Tuesday, 25 June 2019

2019 FIFA Women's WC - Referee appointments for Round of 16 (II)

Referee appointments for round of 16 at 2019 FIFA Women's World Cup. 
Match 41 (Reims)
24 June 2019, 18:00 CET
Spain - United States
Referee: Katalin Kulcsár (HUN)
Assistant Referee 1: Katalin Török (HUN)
Assistant Referee 2: Sanja Rođak-Karšić (CRO)
Fourth Official: Anna-Marie Keighley (NZL)
Fifth Official: Sarah Jones (NZL)
Video Assistant Referee: Danny Makkelie (NED)
Assistant Video Assistant Referee 1: Paweil Gil (POL)
Assistant Video Assistant Referee 2: Lucie Ratajova (CZE)

Match 42 (Paris)
24 June 2019, 21:00 CET
Sweden - Canada
Referee: Kate Jacewicz (AUS)
Assistant Referee 1: Kathryn Nesbitt (USA)
Assistant Referee 2: Felisha Mariscal (USA)
Fourth Official: Sandra Braz (POR)
Fifth Official: Lisa Rashid (ENG)
Video Assistant Referee: José María Sánchez Martínez (ESP)
Assistant Video Assistant Referee 1: Paolo Valeri (ITA)
Assistant Video Assistant Referee 2: Manuela Nicolosi (FRA)

Match 43 (Montpellier)
25 June 2019, 18:00 CET
Italy - China PR
Referee: Edina Alves Batista (BRA)
Assistant Referee 1: Neuza Back (BRA)
Assistant Referee 2: Tatiane Sacilotti (BRA)
Fourth Official: Laura Fortunato (ARG)
Fifth Official: Mary Blanco (COL)
Video Assistant Referee: Mauro Vigliano (ARG)
Assistant Video Assistant Referee 1: Tiago Martins (POR)
Assistant Video Assistant Referee 2: Mariana de Almeida (ARG)

Match 44 (Rennes)
25 June 2019, 21:00 CET
Netherlands - Japan
Referee: Melissa Borjas (HON)
Assistant Referee 1: Shirley Perello (HON)
Assistant Referee 2: Chantal Boudreau (CAN)
Fourth Official: Ekaterina Koroleva (USA)
Fifth Official: Sian Massey (ENG)
Video Assistant Referee: Christopher Beath (AUS)
Assistant Video Assistant Referee 1: Clément Turpin (FRA)
Assistant Video Assistant Referee 2: Kylie Cockburn (SCO)

138 comments:

  1. What are your predictions of QF appointments? Is Steinhaus in or out? Will any of the R16 referees also get a QF? I believe Frappart (FRA), Monzul (UKR), Umpiérrez (URU) and Venegas (MEX) for QF.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. For exact predictions, I'll wait until we know the matches, but your 4 names are also on my shortlist. I would add Pustovoytova and Keighley as further candidates.
      In general, the R16 referees are also possible, if someone will manage a match without controversies...
      I believe, Steinhaus is out after no appointment in this round (+ Germany in the QF would also restrict the possibilities).

      Delete
    2. Why would Steinhaus not be appointed? She was by far the most superior ref at this tournament in the one match she had. Is she injured?

      Delete
  2. The potential red card from the France v Brazil game.
    https://streamable.com/zttoc

    ReplyDelete
  3. As a referee I don't usually side with coaches on many things. However I think the comments made by Phil Neville after the match about the behaviour of Cameroon are spot on.
    https://streamable.com/v1rds

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I did not watch the match. That push by Cameroon #10 (00:28 in video) towards the referee - was it punished with YC? I hope it was. Terrible behavior.

      Delete
  4. A very interesting video with Anastasia Pustovoitova, it seems she became a star in Russia following this broadcast.
    English subtitles, so not a problem to watch it. Enjoy!
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Uw7FiyBcwKY

    ReplyDelete
  5. Is it odd for two American ARs to work on the Canada-Sweden match? Canadian and US referees work together constantly, and until Chenard withdrew, they were nominally on her team. I understand neutrality rules are weaker than they used to be, but this seems a bit close for comfort, no?

