Referee appointments for round of 16 at 2019 FIFA Women's World Cup.
Match 37 (Nice)
22 June 2019, 21:00 CETNorway - Australia
Referee: Riem Hussein (GER)
Assistant Referee 1: Kylie Cockburn (SCO)
Assistant Referee 2: Mihaela Tepusa (ROU)
Fourth Official: Jana Adamkova (CZE)
Fifth Official: Maria Sukenikova (SVK)
Video Assistant Referee: Felix Zwayer (GER)
Assistant Video Assistant Referee 1: Sascha Stegemann (GER)
Assistant Video Assistant Referee 2: Katrin Rafalski (GER)
Match 38 (Grenoble)
22 June 2019, 17:30 CETGermany - Nigeria
Referee: Yoshimi Yamashita (JPN)
Assistant Referee 1: Naomi Teshirogi (JPN)
Assistant Referee 2: Makoto Bozono (JPN)
Fourth Official: Casey Reibelt (AUS)
Fifth Official: Maiko Hagio (JPN)
Video Assistant Referee: Carlos del Cerro Grande (ESP)
Assistant Video Assistant Referee 1: José María Sánchez Martínez (ESP)
Assistant Video Assistant Referee 2: Mayte Chavez (MEX)
Match 39 (Valenciennes)
23 June 2019, 17:30 CETEngland - Cameroon
Referee: Liang Qin (CHN)
Assistant Referee 1: Yan Fang (CHN)
Assistant Referee 2: Kum Hyo Hong (PRK)
Fourth Official: Hyang Ok Ri (PRK)
Fifth Official: Kyoung Min Kim (KOR)
Video Assistant Referee: Bastian Dankert (GER)
Assistant Video Assistant Referee 1: Mohammed Mohammed (UAE)
Assistant Video Assistant Referee 2: Michelle O'Neill (IRL)
France - Brazil
Referee: Marie-Soleil Beaudoin (CAN)
Assistant Referee 1: Princess Brown (JAM)
Assistant Referee 2: Stephanie-Dale Yee Sing (JAM)
Fifth Official: Kyoung Min Kim (KOR)
Video Assistant Referee: Bastian Dankert (GER)
Assistant Video Assistant Referee 1: Mohammed Mohammed (UAE)
Assistant Video Assistant Referee 2: Michelle O'Neill (IRL)
Match 40 (Le Havre)
23 June 2019, 21:00 CETFrance - Brazil
Referee: Marie-Soleil Beaudoin (CAN)
Assistant Referee 1: Princess Brown (JAM)
Assistant Referee 2: Stephanie-Dale Yee Sing (JAM)
Fourth Official: Esther Staubli, (SUI)
Fifth Official: Susanne Kung (SUI)
Video Assistant Referee: Massimiliano Irrati (ITA)
Assistant Video Assistant Referee 1: Christopher Beat (AUS)
Assistant Video Assistant Referee 2: Oleksandra Ardasheva (UKR)
Fifth Official: Susanne Kung (SUI)
Video Assistant Referee: Massimiliano Irrati (ITA)
Assistant Video Assistant Referee 1: Christopher Beat (AUS)
Assistant Video Assistant Referee 2: Oleksandra Ardasheva (UKR)
Interesting: Riem Hussein 3 appointments, Bibiana Steinhaus only 1 game.
ReplyDeleteQuestion to German readers: would you have expected that?
To add, Bibiana Steinhaus for some reasons was not appointed in CL KO stage in the second part of 2018-19 season.
I don't know, maybe she is close to retire at international level, after a so long time, I have this feeling.
About the rest of appointments, surely Marie-Soleil Beaudoin with the best game so far.
I am not surprised about a R16 match for Hussein and I don't think, the fact, that it's her 3rd match is so important. We have to wait, whether Steinhaus also gets a R16 match (or even more). If not, it could only be explained by some injury problems, I think.
DeleteIt is possible, that she will retire on Women's international level after the tournament, because she has achieved everything there. I wonder, whether there is any chance to see her in men's international competitions. She has completed two Bundesliga seasons and is already on the FIFA list. So I think, technically there would be no obstacles. Some female FIFA ARs have also been used in men's competition.
The question is, whether UEFA wants that or not.
Beaudoin had the U17 final, so one could maybe expect a good tournament for her. But honestly, I did not expect it.
Yamashita and Qin both had solid first matches, so a second match was expected. Let's see, whether the Australians are also appointed again or FIFA is focussing on them for the last rounds (as AFC representatives).
Agreed, Philipp. However, one can say that it is a very successful first WC for Hussein considering the three assignments. But overall nothing very surprising. There are rumours that Steinhaus suffered a minor injury after her first game, but nothing confirmed yet. If that is true, it is likely that Steinhaus will get another game in the next stages of this WC.
DeleteIt's quite simple really. Riem has been better than Bibiana at this tournament. And she's rightly being rewarded. Names shouldn't matter only performances.
DeleteWith 'fifth official' you mean the reserve assistant referee, right?
ReplyDeleteYes.
DeleteTemporary dispensation: no cautions for goalkeeper encroachment during Kicks from the Penalty Mark at the FIFA WWC 2019.
ReplyDeleteSource: IFAB
thank goodness
DeleteThey realized that this was something very excessive. I praise this decision.
