Wednesday, 3 July 2019

2019 FIFA Women's WC - Marie-Soleil Beaudoin in Netherlands - Sweden semifinal (discussion)

Marie-Soleil Beaudoin in Netherlands - Sweden, discussion. 

Match 50 (Décines-Charpieu)
3 July 2019, 21:00 CET
Netherlands - Sweden
Referee: Marie-Soleil Beaudoin (CAN)
Assitant referee 1: Princess Brown (JAM)
Assistant referee 2: Stéphanie-Dale Yee Sing (JAM)
Fourth official: Kateryna Monzul (UKR)
Fifth Official: Maryna Striletska (UKR)
Video Assistant Referee: Massimiliano Irrati (ITA)
Assistant Video Assistant Referee 1:  Mohammed Mohammed (UAE)
Assistant Video Assistant Referee 2: Chantal Boudreau (CAN)

45 comments:

  1. Video of potentially crucial incident (thank to Mikael W.):
    https://streamable.com/hzjng

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The non intervention of VAR yesterday at the Copa America and today. Show that the VAR system is not infallible. Behind the screens are other referee's who are human. Referee's who can't be forced to see something they choose to ignore or to mitigate.

      Delete
    2. Sheriff, do you really think that VARs make mistakes by intent? What do you mean with the last sentence?

      Delete
    3. Nothing is done with malicious intent. But just like referee's on the field choose to overlook or ignore obvious fouls. So can those behind the screen. Why they do it? Only they know.

      Delete
    4. But with VAR it is that much more unacceptable for those behind the screens to make certain mistakes. Yesterday and today are two prime examples.

      Sweden may have very well missed the PK. But for the referee team to deprive them of the opportunity to score is wrong.

      Delete
    5. I am 100% sure they don't ignore or overlook fouls. They justm (don't see) them (regarding referees). Regarding VARs, it is hard to miss something (but not impossible) but it is not hard to interpret a foul wrongly and it is also easy for an AVAR to get so concentrated in the foul itself that he forgets to maintain a look at the live footage (I think that was what we saw today). For them it is also hard to resist from the 'extra extra check' as it is available.

      Delete
    6. Yes, very sad that such a mistake impacted the medal listings.

      Delete
    7. FIFA and IFAB need to get off the "high horse" they sit upon and look to other sports. I'd like for them to look at the sport of Rugby and to how that sport is officiated. During a match the communication between match official is broadcast live and publicly.

      This would remove any and all doubt in regards to VAR communications. No more did VAR intervene. No more did the referee dismiss the VAR attempt to assist him/her. No more what did the referee see or what did VAR see.

      If Rugby can be so transparent/open and still continue to operate just fine. Why can't football?

      Delete
  2. (Continuing the discussion started at 21:13 in previous post by Sheriff Castrilli.)
    Some days ago you said others should "lower" themselves and watch some Coppa America games. OK, I will stay awake till 3:30 at night and do it. But then "lower" yourself and watch a EURO U-21 game! You can find all information about Kulbakov's case at https://law5-theref.blogspot.com/2019/06/2019-uefa-under-21-championship_21.html?m=0 It isn't the same but it is about whistling before attack has ended and potentially a goal being scored, and then the decision proving wrong. BTW, your comment definitely wasn't only about that.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. My comment was certainly meant in that manner. If you misinterpreted it. That's on you bud. I would have loved to have to have been able to watch the UEFA Euro U-21. The more football I am able to watch the better. A lot is learned (good and bad) from simply watching a match. Unfortunately the TV rights were held by a broadcaster whose channel I don't have. That is also the reason I never commented on any posts regarding the UEFA U-21.

      Thank you for the info, which is what I was seeking from the beginning. I check it out and hopefully there is something to learn from it.

      Delete
  3. I thought she was good but to me that's absolutely a missed penalty. I blame VAR.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Definitely a penalty and KMD marked as wrong. Both for referee (who was close) and VAR.

      Delete
    2. Victor: Do you honestly think she did a good job? That surprises me. Both teams did a good match despite the embarrassing effort from the ref. It was truly some of the worst calls I've ever seen, at such a high level. I'm not just thinking of the missed penalty. She did a bad job overall, for both teams.

      Delete
    3. The referee did one of the worst games I have ever seen at this level. A lot of strange free kicks both ways and missing obvious fouls or giving them to the opposition, not mention the strange free kicks given Netherland on Swedish corners, and the non use of VAR when the dutch used uncontrolled tackles in the penalty area. Maybe her decisions did not decide the game,but she did a very bad job in this game. Not worthy a world cup semifinal.

      Delete
  4. Predictions for the last matches:
    ENG-SWE: Kulcsar, Török (both HUN), Rodak (CRO), Pustovoytova (RUS) - Makkelie (NED), Gil (POL), Kurochkina (RUS)
    USA-NED: Jacewicz (AUS), Boudreau (CAN), Amboya (ECU), Umpierrez (URU) - Sanchez (ESP), Beath (AUS), Ratajova (CZE)

    AFC did not have any match in QF and SF, UEFA did not have a SF, therefore I assume, those two confederations get the two last matches.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Would be amazing for my country is your prediction comes true. It would be the second Australian to referee a women's world cup final after Tammy Ogston refereed the final of the 2007 women's world cup. Tammy Ogston also refereed the opening game of that world cup.