    ReplyDelete
  6. WOMEN'S WORLD CUP
    Round of 16 / First 4 matches

    GERMANY vs NIGERIA
    Yoshimi Yamashita (JPN)
    Carlos del Cerro Grande (VAR)

    (-) 20.00 After GER scored a goal VAR correctly suggested OFR. Referee stayed with her first decision and gave goal after watched the situation.The game should have started offside (interfering with an opponent)
    (+) 23.15 Possible penalty situation (GER) for reckless. Play continued. VAR correctly recommended OFR. Referee watched and gave penalty. NGA 6 yellow card for reckless
    (+) 31.30 GER 15 yellow card for reckless
    (+) 55.50 GER 9 yellow card for illegal use of arm
    (+) 60.10 NGA 9 yellow card for reckless
    (-) 64.15 GER 19 should receive yellow card for tactical faul
    (-) 89.50 GER 6 should recieve yellow card for reckless(tackle)

    NORWAY vs AUSTRALIA
    Riem Hussein (GER)
    Felix Zwayer (VAR)

    (+) 41.10 Referee gave penalty(NOR) for handball. VAR suggested OFR. Referee watched and changed penalty decision and restart with dropped ball
    (+) 52.41 NOR 17 yellow card for SPA
    (+) 57.30 Possible penalty situation (AUS) for handball. Play on was the correct decision. (natural position -ball towards hand)
    (+) 58.55 AUS goal correctly disallowed for offside (AR1)
    (+) 64.30 Possible penalty situation (AUS) for handball. Play on was the correct decision. (arm close the body)
    (+) 88.21 Possible penalty situation (AUS). Correct play on. Defender played the ball clearly.
    (+) 95.40 NOR 11 yellow card for reckless
    (+) 98.20 Possible DOGSO situation. Play on was the correct decision. Player touched the ball.
    (-) 103.30 AUS 14 red card for DOGSO (holding). Yellow card could have been better decision. No control of the ball.But correctly VAR didn't intervention.
    (+) 105+1 NOR 8 yellow card for holding

    ENGLAND vs CAMEROON
    Liang Qin (CHN)
    Bastian Dankert (VAR)

    (+) 3.10 CMR 4 yellow card for illegal use of elbow
    (+) 11.20 Correct IF in favour of England in the penalty area (pass to GK).They scored..
    (+) 45+3 ENG scored a goal. AR1 raised incorrect offside flag. Goal was given after VAR intervention
    (-) 46.20 CMR 8 should receive yellow card for reckless (step on foot) 4th official must help the referee.
    (+) 47.35 CMR scored goal. AR1 didn't raise offside flag. Goal disallowed for offside after VAR intervention
    (-) 75.15 Possible penalty situation (ENG). Referee didn’t whistle for penalty. Then VAR intervention, referee watched the situation and she didn't give penalty. In my opinion, Penalty should have given (careless manner)
    (-) 84.50 The ball touched the referee and play continued. The game should stop and restart with dropped ball
    (-) 97.00 Possible red card situation. Yellow card was given after OFR. It should be red card for SFP

    FRANCE vs BRAZIL
    Marie-Soleil Beaudoin (CAN)
    Massimiliano Irrati (VAR)

    (-) 09.40 BRA 5 should recieve yellow card for tactical faul
    (-) 22.30 FRA goal disallowed for offensive faul after OFR.Why did they cancell the goal? GK injured because of her team mate.Brazilian player made the contact with her knee!! The only question if GK control the ball or not before French player touched the ball. I don’t see any faul by committed by French player.For me goal should have been given
    (+)34.16 FRA 3 yellow card for reckless
    (-) 37.45 BRA 5 should recieve yellow card for reckless (tackle)
    (+) 45+1 BRA 6 yellow card for unsporting behavior
    62.10 (+)BRA scored goal. AR1 raised offside flag. Goal was given after VAR intervention
    (+) 68.25 Penalty appeal for (FRA). Normal challenge with the ball.
    (+) 69.47 BRA 8 yellow card for tactical faul
    (+) 82.09 BRA 16 yellow card for reckless
    (+) 97.00 BRA goal correctly disallowed for offside (AR1)
    (+) 100.00 BRA 14 yellow card for reckless
    (+) 107.10 Correct goal decision (FRA) Following kick off, player touched the ball two times. After referee gave the correct IF

    RF

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. @Qin, 84.50: I don't think so, because posession did not change there. A dropped ball would be unneccessary and is not required by the LotG.

      Delete
    2. “Thank you for your feedback Philipp S."

      Here I can live without dropped ball decision.But..Imagine Domestic leauge match or another scenerio in this match...Direction of the attack changed.If they score at the end of the attack and team protest after conceded goal.For example white player can protest that she can controll the ball if the ball did not hit the referee..then ?

      The best decision must be dropped ball in both cases if there is a promising attack after the ball hit the referee even the possession of the ball didn’t changed.

      RF

      Delete
    3. Yes, in case of a promising attack a dropped ball is also mandatory. But as there is neither a promising attack nor a change of possession, a dropped ball is just wrong in this situation, I think.

      Delete
  7. 5': penalty to USA, correct decision by referee. No need of VAR.
    What I like in women's football is that they don't act like men, she tried to resist to contact and to go to score... this is the confirmation that you must whistle this penalty because attacker is very honest there.