Deletebut that only applies to penalties
DeleteIt was a disaster waiting to happen. Surely we would have penalty shootout in the knockout phase and would see a lot of goalkeeper seeing Red cards for technical infringements which was very harsh to say the list
DeleteThe ripple effect of this is that the door is opened for persistent infringement.
Delete"No VAR for keeper encroachment at penalties in Premier League"
Deletehttps://www.bbc.com/sport/football/48703852
So enforcement is already beginning to be selectively used and/or enforced.
Pierluigi Collina interview:
Deletehttps://www.fifa.com/womensworldcup/news/collina-talks-var-penalties-and-refereeing-at-france-2019
It's important to note that the dispensation is only for kicks from the penalty mark when deciding a match, i.e. after extra time. For Penalties during play the caution still applies.
DeleteHoland v Canada
ReplyDelete38th minute
Frappart made a terrible to decision play the advantage. A Dutch player fouled at the top of the penalty box. In a position that would have led to an excellent spot for a free kick. But Frappart plays advantage even though the ball actually gets played away from the goal. Not surprisingly nothing developed for the Dutch team. She did however correctly caution the Canadian player. But she deprived the Dutch team of an free kick in a scoring position.
Agreed with that assessment :)
DeleteWhy do referee's seem to always have a look of disgust and/or dejection when they're waiting on VAR to do its thing.
ReplyDeleteNo data to support this hypothesis. This should just be read as an(other) attack on ALL elite referees that gives the impression of a bitter and envious person.
DeleteLol sheriff you read to much into very little things
DeleteMikael, I hope your day is as pleasant as you are.
DeleteChiagozie, I just find their facial gestures interesting and intriguing. If a referee were to ever speak about what is going through their head when VAR is intervening in their match. That's a conversation I'd love to hear.
WOMEN'S WORLD CUP
ReplyDeleteGROUP STAGE / 3RD MATCHES
SOUTH AFRICA vs GERMANY
Sandra Braz (POR)
Clément Turpin (VAR)
(+) 27.33 The ball hit the referee and correctly restart with dropped ball
(+) 48.45 Correct play on for penalty appeal (GER).Defender touched the ball
(+) 52.12 RSA 4 yellow card for reckless (step on foot)/SPA
(+) 52.50 GER 20 yellow card for dissent.Difficult to understand reason on tv
(+) 55.35 RSA 3 yellow card for reckless
(+) 65.15 RSA 22 yellow card for reckless (tackle)
(+) 75.15 GER goal correctly disallowed for offside (AR1)
(+) 83.00 GER goal correctly disallowed for offside (AR1)
CHINA vs SPAIN
Edna Alves Batista (BRA)
Mauro Vigliano (VAR)
(-) 21.30 CHN 11 should recieve yellow card for reckless (tackle)
(+) 61. 57 CHI 16 yellow card for reckless (step on foot)
NIGERIA vs FRANCE
Melissa Borjas (HON)
Danny Makkelie (VAR)
(+) 26.50 NGA 4 yellow card for SPA
(+) 44.47 FRA 13 yellow card for reckless (high leg)
(+) 72.00 Correct penalty kick was given (FRA) after good intervention,OFR.NGA 4 (second) yellow card for reckless (tackle) and send off. Then penalty kick retaken by VAR and yellow card to GK (NIG).It was unfortunately wrong intervention by VAR which was changed the result of the match.On the other hand,According to the protocol you can not intervene since the ball went out after hit the goal post without touching GK
(+) 97.23 FRA 10 yellow card for reckless (tackle)
SOUTH KOREA vs NORWAY
Marie-Soleil Beaudoin (CAN)
Christopher Beath (VAR)
(+) 2.58 Correct penalty decision (NOR). KOR 8 yellow card for holding
(+) 45 +1 Possible penalty situation (NOR).Both players are challenging with the ball so no punishable contact.
(+) 48.25 Correct penalty decision (NOR).Tackle/clear contact
(+) 66.35 Possible penalty situation (KOR). Correct play on decision (soft contact)
(+) 84.39 KOR 13 yellow card for reckless (tackle)
JAMAICA vs AUSTRALIA
Katalin Kulcsar (HUN)
Jose Maria Sanchez (VAR)
(+) 22. 50 Possible penalty situation (JAM) Play on was the correct decision (normal challenging body to body)
(-)36.05 JAM 11 should recieve yellow card for reckless tackle
(+) 70.15 JAM 5 yellow card for reckless (tackle)
(+) 75.15 JAM 10 yellow card for holding
(+)77.05 Possible penalty situation (AUS). In my opinion GK step on the ground, attacker initiated the contact unintentionally. So correct play on.No intervention even you think it is penalty
ITALY vs BRAZIL
Lucila Venegas (MEX)
Carlos del Cerro Grande (VAR)
(-) 2.55 ITA 7 should recieve yellow card for reckless (tackle)
(+) 11.46 BRA 13 yellow card for reckless (tackle)
(+) 14.30 ITA 13 yellow card for reckless
(+) 28.15 ITA goal correctly disallowed for offside (AR2)
(+) 37.40 Possible penalty situation (BRA) for handball. (short distance/natural position). correct decision no penalty
(-) 71.50 Wrong penalty decision (BRA) in my opininon.Normal contact in football shoulder by shoulder.VAR can not intervene this since there is a contact to support
(+) 84.30 Possible penalty situation (ITA).No penalty for me (player already felt down before the contact).
