleeping.

      Delete
  12. Correct penalty (+ YC for a reckless charge) awarded after On-Field Review by Keighley in the Thailand - Chile game.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I don't think we will see her in KO stage.
      She had two OFR, both for "normal" penalties...

      Delete
  13. R16 predictions
    GER-NGA: Qin, Fang (both CHN), Kim (KOR), Venegas (MEX) - Beath (AUS), Mohammed (UAE), Chavez (MEX)
    NOR-AUS: Braz (POR), Kurochkina (RUS), Rashid (ENG), Pustovoytova (RUS) - Turpin (FRA), del Cerro Grande (ESP), Nicolosi (FRA)
    ENG-CMR: Yamashita, Teshirogi, Bozono (all JPN), Ri (PRK) - Sanchez (ESP), Gil (POL), Ardasheva (UKR)
    FRA-BRA: Jacewicz (AUS), Nesbitt (USA), Boudreau (CAN), Abebe (ETH) - Valeri (ITA), Fischer (CAN), Striletska (UKR)
    ESP-USA: Steinhaus, Rafalski (both GER), Kourompylia (GRE), Staubli (SUI) - Zwayer, Stegemann (both GER), Massey (ENG)
    SWE-CAN: Reibelt (AUS), Lee (KOR), Hagio (JPN), Fortunato (ARG) - Beath (AUS), Mohammed (UAE), Almeida (ARG)
    ITA-CHN: Adamkova, Ratajova (CZE), Sukenikova (SVK), Frappart (FRA) - Dankert (GER), Fischer (CAN), O'Neill (IRL)
    NED-JPN: Hussein (GER), Cockburn (SCO), Tepusa (ROU), Keighley (NZL) - Irrati, Valeri (both ITA), Jones (NZL)

    I know, a lot of AFC here, but the American referees mostly had their second match on MD3 already - so I would rather expect them in QF and SF matches - and the CAF referees seem too weak.

    ReplyDelete