    ReplyDelete
  8. 9' good ONSIDE by AR1 in an unexpected situation (defender's mistake).

    ReplyDelete
  9. YC for Rapinoe seemed harsh. Her hand did hit the face of the Spanish player, but not in a hard way, and the Spanish player greatly exaggerated the contact, something often seen on the men's side but rarely in this tournament on the women's side.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Good job by Kulcsár (dropped ball - 1', penalty, YC Rapinoe) and VAR (confirming no offside at both penalty and equalizer).

    ReplyDelete
  11. Another clear penalty whistled by Kulcsar without hesitation.
    So far it is a strong performance that could give her another appointment. Hopefully, I'm not spoiling it with this post ;)

    ReplyDelete
  12. I want to make a digression and discuss a play during the men's World Cup Belgium-Brazil game. Jesus had nutmegged a Belgium player when Kompany came in studs up and hit Kompany in the ankle and there was not only no YC but inexplicably no foul and no PK. For me, it was the biggest travesty of the WC. I can't find video of the play, but a photo is at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DVdtpc1RqEY&t=29s.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Correction: Kompany hit Jesus, not himself ; )

      Delete
  13. Yes there was contact by Spanish player on American player's leg, but the American player went down late in an unnatural fashion, which raises suspicion of a dive.

    ReplyDelete
  14. Clear penalty and unnecessary time taken. Hopefully it was all just to sell the decision but such a clear foul.

    ReplyDelete
  15. In replay, I see it was Spanish player's studs hitting knee area of American player, so PK was good call and possible YC also for studs up challenge.

    ReplyDelete
  16. The foul for second penalty was almost the same as for the first one. Harsh but correct penalty. What is most important, fully in line with the first call. Totally unnecessary OFR.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I don't understand at all why there was an OFR?? As soon as I saw the first replay I could see it was a pen. So why on earth would you call for an OFR?? It Doesn't make any sense!

      Delete
  17. Weird VAR intervention. That was at least supportable call not obvious error. And i think correct penalty. Refreshing to see this refereeing team today. Both ARs also doing a good job.

    ReplyDelete
  18. Very strange replacement of ball during PK. Normally, the ball can be anywhere on a line while taking a kick (e.g., a corner kick), but is there a rule as to where on the spot the ball should be during a PK?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The ball is on the spot if it touches any point on the spot. It did and the referee was wrong.

      Delete
    2. new interpretation is that the ball must be fully on the spot and not just touching.

      Delete
    3. Where is this being said ''anonymous''?

      Law 14: ''The ball must be stationary on the penalty mark'' = If it touches the paint it's on the mark. Show me where you got that info please.

      Delete
    4. I'll interpret the lack of response from our friend "anonymous" as that the "new interpretation" he speaks about does not actually exist. So much like you Victor, I am going to stick with what Law 14 currently says.

      Delete
  19. It's really a PK?

    American player seems to fall down quite after the "contact".

    Slow-motion seems like a slight contact, live it doesn't.

    It should have been IFK for dangerous play

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Can never ever be indirect if there was contact. Clearly she got studs on her knee.

      Delete
    2. I know, but I don't see the contact at all. Fall is very unnatural.

      Delete
    3. The contact was very clear on replay. Studs right on the knee.
      Here:
      https://ibb.co/HTdW8Lz
      https://ibb.co/LzHt03C

      Delete
    4. For me it's a correct intervention. This light contact is a never a PK in my eyes. The leg doesn't move after the contact and the player went down after three steps. Too soft for a decisive penalty. In men's football this call would create lot's of problems.

      Delete
  20. France - USA in quarterfinal will be something like a final, the appointment for this game will be maybe even more important than final. We will know which referee has the biggest consideration at moment, let me say that...

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The Ref Comm has the opportunity to do the right thing and assign a "neutral" referee to this match. Umpierrez or Keighley being the two strongest candidates. Yet I have a sick feeling that their going undeserving assign Steinhaus. Not at all based on her recent form but solely on who she is and what she has done in the past.

      Delete
  21. Both penalties are soft, IMO. VAR wouldn't have intervened if the original decision had been the opposite one. Oh, and a message to the Anonymous @ 18:45: not so rarely. Morgan has done it a few times in this game, and the player in the second penalty too. There seems to be contact, but no one can deny that the player also threw herself to the ground in a very obvious way. That's why the OFR took place: difficulty to spot the contact and awful simulation by the attacker.

    ReplyDelete
  22. Probably the strongenst performance of KO stage so far. I think we can expect to see Kulcsár in a fourth game, I could even imagine that she entered to the race for the final now.