(+) 93.40 BRA 14 yellow card for reckless
RF
JAPAN vs ENGLAND
DeleteClaudia Umpierrez (URU)
Carlos del Cerro Grande (VAR)
(+) 65.05 Possible penalty situation (JPN).correct play on. Defender touched the ball clearly.
(+) 70.10 The ball touched the referee. The game stopped and restarted with dropped ball
SCOTLAND vs ARGENTINA
Hyang Ok Ri (PRK)
Bastian Dankert (VAR)
(-) 13.20 SCO 10 should receive yellow card for reckless (tackle)
(-) 37.00 SCO 3 should receive yellow card for reckless (tackle)
(-) 57.55 ARG 19 should receive yellow card for reckless (tackle)
(+) 74.45 ARG 19 yellow card for reckless (tackle)
(+) 84.20 SCO 22 yellow card for delaying the restart of play
(+) 84.45 SCO 9 yellow card for reckless (tackle)
(+) 86.00 Correctly penalty was given (ARG) after OFR. Penalty missed but retaken after VAR intervention and yellow card to GK.But It was wrong intervention by VAR because goalkeeper's one leg was touching line
NETHERLANDS vs CANADA
Stéphanie Frappart (FRA)
Felix Zwayer (VAR)
(+) 1.00 Penalty decision for (CAN) changed after VAR intervention.The faul committed just outside of the penalty area.OFR was wrong since there is a factual decision
(+) 21.15 CAN goal correctly disallowed for offside(AR2)
(+) 22.10 NED 6 yellow card for SPA
(+) 37.50 CAN 3 yellow card for reckless (it was shown after good advantage)
(+) 47.35 player accidentally step on hand.Correctly No faul
(-) 71.25 Goal kick was retaken for what? It was correct restart
(+) 79.45 CAN 5 yellow card for illegal use of arm
(-)88.50 Early whistle inside the penalty area for offensive faul. Referee must delay the whistle like ARs delay flag for offside
(+) 89.35 NED 19 yellow card for reckless
CAMEROON vs NEW ZEALAND
Kateryna Monzul (UKR)
Massimiliano Irrati (VAR)
(+) 56.50 Correct goal decision (CMR).No handball
(+) 60.50 Possible penalty situation (CMR) Play on was the correct decision.(No punishable faul)
(+) 67.00 NZL 3 yellow card for holding
(+) 68.35 CMR 21 yellow card for reckless (tackle)
(-) 76.00 Incorrect offside flag. No interfering (AR2)
SWEDEN vs UNITED STATES
Anastasia Pustovoitova (RUS)
Danny Makkelie (VAR)
(-) 2.40 Incorrect goal decision. USA goal has to be disallowed for offside.Var must intervene.Clear interfering with GK
(-) 49.20 Incorrect goal decision (USA).USA goal has to be disallowed for offside.VAR recommended OFR but Referee gave the goal after watch it.interfering with opponent
(+) 58.10 USA 5 yellow card for reckless (it was shown after advantage)
(+) 86.00 SWE 10 yellow card for holding
THAILAND vs CHILE
Anna-Marie Keighley (NZL)
Paolo Valeri (VAR)
(-) 3.35 THA 5 should receive yellow card for reckless (tackle)
(-) 11.10 Possible penalty situation (CHI) for handball.Referee said no penalty but Penalty should have been given.Var has to intervene for this punishable handball
(-) 43.10 CHI 9 should receive yellow card for reckless
(+) 58.50 THA 19 yellow card for reckless(tackle)
(+) 82.10 Correct penalty was given to (CHI) after OFR. THA goalkeeper yellow card for reckless
RF
Frappart
Delete37.50 CAN 3 yellow card for reckless (it was shown after good advantage)
IMO, that's not a "good advantage". Nothing developed or was gained by the advantage. The more advantageous play would have been the free kick for the affected team.
Thank you for your feedback Sheriff. I agree with you. Please avoid the word “good”!! Have a nice day.
DeleteRF
Well, two US assistant referees for Canada in KO stage, with all the referees you have...
ReplyDeleteNigeria with fouls here and there disrupting the flow of the match. No serious foul yet to warrant a yellow card but Yamashita could do well to caution persistent infringement rather than the foul itself
ReplyDeletePossible active offside for 1-0 by Germany.
ReplyDeleteIt's not punishable
DeleteFor me this time it is offside (obstructing keeper's line of vision) and goal should be disallowed. Let'see the decision.
ReplyDeleteWell, she allowed the goal. I disagree.
DeletePenalty surely for germany
DeleteCould be a red but precedence suggest otherwise
DeleteAccording to the laws of the game the first goal should not stand because she was in line of sight but it would be very harsh because she made no attempt for the ball
DeleteFor me offside, because she is in the line of vision. An attempt to play the ball is not required.
DeleteThe law is "preventing an opponent from playing or being able to play the ball by clearly obstructing the opponent’s line of vision or" - the GK was not getting to that ball whether she had a clear view or not so I don't see how there can be an offence.
DeleteGood point. The interpretation, which I know, is that being in the line of vision is sufficient. But indeed the LotG don't support that.
DeleteClear penalty missed and now another OFR.
ReplyDeleteIt can be RC for SFP, but given the trend of this tournament, she will show yellow.
Why is this a penalty? Of course she strikes the German player, but German player goes in with open studs first, and Nigerian player touches ball first. It’s just like that silly penalty after VAR in the opening group stage
ReplyDeleteBecause the light touch with the ball doesn't excuse everything and a strong kick against the knee follows.
DeleteIn the (I think, there were even two) situations in the group stage, the defender at least fully played the ball first. So today, it's even a clearer penalty IMO.
33': VAR check for mistaken identity but Yamashita didn't change her decision. I didn't understand what happened there.
ReplyDeleteShe gave the card for dissent not for the foul I guess
DeleteIndeed it should be that she booked another player for dissent and VAR thought she had booked a wrong player. However, the challenge deserved YC so I think VAR was allowed to have doubts.
DeleteAnother silent check by VAR in 45'+4 for a possible penalty. Play was allowed to continue. The busiest first half ever in this competition for VAR officials.
ReplyDeleteMakes VAR seem irritating not against it but it stops a lot of play
DeleteThe no penalty decision was clearly correct here (but needed to be checked, of course).
DeleteI must say very good work by the VAR team in Paris. Correct intervention after 1-0 as it was not clear whether the goalkeeper’s vision was obstructed. In my view, the referee was correct to validate the goal. Considering the reaction of the goalkeeper, I do not think that the attacker had an impact on the goalkeeper.
DeleteThen, only few minutes later, correct intervention leading to the penalty decision. Probably hard to perceive the contact on the pitch in real speed. And last but not least del Cerro Grande was very concentrated in identifying the mistaken identity.
Overall, I would not blame the Japanese too much.
How was this a clear and obvious mistake?
ReplyDeleteI am in a room with 8 people and we still can’t say for sure whether it was handball, shoulder or breast. The logo on the arm sleeve moves, so I lean towards handball.
I agree. I was under the impression that as handball is down to the referees on field interpretation that VAR will only intervene in situations like this if the ball clearly doesn't hit the hand.
DeleteQuestion I have is why was it only shown in slow motion, and not slowed down even further to frame by frame to get the exact point of contact?
DeleteThe camera angles and lack of slow motion might be the real limitation of VAR.
DeleteIt seemed to depend on the camera angle. From from the front view, it did appear to hit the chest and not the shoulder, so that is probably why VAR intervened.
ReplyDeleteRiem Hussein seems to have the clearest and crispest hand signals, and this gives an air of great confidence. Other than the reversal on her penalty kick, all of her decisions seem correct, so she looks the best of all referees I've seen so far in this tournament.
ReplyDeleteAgree, she has been excellent all match. I just disagree on the penalty reversal
Delete...and now Zwayer and Hussein just ruined their match. Clearest penalty I have seen all World Cup.
Delete...now a push in the back against Kerr...Australia should have had 3 (!!) penalties by now
DeleteHow in the world is that not a PK? Or at the very least an OFR? Are there any merits for that not to be a PK?
ReplyDeleteI agree. PK for me also.
DeleteHussein and her VAR teamteam plain refused to make the hard but correct decisions. Just because it's late in a match and the score is tied. You can't swallow your whistle and ignore something so obvious.
ReplyDeleteVery strange that VAR didn't intervene on either non-PK calls. Inconsistency of application, either in PK encroachment by the goalkeepers or VAR intervention, hurts the credibility of referees.
ReplyDeleteI'd understand if either play was doubtful. But I mean c'mon now, those were so obvious
DeleteI'm starting to watch now, it would be interesting to see the incident you mentioned.
ReplyDeleteNow 91' - 92' a possible penalty but correct no VAR intervention for me.
VAR did a great intervention in the 1st half on the handball, however before stopping time it was a clear penalty missed because of a charge.
ReplyDeleteThis is not a red card for me. Speed of the ball, no control of the ball and the distance to the goal with the keeper coming close.
ReplyDeleteNow RC for DOGSO...difficult
ReplyDelete104': RC for DOGSO by Hussein, holding outside the box.
ReplyDeleteIn my opinion, it was quite unlikely for attacker to reach the ball, but I think that VAR should support because there is a small chance that can't be ignored.
Her VAR backed her unexplainable no PK calls. So they were never going to speak up. They're going to blindly follow Hussein's lead
DeleteRed? From bad to worse. Was the Norwegian player in control of the ball? Was she going to get to the ball?
ReplyDeleteThe problem here is that RC is not 100% wrong, but surely the worst decision. As long as there is a 15% - 20% about the chance to control the ball (and you can't deny that), VAR can't overrule.
DeleteI would have prefer a YC here.
ReplyDeleteOh, no. Didn't look possible for possession after the foul. YC for tactical foul would have been better call IMO.
ReplyDeleteI can understand her dogso decision from her spot live. But on replay it looks pretty clear there was no way she would have gone to that ball before the GK. VAR should have changed it to a yellow 100%.
ReplyDeleteI love Hussein's manner, despite some questionable calls. She is so firm in all her signals, has a very loud, sharp whistle, and deals very firmly with players.
ReplyDeleteGreat optics, poor decisions. Not a great trait
DeleteWhy VAR didn't give the referee the opportunity to rewatch it again? I am sure she would have changed her decision after seeing the replay.