    ReplyDelete
  23. Surely the only way that could be a clear and obvious error is if there wasn't any contact? But we could see from the first set of replays before she went over for an OFR that there was contact.

    So I'm trying to imagine what was being said between referee and VAR - you'd think she would ask "was there contact?" as basically that was the only thing that meant it was a penalty. Surprised as normally Makkelie is a good VAR...

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I dont understand Makkelie's dicision, after the 2. replay everybody had seen that it was a clear contact. IMO it was an unnesecerry OFR. This is why VAR is missing in football in my view.

      Delete
    2. If you understand football you won't give such a controversial penalty that sent a team home in the KO. The contact was very soft and the player made three steps before she felt. In men's football nobody would support this kind of penalty's given. Football is a sport of contact.

      Delete
    3. I'm sorry ProRef but you are just fundamentally wrong! That's twice now you've said about men's football. I would give this penalty in any game, male or female. If you don't think studs to knee is a penalty, then nobody here can help you. And sending a team home has got nothing to do with whether you give a penalty or not. The referee in this case on both penalties saw it and gave it which is exactly what you're supposed to do.

      Delete
    4. Studs on knee? Which match did you watch? Defender hit the ball first and then there was a slide contact on the lower part of the leg. The leg didn't move an inch and after three steps she decided to go down. The first PK was a clear step in foot, that's totally different. If you give soft penalties like this I am wondering how many problems you have been into :-) Any way did you read the comments in the media and on TV? People say very controversial. And I respect your opinion, so please respect mine also.

      Delete
    5. I agree with you, ProRef. But you shouldn't be listening what media and incompetent people say about refereeing incidents.
      IMO, Makkelie was correct ti intervene.

      Delete
  24. SFP by #18 SWE but no VAR intervention. Clear RC for me.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yes textbook SFP. Really no doubt on that one but of course would lead to even more media issues if VAR intervened again. Has there been any game so far without the referee going to the monitor?

      Delete
    2. https://streamable.com/2tfvh

      Delete
    3. For UEFA this is a 100% RC. José María Sánchez Martínez should know that. So, evidently, FIFA has different "guidelines".

      Delete
    4. AlKhalifi, could you please tel where you get the clips? Thanks!

      Delete
    5. @victor Huh, media issues... We don't care about them - media don't know anything about refereeing and that is something that annoys me a lot. ;)

      Delete
    6. Anonymous who is we? Obviously they care A LOT about it since they even changed the penalty rule for the playoffs so the GK won't get a yellow for enroachemnt anymore. All these new law changes 2019 are also because of the media to make the game flow more...

      Delete
    7. @victor With WE I meant most of this blog's readers, the refereeing comunity. Of course, IFAB cares a lot but that isn't good at all.

      Delete
    8. "but of course would lead to even more media issues if VAR intervened again."

      God forbid that the mistakes these referee's are exposed. Lets instead act as if nothing happened, nothing to see here. Isn't that what VAR is for? Reducing the number of referee mistakes? Now, if VAR is having to be used in each and every match. Then that tells me that the Ref Comm did a poor job in preparing these women for the World Cup. But that would reflect poorly on Busacca and his minions. And we all know that Busacca isn't exactly known for humility or taking any sort of responsibility. He would much rather be dismissive of any and all criticism. By telling everybody that they don't know what they're talking about or that they don't understand football officiating.

      Delete
  25. Clear yellow not given now for studs on the foot minute 52.

    ReplyDelete
  26. 65' missed penalty for deliberate handball, now OFR.
    Not the best peformance there.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Definitely correct decision after OFR (penalty). VAR made a quick check after PK, but nothing to intervene with.

      Delete
  27. She had left the monitor but very likely she was called again for watchinf further images. Maybe after the first OFR her decision was different? How much VAR can influence referee in such situations?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. IMO if the VAR is 100% convinced for something and the referee doesn't agree, it is worth to hold the referee to that monitor for a longer time. However, interesting situation there, it wasn't like we often see (referee goes 1 m away and goes back after 1 second) - she went nearly to the pith-line, communicated with VAR there for some 5 seconds, then went back and had a very, very quick look before making the final decision...that maybe was different from the one after the first look at the moninor.

      Delete
    2. I suspect that the call back was to confirm that the shot was on target, and thus a caution required. The video showed only a single pass on a wide-angle, she looked at it for a few seconds and then left.

      Delete
  28. This proves that even when you can't leave the line and VAR has an eye on you, you CAN make a save.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. However she got really lucky. Her foot was about 2 cm on the line. Being behind the line is also not allowed. She got really lucky.

      Delete
  29. Now a penalty has been annulled due to a previous offside. Very tight situation, I would say impossible for AR2.