ReplyDeleteHer VAR's are going to go with whatever she decides. Nobody on the Ref team wants to take any sort of responsibility in the outcome of the match.
DeleteYC is preferable but RC no clear error as there was still a small chance of reaching that ball without the foul. Nothing to do for VAR here.
DeleteEven if there was. They showed earlier on the 2 Aussie PK appeals. That they were not going to question Hussein's decisions. They didn't want anything to do with responsibility
DeleteThat verbal warning is nonsense. If the player is already on a caution and she does something else dumb. Don't talk, send her off. Hussein's own actions are making her look impartial.
ReplyDeleteSo far AUS lost a PK that was a bad replay segment from VAR, with a player obscuring, a handball in the penalty area missed around min 50 and a clear leg chop was ruled no PK by VAR. And now this RC that should have been a YC. That the misses by referees and VAR consistently seem to be to AUS disadvantage is surely a coincidence but clearly doesn't look good at all. German referee and VAR-team should not be biased towards NOR over AUS but this game has been a disaster..
ReplyDeleteMany VAR's are doing a bad job this WC. In the Germany match the 1st goal should have been disallowed for offside. Line of vision and interfering with the GK.
ReplyDeleteIn Germany - Nigeria final decision was taken by referee on the pitch, VAR did his job to report the possible offside, then I agree with you it was punishable but goal was allowed...
DeleteSee discussion above: There really seem to be different interpretaions regarding such situations around the world...
DeleteIt starts with the referee! VAR could help indeed afterwards.
DeleteI made this video of 16 whistles. Many FIFA whistles and some very cheap to show how they compare with each other. If you want to see it. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e8P6lzUmQuU
ReplyDeleteQin started her game with a mandatory YC (very blatant reckless use of arm).
ReplyDelete12': Qin assessed a deliberate backpass to keeper who saved by hand and then an indirect free kick was whistled. I'm not so much convinced, it looked like a wrong control of the ball by defender that became a pass to keeper, but there wasn't any intention by defender. I was never convinced by this rule, to be honest, in my opinion it should be whistled only in case of 100% clear situation.
ReplyDeleteI'm surprised nobody brought this up but there was clear red card missed in this incident when a Cameroon player SPAT at an England player and you could see the spit on the arm. Several replays shown. IMO a clear red card.
DeleteAdd to the long list of things that Qin and crew missed.
Delete45'+3 disallowed goal by AR1, player was ONSIDE, VAR corrected the decision.
ReplyDeleteAfter the 2-0 allowed by VAR, Cameroon made something like a protest, they didn't want to resume the game. Now referee and fourth official are busy to convinvce them. Very strange scene.
ReplyDeleteI would sdo: fine, no more additional time and we go to the dressing room! If you don't want to play, than me neither. What a behaviour of Cameroon?!
ReplyDelete50': now another VAR decision against Cameroon with an extremely tight offside disallowing a goal, AR1 had allowed it. Cameroon want to leave the pitch.
ReplyDeleteThis behaviour is really unacceptable and bad for the image of football! I hope FIFA disciplinary will impose fines to Cameroon so badly!
ReplyDeleteSome of the most disgraceful scenes I've seen at a professional tournament. As far as I'm concerned THROW THE BOOK AT THEM. They should be banned from the next world cup!
DeleteI just hope after the game Cameroon will be fined, this behaviour is shocking and unaccaptable...
ReplyDelete#10 from Cameroon pushed from behind with a certain force referee.
ReplyDeleteIf this is not RC... I'm shocked.
Minute 67 reported that a Camerun player intentionally crashed into the referee. You can see it on the offside replay. This is what I heard.
ReplyDeleteDeliberate act, she wanted to hurt referee. I'm shocked this went unpunished, even by VAR.
DeleteYes I saw the replay now and it's deliberate. It's out of frustration because of the late offside goal call and in general the long ''wait and see'' offside calls in the match. Not acceptable.
DeleteViolent conduct can be visited anytime but I doubt it will
DeleteI am not sure, that it's deliberate by seeing the one replay.
DeleteI mean, it is quite possible, but not guaranteed IMO.
You can't decide not to play anytime a decision goes against you. Honestly I don't blame them. CAF should take sole responsibility because they set the precedence here. After they willed into EL Tunis action of refusing to play after a wrong decision went against them even after the CAF President even begged them and now the final is to be replayed. A terrible precedence set
ReplyDeleteNow OFR for a possible penalty to England. NO PENALTY was the final choice. Well in case of penalty I think game could have been definitely stopped, can't imagine reacttion by Cameroon...
ReplyDeleteI agree with play on. Ball was already passed, no penalty for me.
DeleteAgree with Qin’s decision. Common sense here. Very convincing performance by Chinese crew IMO.
DeleteDoes it matter if the ball was passed? I think clear stamp on the foot, good intervention from VAR.
DeleteShe is just afraid of taking decisions against Cameroon now...The reaction of her after the possible red card, just a smile...so weak personality..
I have the feeling we see a sunday league game...
Ball being passed shouldn't mean anything to be honest. We should hide behind the he played the ball or she had passed the ball. If it's a late challenge it should be punished even now defenders can't even hide behind making contact with the ball or playing it the follow through will be taken into account because a lot if terrible challenge gas gone under the radar because the attacker had played the ball. But I support Qin decision not because it's common sense but because the was nothing there really
DeleteWell if she gave a penalty there hell would have broken lose there
ReplyDeleteSo she succumbed to the fear of "what if"?
DeleteCameroon very unlucky in this game, with a controversial indirect free kick decision, two borderline offside situations (1 goal allowed for England, 1 goal disallowed for Cameroon), but this can't be a strong argument for what they did all game long. This is unacceptable behavior, referee's decisions must be accepted, in the specific case regarding the two offsides, it was 100% surely the right choice, so absolutely shocking to see that. #10 should have been sent off for deliberate violent conduct against referee.
ReplyDeleteHowever, I think Liang Qin didn't want to exasperate the situation and one must admire her. Minute 85' and she is still smiling... but for sure this was one of the most difficult and challenging games of the tournament.
Assistant referee 1 with two crucial mistake, but both very difficult decisions, as said...
Video:
ReplyDeletehttps://streamable.com/7pixg
The referee could not know if it was deliberate but VAR should have intervene.
DeleteIndeed, I agree. Referee couldn't know. But VAR... no courage there?
DeleteUnbelievable YC here. Cristal RC. No braveness. Qin’s WC finished here for me.
DeleteIt's not thier protocol to intervene for indirect free kick
DeleteAs said above, the video doesn't prove it for me. It's still possible, that she did not look into the direction, where she was running. And then it's a reflex to put your arms in front before a collision. That would be reckless, but this is not punishable against the referee.
DeleteOf course, it probably was intentional, but probably is not enough for a RC or OFR, I think.
90'+7 this game should end soon. Now a SFP close to benches.
ReplyDeleteAgain, Liang Qin with common sense (YC).
DeleteI would never write such comments, and I always think referee takes decision based on what he / she sees, but in this case it is impossible to apply LotG. Moreover, the final whistle should have occurred before that... no need to have a so long added time.
Correct VAR intervention but Qin refused to have a serious look on the monitor. Clear SFP.
DeleteDisagree. Shame and personality lack just with thks YC.
DeleteTo be honest, it would have been a miracle to see a RC for such a foul in a FIFA tournament, but yeah, I'm not even surprised that Qin only went for a yellow. Dankert did his job, Qin has to take the final decision.
DeleteOn the foul itself, I'm sorry but that's a red card all-day long. If I don't give that on grassroots level, the observer will come with a 7.9 in my report (and is fully entitled to do so!). It's not the first time that fouls potentially causing injuries are not sanctioned as they should be at a FIFA tournament. Sad!
Totaly disagree she would have given red which was the last kick of the game what could possibly go wrong after the final whistle. Common sense would suggest do the right thing and blow the final whistle
DeleteWell now it is too much, the referee is here to protect the players. She should have gave a RC here and at least a YC wihout VAR...
DeleteI‘m sorry, but I disagree. I think most of the referees would have given a RC for SFP. However, Qin did not take the time that was necessary to assess this incident. She had one eye on the monitior, one eye on the pitch, stepping back without having seen a replay in real speed. In my view, that‘s the mistake here.
DeleteHow is that not a red card. Even as an African I am ashamed of this behaviours from Cameroon endangering thier opponents safety and even the referee. Shambolic from Qin for not given a straight red card
ReplyDeleteCan’t believe what I’ve witnessed here.... Only words I want to spend on the Cameroon team this afternoon: disgrace for football
ReplyDeleteI know expext always unexpected scenes. But this tolerance to Cameroon players is just week refereeing without authority. That's not common sense just being afraid of crucial decisions...
ReplyDeleteUnbelievable the last possible SFP not Ar1, 4O or Qin thought initially at least to give a card... And then the protest and gestures while the English player is on the ground...
That's just a poor and weak performance. It was hard to control the players but she didn't even try It...only smiling and small talks...against a team who behave terrible. Sorry for harsh words, but I can't say this was refereeing a game..
That no.7 for Cameroon should have been sent off after all the things she did during that game. What she did during the last minute of the game was unacceptable.
DeleteA small matter here us that everyone here over in Africa feels it's intentionally done against them and I have to explain it's just a coincidence that most decision are going against African teams and it's right decision most of the time by the rules. Nigeria south Africa and Cameroon feel hard done by
ReplyDeleteYes. If anything they should thank the referee for not giving England that penalty. Not giving a red card for violent conduct for the clear push, not giving a red card for SFP for that clear tackle on the shin/foot in the last seconds.
DeleteAlso, after 4 minutes, the reckless use of the arm could be perceived as VC, as the Cameroon player strikes the opponent with force using the elbow. In reality, Cameroon got off lightly and the ref took pity which is exactly what Phil Neville the England manager said and I totally agree with.
DeleteYes. We are talking about the World cup here with a referee who has been doing this for many years. She is not alone at night in a division 6 match. She was afraid to make the right decisions multiple times becuase of one team.
DeleteMiunte 12, IFK given by Qin L.: Cameroon player was spitting against English player. Where was VAR???
ReplyDeleteDidn't look deliberate to be honest. She didn't look at the arm.
DeleteKnew exactly what she was doing. That's a red card!
DeleteCompletely intentional. English player lifts her arm and places it at chest height of the Cameroonian player. Who then proceeds to spit on her.