    ReplyDelete
  30. OT: Liverpool released a video of UCL final today and in the video the audio of the players and referee with his VAR team could be head and what I will say is Danny said penalty 100 percent.

    ReplyDelete
  31. It's lovely to here the referee audio. Urge u guys to have a look

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Liverpool YouTube channel: https://youtu.be/yrG3C-R7D5s

      Delete
  32. I might be wrong but that voice seems to be from Skomina himself, not from the VAR. However, very interesting to listen how the referee explains decisions to the players.

    ReplyDelete
  33. ESPUSA

    dropped ball
    https://streamable.com/e9g4f

    penalty #1
    https://streamable.com/qjolk

    penalty incident - push
    https://streamable.com/1zkce

    missed FK and YC for reckless tackle
    https://streamable.com/1iiuv

    penalty #2
    https://streamable.com/tj607

    penalty incident - holding
    https://streamable.com/153a9

    ReplyDelete
  34. I'm okay with both PK's in the USA v Spain match. Because I've said many times before. There are not little fouls and big fouls in the penalty area. Fouls are fouls.

    However, if that 1st PK today is indeed a PK. Then why was it not a PK yesterday? Both fouls are exactly the same (foot stomps), yet there are two different decisions? Today's PK call makes Qin's no PK decision yesterday look even worse.

    ReplyDelete
  35. I can only presume that Qin didn't want to anger Cameroon any further. Same thing with the yellow card that was supposed to be red. Because I feel like both incidents are PKs.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. A referee who has reached FIFA level should have more backbone, courage, personality and should never allow herself/himself to be bullied by a team or player into trampling the LOTG. As others have said previously. She was at a FIFA Women's World Cup match. She was not out there all alone on the pitch, fearful that she would be assaulted with nobody to come to her aid.

      Delete
    2. I'm not defending her... just trying to explain what happened. Because that last VAR check for the red card tackle seemed rushed...

      Delete
  36. Media activity on Refereeing and VAR at the FIFA Women’s World Cup France will take place on June 26: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yuhIVx8RoiI

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. They certainly have a lot of explaining to do. But I'm not expecting much of anything from any one of them. After all, in their delusional view of things. Only they know everything about football officiating. And the rest of us are uneducated and clueless.

      Delete
  37. AFC CL
    https://twitter.com/vkv64091614/status/1143484329001009152?s=21

    The goal was disallowed for diving.For me,Very harsh decision.

    ReplyDelete
  38. Another clear SFP (my opinion) in the World Cup not punished of course. The GK completely takes out the attacker before the goal with a straight leg above the ankle with full force and a straight leg.

    ReplyDelete
  39. 1-0 by Italy: good and expected advantage by Alves Batista: the attacker passed ball to teammate and seh was fouled by keeper. However, the challenge was very reckless and I would have issued at least YC afterwards for this reason. Dangerous collision, one could say even RCF for SFP, but missing YC is a serious mistake there.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Absolutely a red card. Unbelievable.

      https://ibb.co/gv1TZCv
      https://ibb.co/B39b8CP

      Delete
    2. It's certainly a leg breaker type of tackle. Italian player was lucky that her leg wasn't planted at the moment of contact. The fact that the goal was scored doesn't excuse anything.

      Delete
    3. SFP for sure. Being a goalkeeper doesn't give you the right to make a tackle like that.
      https://streamable.com/lh6fn
      I agree with Victor, the last replay shows its absolutely a red card.
      None of us know what its actually like there but it feels like they just aren't prepared to make the unpopular but correct decisions.

      Delete
  40. Now a missed kick on head (clear contact), penalty to China should be whistled after OFR, it is evident.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. With my surprise, play was allwed to continue. The contact existed, but maybe it was assessed as dangerous play by Chinese?

      Delete
    2. Argumrn being attacker bent over

      Delete
    3. not a crystal cleal penalty kick in my eyes, because the attacker is also very low with her head. but an OFR should have been recommended.

      Delete
    4. The Chinese players head is at a reasonable height and has a right to make a play on the ball. IMO the Italian's player foot is at a dangerous height. And it's her foot that makes contact with the Chinese players head.

      Delete
  41. As tackles are flying in in this match can't believe no card given

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Welcome to the new reality of "modern" FIFA Football

      Delete
  42. 54' another silent check for a possible penalty, play was allowed to continue, no replay so far

    ReplyDelete
  43. 90'+4 a very mandatory YC for reckless challenge missed.
    I didn't like Edina Alves Batista today. She didn't give impression to be in the game. Only whistling some fouls, missing all cautions (major mistake is when Italy scored 1-0, missed card to keeper) and rely too much on VAR in case of penalty area incidents.
    Sorry if I'm too harsh but this is easy officiating, at this level one requires more.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. One of the better referees I have seen in the knockout stage. Her presence was felt but only with talks. She should give cards

      Delete
    2. Not harsh at all Chefren. You simply speak the truth based on what you observed.