DeleteI would love if someone could post the links of the incidents.
ReplyDeleteSpitting.
Penalty VAR review
SFP tackle at the end.
Here you are:
Delete12’ Spitting incident
https://streamable.com/
76’ OFR - penalty
https://streamable.com/ohvc3
90+8’ OFR - SFP
https://streamable.com/3zhjq
Retry for the spitting incident (12’)
Deletehttps://streamable.com/0lztj
links for pushing the referee that will be lovely
DeleteReferee Push by Cameroon Player.
Deletehttps://streamable.com/g85tj
I have another version of the spitting incident. IMO clearly should have been a red card.
Deletehttps://streamable.com/gc0pu
She knew the player was in front of her and chose to spit in that direction. Spit makes contact with the player. Should have been a send off.
I've seen less than this end up in VAR review and send off. In the A-League there was one and the player got an 8 match suspension.
Sometimes it is possible to change idea. I wrote the post about "common sense" during the game because I was feeling "too much" it. But now I must ABSOLUTELY correct myself: referee MUST always take the appropriate decision in all situations. I didn't say that YC was OK for that foul, I said that choice by referee in such circumstances was clever. But then now I realized that you can say this maybe at lower and amateur level, where you are not protected in case of attack by players. At World Cup a referee must be always focused and concentrated. We have a missed clear RC for SFP, but for me even more unacceptable is the violent conduct against referee.
ReplyDeleteEnding this game with only two yellow cards is definitely not good, referee was too much passive.
Sorry for my previous comments, I hope you understand my feeling and I must agree with most of you.
This is nothing but a RC. Not even SFP anymore, it is assault. Getting screamed at by one of the opposing team as well and the referee does NOTHING. This is an utterly gutless performance. This isn't some grassroots match where you have to fear for your safety if you apply the LotG. This is simply, and I rarely use such a word, disgraceful from Cameroon and from the referee that she decides to allow it.
ReplyDeleteBTW: It is not the first time Cameroon has shown unsporting behaviour in this tournament: https://ultragooner89.tumblr.com/post/185618641679
ReplyDeletePinnacle FIFA refereeing we see here.
That's the same player as well. No.7 who was the captain. She is a disgrace. I don't know how she didn't get multiple yellow cards in this match against England.
DeleteMarie-Soleil Beaudoin disallowed 1-0 goal scored by France after OFR.
ReplyDeleteVery long review. This can be discussed.
Very difficult decision agree but wrong decision IMO. No fault here, goalkeeper is responsible for the mutual contact. Ball wasn’t in control. Very severe to cancel this goal.
DeleteFor me this is "safe" but not correct refereeing. During the World Cup it has become the practice that if an OFR takes place then the referee will change the decision given on the field of play.
DeleteFor me this is a goal, watching replays I can see no obvious reason to disallow it.
Not sure if it was reversed due to foul on keeper or handling by French player.
ReplyDeleteSorry but why this is a foul??? Correct goal disallowed! VAR want to be a superstar. Attacker didn't do anything wrong in my opinion.
ReplyDeleteYes, normal collision on 50-50 ball so more likely reversed due to handling.
DeleteKick in stomach or hip on French player no where close to ball was possible YC.
ReplyDeleteharsh decision for me, because simply the touch of the goalkeeper wasn‘t really controlling the ball. but if the goal was scored with the arm, it is the right call to disallow it
ReplyDeleteAgain a big mistake by the VAR this World Cup. Irrati missed a handball for Scotland and now he disallowed a valid goal.
ReplyDeleteHe did not disallow the goal (Irrati) it was the referee no one else
DeleteSorry but if you send the referee for nothing you put pressure! And we have seen that women referees dont ignore the men VARs. Why you send the referee for something that's not a foul or even not clear and obvious?
DeleteHey anonymous remember that final word is always up to referee.
DeleteOk than lets send the referees for everything and forget the impact, the minimum interference and clear and obvious!
DeleteHave you forgotten the earlier match today were VAR suggested a penalty and red card and Qin rejected both calls. Please spare me the lecture on putting pressure on the referee. The pressure is disallowing a goal against the host so I don't get the logic. It's her decision and no one else
DeleteQin was never going to give anymore decisions against Cameroon. She was weak willed and allowed herself to be bullied into becoming a referee who trampled on the LOTG. Shame, shame, shame.
Delete#gutless
I am really pleased with her so far. Really active from her and the disallowed goal was the ball being taken off the hand of the goalie. Imo she was n3ver in control but the wordings of the law will disagree
ReplyDeleteIf someone can bring that particular law for the gialuw and when one can challenge the goalkeeper
Was disallowed for hitting the hand of the French player not because the goalkeeper was in control.
DeleteTV commentator said foul on keeper was confirmed by VAR. Interesting.
ReplyDelete35': possible SFP by #3 FRA.
ReplyDeleteReferee wanted to book her but she ran away, not nice to be watched.
Clear SFP...and what a passive way with brazilian attitude against her. Missed YC now and error from throw in...not convinced at all...
DeleteLooked like a red to me. I can sort of understand why no VAR intervention though.
Deletehttps://streamable.com/zttoc
https://streamable.com/zttoc
DeleteHum hum...No VAR here ? IMO red card missed against French player Wendy Renard. Serious foul play...