      Delete
    3. And for her to not even whistle a foul is completely unacceptable. I'd at the very least expect that from her. Because expecting more from her is an illusion

      Delete
  44. Please excuse my language, but this is horseshit! I refuse to believe that these women (referee's) and these men (VAR's) are this bad. That tackle by the Chinese GK is a leg breaker. The Italian player was fortunate this time. But her being lucky doesn't excuse the referee's unbelievable decision to show no card. I know that we don't officiate based on "what ifs". But what if the Italian player had suffered a fracture? The fact that the Chinese GK got away with no card at all after a tackle like that. Is plain and simply criminal!

    I am fully convinced that external pressures are forcing these women to be so lenient and forgiving. Under-punishing most incidents in a manner that trample the LOTG and putting the players physical well being in danger.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I am very sure that there are these external pressures. But the real question is "Why are they made?".

      Delete
    2. What I don't understand is the desire and obsession to force these women to play in such a physical manner. We already see that in men's football. And TBH, it's not that pleasant to watch. The women's doesn't need it to make itself more attractive to viewers. I personally like women's football because it's more played in a more pure and honest manner.

      Delete
  45. 88': very crucial penalty whistled by Melissa Borjas for deliberate handball. I think the call can be supported but surely not a 100% clear situation, VAR should confirm. YC should be issued because it was shot on goal.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Honestly...players need to start cutting their arms off to remain playing this game. This interpretation of a handball damages football. It CAN be supported according to current INTERPRETATION of FIFA, but it is just absurd. Ruins the game.

      Delete
    2. Quite strange to give the yellow card after she communicates with VAR and not before.

      Delete
    3. but in fact, it was a shot on goal that could well have meant a goal and that was block by the arm of the defender. this kind of defense is also not in the sense of football.

      Delete
    4. Cassius what you are describing has nothing to do with if a handball should be called or not. What you describe are criterias for a DOGSO.

      Delete
    5. With all respect, but IMO this action can never result in a penalty decision. JPN player clearly pulls her arm back

      Delete
  46. Well spotted penalty kick here.

    ReplyDelete
  47. Sorry but this is not a PK. Arm was in natural position and no movement towards the ball. Shot from close distance and the arm moved backwards to avoid. These decisions destroys football.

    ReplyDelete
  48. Debatable decision. Not totally wrong, therefore no VAR intervention

    ReplyDelete
  49. As you can read here, this is at least controversial because there are always the same discussions regarding handballs. I fully understand the point of people who think that this is not punishable, but we can be sure this is accepted by FIFA and UEFA as well. Ball hits arm, even more in case of shot on goal, this is seen like a save. Defender in most of situations it not 100% guilty but he has to pay for the very strict interpretations of this law.
    Having said that, I guess in the contrary scenario (no whistle by referee) play would have been allowed to continue. In my opinion arm is not still so open to assess it as very clear.
    About the delayed YC, I have the feeling this is an instruction by Busacca / Collina, to avoid to show card before VAR verdict, because then it must be annulled if VAR changes the decision of referee.
    However, this is against how it should be, with referee whistling penalty and then booking player. If they wait, they give the impression that VAR inform about the disciplinary measure to be issued and that's not good.
    On a general speech, what I can point out from FIFA tournaments, including Russian WC one year ago and now WWC, is that they are not interested in applying strictly LotG, I don't like this trend and I will never like it.

    ReplyDelete
  50. QF predictios
    NOR-ENG: Monzul, Striletska, Ardasheva (all UKR), Kulcsar (HUN) - Irrati (ITA), Beath (AUS), Jones (NZL)
    FRA-USA: Yamashita, Teshirogi, Bozono (all JPN), Mukansanga (RWA) - del Cerro Grande (ESP), Martins (POR), Chavez (MEX)
    ITA-NED: Pustovoytova, Kurochkina (both RUS), Iugulescu (ROU), Carvajal (CHI) - Sanchez (ESP), Mohammed (UAE), Toloza (CHI)
    GER-SWE: Frappart, Nicolosi (both FRA), O'Neill (IRL), Keighley (NZL) - Turpin (FRA), Fischer (CAN), Jones (NZL)

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. My predictions:
      NOR-ENG Adamkova (CZE)
      FRA-USA Umpierrez (URU)
      ITA-NED Venegas (MEX)
      GER-SWE Monzul (UKR)

      Delete
    2. NOR-ENG: Staubli (SUI)
      FRA-USA: Steinhaus (GER)
      ITA-NED: Keighley (NZL)
      GER-SWE: Umpierrez (URU)

      Delete
  51. Norway - England:
    Esther Staubli (Switzerland), VAR: Danny Makkelie (Netherlands)

    France - United States of America:
    Bibiana Steinhaus (Germany), VAR: Felix Zwayer (Germany)

    Italy - Netherlands:
    Claudia Umpierrez (Uruguay), VAR: Mauro Vigliano (Argentina)

    Germany - Sweden:
    Lucila Venegas (Mexico), VAR: Massimiliano Irrati (Italy)



    ------------------------



    Semifinals:
    If France is not in SF: Frappart, Keighley
    If France is in SF: Kulcsar, Frappart


    3rd place:
    Hussein


    Final:
    Umpierrez

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Sorry:
      Semifinals:
      If France is not in SF: Frappart, Keighley
      If France is in SF: Kulcsar, Keighley

      Delete
  52. Man that's a tough call. But by current interpretation and by how those have been called all tournament long. It's correct. But man, what is that Japanese player supposed to do. This new interpretation was supposed to assist with players not having to use awkward stances with their arms. But it seems that the only way defenders can defend in their penalty area is if they either run around with their arms behind their backs or glued to their sides. Try moving and running with those type of postures. Not easy at all not is it natural.

    End this madness in regards to handling. And just penalize any and all handling period. If it touches the arm/hand, it's handling. Eliminate distance, speed of the ball, intent and anything where the referee has to interpret anything.

    Lastly, if this was a PK. Then why wasn't also whistled in favor of Australia versus Norway? No consistency at all. And that, is frustrating!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I don’t agree with you often, but am 100% with you on this comment...

      Delete
  53. The broadcaster of the FIFA Women's world cup in my country has just posted this:
    "FIFA has backed Qin Liang after she rejected VAR advice on an England penalty claim, and a potential red card challenge committed by Cameroon."
    "Referee Qin Liang twice overruled VAR advice to prevent Cameroon abandoning the match"

    IMO This is a clear statement by FIFA that they do not care about protecting player safety.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. It was bad enough that a referee allowed herself to be bullied into completely disregarding the LOTG. But for FIFA to publicly admit that it too has been bullied by a team is unfathomable. What little credibility this organization has is now completely gone.

      Delete
    2. What they claim FIFA has said means nothing unless you hear it from FIFA themselves. Don't believe anything you hear/read.

      Delete
  54. https://deadspin.com/the-womens-world-cup-has-a-refereeing-problem-1835838761


    "FIFA set its referees up to fail at the Women’s World Cup, all in the name of technology no one fully understands and rules no one particularly likes."

    ReplyDelete
  55. Source: Arbitro Internacional

    Norway vs England
    CR: Lucila Venegas (MEX)
    AR1: Mayte Chavez (MEX)
    AR2: Enedina Caudillo (MEX)
    4th: Katalin Kulcsar (HUN)
    5th: Sanja Rodak (CRO)
    VAR: Massimiliano Irrati (ITA)
    AVAR: Paolo Valeri (ITA)
    AVAR: Manuela Nicolosi (FRA)

    France vs USA
    CR: Kateryna Monzul (UKR)
    AR1: Maryna Striletska (UKR)
    AR2: Oleksandra Ardasheva (UKR)
    4th: Kate Jacewicz (AUS)
    5th: Kim Kyoung Min (KOR)

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. For those of you who made predictions. Are any of you surprised by these designations? Or are you okay with them?

      I personally am okay with them. As these women and their crews have earned it on the pitch with their performances.

      Delete
    2. I agree that these two crews have performed solidly. I am not surprised as I was expecting FIFA to pick referees who have had 2 matches already. A quarter final is the 5th match for the teams, it simply would not make sense to appoint referees with only one group stage match. Therefore I don't expect to see Steinhaus, Fortunato and Staubli again. But who knows, FIFA sometimes works in mysterious ways... ;-)

      Delete
    3. I actually predicted both refereeing teams, just for the other two games.
      I am almost sure Umpierrez will get one of the other games and one other Uefa crew should be appointed. I guessed Adamkova, but it can be actually Frappart so she gets for sure one more game regardless the progress of France.

      Delete
    4. Just out of curiosity. Why do you say that a UEFA Crew "should" be appointed? In regards to Frappart. Is it because she's from the host nation?

      Delete
    5. I think if Uefa cares about the distribution of the appointments we should see one more Uefa crew before the final four games.
      So far only Hussein, Kulcsar and now Monzul were appointed in the KO stage. I believe Frappart should get appointment as she has one of the most experience in Europe and she had so far good performances in the tournament.