ReplyDeleteCertainly possible red card with studs up hitting shin of Brazillian player, but because it wasn't hard contact, I would have gone with YC also.
DeleteSorry is a player allowed to play with lipstick (Marta)?
ReplyDeleteWhy wouldn't they be allowed??
DeleteThere are really no words left. That's such a clear case of SFP. Is this a clear pattern we are seeing? Be strict in the group faces but lenient in the playoffs? Seems like this is what they told them.
ReplyDeleteThey were never strict in group stages.. never a straight red card
DeleteOkay then lenient all the time then.
DeleteVictor, I saw your referee whistle video review you linked to yesterday. I had seen it before and think it's great. I have the Fox Sonik Blast and like the sound it makes in the video compared to the others. One problem is that it hurts my ears and players' ears if I blow it at full strength. What do you think of it compared to others and what's your favorite whistle?
DeleteThan you for the comment. I ahve to say my ears also hurt after using the Blast. For the test I was using earplugs for protection but without it no whistle hurt as much. My favourite is still the Valkeen but from the Fox 40 versions the Classic and the Epik impressed me a lot.
DeleteWelcome. I don't like the idea of spending so much on a whistle, but I may have to buy the Valkeen just to see if it lives up to its reputation.
DeleteI think we shoundt bother for straight Red cards for SFP at FIFA tournaments it's quite autrosious. We have missed Sheriff because Liang Qin won't rest... lol
ReplyDeleteTell me please, we send the referee for an OFR while it's not a foul or nearly a foul, and for something that is more to red or even red we dontd send the referee. Can somebody explain this to me?
ReplyDeleteI agree on an overall speech: more and more we see many controversial reviews for alleged fouls, penalties and so on.
DeleteBut clear SFP are very often left unpunished. I know that VAR job is very difficult but believe me, I would prefer all interventions in situations like these and less interventions in controversial incidents, like the disallowed goal for 1-0 today. VAR spirit should be oriented more on obvious things.
I agree with Chefren. Goal should stand without an OFR. The potential red card could should be an OFR.
DeleteI think the VAR reversal is a good time to discuss possible differences in referees of women's football vs. men's football. The type of collision between the Brazilian keeper and the French player is quite common on the men's side but perhaps seen less often on the women's side. This may lead referees in women's football to call smaller fouls. I find myself doing this when I referee women's football. This might just be sexist thinking, but I think there might be something to it.
ReplyDeleteEven in men's Football keepers get a very lenient treatment
DeleteWrong offside flag by AR1, this time I must say quite poor decision there.
ReplyDeleteBut thank God she delayed the flag which was quite a long delayed flag we often complain of
DeleteVAR's redemption.
ReplyDeleteOn french TV they said goal has been stolen!
ReplyDeleteCalled a foul against Brazil in the corner of France's defensive half in which I didn't see any real contact and seemed to miss foul against Brazil just now, as French player extended her arm throwing Brazilian player to the ground, using her arm as a weapon, not a tool.
ReplyDeleteYC for Brazilian player grabbing French player from behind was warranted in 102". I can understand not giving her second yellow, but she should have at least been warned.
ReplyDeleteFifa will be relieved with the victory of France, especially after a debatable goal scored disallowed. I am happy :-)
ReplyDeleteI'm glad France won. First VAR intervention was too controversial today.
ReplyDeleteA lot has been said about Qin officiating in a manner in which she applied a "common sense" approach to quite a few situations in her match. Some of you then retracted your sentiment. But hey that's cool.
ReplyDeleteHowever, I feel that she missed the biggest opportunity to use "common sense". Had she simply gone and done an OFR of England's 2nd goal. I have a strong feeling that a lot of what occurred after that moment would have been prevented. Most of you will say counter by saying that an OFR was not neccesary and I agree. But as we saw with Jarred Gillette in an A League match this past season. He chose to go over to monitor to "sell the call". And I think that is all the Cameroonian players wanted. For the referee herself to go over to the monitor and simply take a look. Had she done this simplest of things. She would have appeased the Cameroon players and would like have prevented the mess that ensued.
She signals to the center circle at 49:20. But play doesn't restart until 52:17. That is almost a whole 3 minutes. It would have taken her less time to trot over to the monitor, take a look, trot back onto the pitch and signal goal.
Delete#sellthecall
I see your point Sheriff. But it is still no excuse for the awful behaviour of the Cameroon players. And the Jarred Gillett one you refer too is a little different as yes he wanted to sell it, but it also involved interpretation of whether the ball had been deliberately played by a defender not the simple and clear interfering with play seen in this womens world cup match.
DeleteI agree. But as referee, player, coach and fan. I am also well aware of the "in the heat of the moment" acts and reactions. So I am not at all surprised by how Cameroon reacted, rightfully or not. They felt hard done by the referee team and the referee team did little to nothing to ease the tension. And not correctly sending off the Cameroonian player doesn't do Cameroon any favors. All it means is that she missed the Reddest of Red Cards.
DeleteAnd yes, I know that the A-League incident was different. But by Gillette going to the monitor. He appeased the defending team. Who was then more open to actually hearing him out. Had Qin done the same today. Cameroon would have also been more receptive to her explanations. In their minds, how could the referee explain the situation if she hadn't actually taken a look at it. They didn't care what the booth said to Qin.