      Delete
  56. Quarterfinals

    Norway - England

    Referee: Lucila Venegas (MEX)
    Assistant Referee 1: Mayte Chavez (MEX)
    Assistant Referee 2: Enedina Caudillo (MEX)
    Fourth Official: Katalin Kulcsar (HUN)
    Fifth Officil: Sanja Rodak (CRO)
    Video Assistant Referee: Massimiliano Irrati (ITA)
    Assistant Video Assistant Referee 1: Paolo Valeri (ITA)
    Assistant Video Assistant Referee 2:Manuela Nicolosi (FRA)

    France - United States

    Referee: Kateryna Monzul (UKR)
    Assistant Referee 1: Maryna Striletska (UKR)
    Assistant Referee 2: Oleksandra Ardasheva (URK)
    Fourth Official: Kate Jacewicz (AUS)
    Fifth Official: Kim Kyoung Min (KOR)
    Video Assistant Referee:
    Assistant Video Assistant Referee 1:
    Assistant Video Assistant Referee 2:

    ReplyDelete
  57. WOMEN'S WORLD CUP
    Round of 16 / Second 4 Matches

    SPAIN vs USA
    Katalin Kulcsar (HUN)
    Danny Makkelie (VAR)

    (+) 00.13 The ball touched the referee. The game correctly stopped and restarted with dropped ball
    (+) 4.30 Correct penalty decision.Step on foot (ABD)
    (+) 36.10 USA 15 yellow card for illegal use of arm
    (-) 45.53 Possible penalty situation (USA) for holding/pushing.Penalty should have been whistle.No VAR intervention correct since referee has clear angle of view/thinks not enough intensity
    (-) 55.20 ESP 4 should recieve yellow card for reckless (tackle)
    (+) 70.07 Referee gave penalty correctly (USA).Wrong intervention by VAR.After OFR Referee stayed again with her first decision. There is a clear contact so VAR shouldn’t intervene
    (-) 79.30 AR2 missed offside (interfering with an opponent)
    (+) 84.10 ESP 4 yellow card for reckless (tackle)
    (-) 86.05 AR1 incorrect offside flag
    (-) 88.40 Possible penalty situation (USA) for holding.Penalty should have been given.This time i would prefer VAR intervention since there is a clear proof holding from her neck

    SWEDEN vs CANADA
    Kate Jacewicz (AUS)
    Jose Maria Sanchez Martinez (VAR)

    (+) 44.30 SWE 18 yellow card for reckless (step on foot)
    (+) 65.00 Penalty was given to (CAN) after OFR. Good intervention by VAR. SWE 9 yellow card for handball (shot at goal)
    (+) (80.15) Referee gave penalty in favour of SWE. Then penalty cancelled and Offside was given after VAR intervention
    (+) 84.30 CAN 3 yellow card for SPA
    (-) 88.05 Delayed offside flag.Should have been raised earlier
    (-) 90+4 USA 8 should recieve yellow card for reckless tackle

    ITALY vs CHINA
    Edina Alves Batista(BRA)
    Mauro Vigliano (VAR)

    (+) 9.20 ITA goal correctly disallowed for offside (AR1)
    (-) 14.00 Correct goal decision (ITA). But two seconds before goal scored,GK committed a faul (SFP) . VAR should intervene and GK should be sent off
    (-) 24.30 Possible penalty situation (CHN).Defender played with the ball but at the same time clear contact opponent head.Should be penalty kick and yellow card.Ofcourse VAR intervention was needed
    (-) 28.30 CHN 6 should recieve yellow card for reckless
    (+) 54.07 Possible penalty situation (ITA) Correct play on. (light contact).No VAR intervention correct

    NETHERLANDS vs JAPAN
    Melissa Borjas (HON)
    Christopher Beath (VAR)

    (-) 66.18 JPN 17 should recieve yellow card for reckless tackle
    (+) 87.15 Correct penalty decision(NED) for handball. JPN 3 yellow card for shot at goal

    RF

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Good job RF.
      Thanks for your work.

      Delete
    2. “Thank you Jackson...”
      RF

      Delete
  58. Sorry, but there are too many comments here like: penalty should have been given or VAR should intervene/not intervene. It's so obvious that these comments come from people that really don't know how it is to be a referee at top level. Only thinking with the law book in hands or thinking black and white. Almost everybody knows it better here. Well if you think so, please show your skills. Put some clips here of your own matches and let's start a discussion.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. If you show me your credentials and/or achievements first, that make you better than the rest of us. Then I'll consider your request for my match clips.

      Delete
    2. Not necessary because I don't say all these bullocks.

      Delete
    3. Yeah, let's have another one mate

      Delete
  59. Like the Semi Final round, you can expect to watch Women's World Cup Final Round live online from anywhere in the world, and without restrictions.

    ReplyDelete

Thank you for writing a comment on our blog!