      Delete
    2. Makkelie is home already, so he won't get any mach

      Delete
  5. If Umpierrez is chosen to referee the final at this world cup she would be the third WWC referee chosen for both the opening match and the final after:
    2007 WWC opening match and final; Tammy Ogston
    2015 WWC opening match and final; Kateryna Monzul

    ReplyDelete
  6. Herein lies the problem. Those within FIFA justified it's implementation as an "infallible" system. It has been proven otherwise. Is it worth continuing to use it? Does it need to modified? Does the sport gain more than it loses by continuing to use it? All very valid questions at this time.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. It absolutely gains more than it loses, that's not even a question. The number of obvious penalties initially missed by the referee that have then been called after VAR is nearly as high as the number called on the field in the first place.

      I don't think anyone ever called it 'infallible.' You cannot have a refereeing system that is even remotely perfect if you have humans controlling the decision-making, that's a fact.

      Delete
    2. Fair enough.
      Would you leave it as is?
      Or what would you tweak and/or modify?

      Delete
    3. I agree with Player23 - correcting many errors is good, even if some errors remain unchanged or even if some corrections are doubtful.
      Regarding modifications, I think, the VAR protocol and the general priniciples can remain as they are.
      But I see some points for improvement in the application:
      1) Not all clear mistakes are detected. Ideally, all decisions, that are considered wrong by nearly all (say 95%) of the viewers with good refereeing knowledge should be corrected. However, some are missing at the moment, because:
      - VAR does not assess the situation
      - Play is continued too fast
      - the referee is too convinced by his decision
      - the VAR thinks, it is not clear enough
      The first two points could be improved by VAR training and experience. For the third point, VAR should be clear in the communciation, that and why they consider it a clear mistake. And referees should listen to that - they still can keep their decision after an OFR. For the fourth point, the threshold for an intervention maybe has to be slightly lowered
      2) Not enough uniformity regarding "missed incidents": We sometimes get the impression, that "missed incident" is used to justify OFRs in unclear situations, but not consistently applied. There must be a clear guideline, which "missed incidents" should lead to an OFR and which not, e.g. how likely a change of the decision has to be. This should be also communicated to the public, who often are not aware of this aspect.
      3) Too long review processes: Not easy to improve, because correctness is more important than speed. An idea would be, that the referee already moves towards the Review Area, when there is a certain probability that an OFR will be needed. Then the way can be used by the VAR for further analysis and some times is saved. It would not be a big problem, if the referee arrives in the Review Area before the VAR is ready.

      Delete
    4. All very good points Philipp. Thank you for your input.

      I think that if we want thorough and correct reviews and final decisions to be made. We must accept and get used to long stoppages. Yes, it goes against the fluidity of football. But do we want to continue to have missed incidents because reviews or checks are rushed.

      Delete
    5. With regards to the referee review area, we need only look to USA and the MLS. From what I've seen they have RRA's at each end behind the goals as well as halfway which makes it easier for the referee to go to the nearest one. And since most VAR interventions are for penalties it makes sense to have a screen near the penalty area.

      Delete
  7. Missed penalty at 67' should be classroom teaching example for the role of Assistant VAR, who should remain in communication with the referee when VAR is checking a situation. Another example would be the potential penalty in the U21 EURO. Another take home message is that we can recognise a subconscious in our mind that if nobody appeals for sth, cognitively we are less likely to compute if it's a foul, RC etc. - there should be works to help reduce this when working as VAR (à la flash lag effect and assistant referee). As a final remark on that scene, Irrati seems to have lost his form a bit being the unofficial "best VAR in the world", after Manchester City - Tottenham, Japan - Scotland (we will never know what he communicated to Abebe there, in his defence) and now the game last night.

    As I said last night, very forgivable perception mistake for Marie-Soleil Beaudoin - perhaps even she saw that NED defender kicked through her opponent, but it would take amazing confidence in one's perception to whistle the penalty considering the ball passed away as if a well-executed tackle. I would dare say even Çakır, Kuipers or so would not have given this penalty in real time. Canadian reached much in this competition, which in my opinion she deserved - never over complicating her matches, sorting out cards and whistling penalties when needed, and being able to reach players on both an empathetic and authoritative level - she can reflect with great fondness on this championship. If she keeps up this form, she is certainly a name to handle the WWC Final in 2023, and judging how FIFA computes appointments (Umpiérrez was likely decided as Final referee before a ball was kicked), that should be extremely valuable for her.

    Besides my origin, I was sad when United States eliminated England, which meant that Lucila Venegas could not handle the Final. She would have deserved it much more than Umpiérrez, who's behaviour in ITA-NED was actually ridiculous at such a level, but Uruguayan got through her matches without (technical) mistakes, so she will likely take charge of the game on Sunday. 3rd place playoff could go to Venegas, AFC (Jacewicz) or UEFA (Kulcsár, Frappart).

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Mikael, I asked this on the previous conversation page. Why can't Venegas who is from CONCACAF be assigned to a USA match?
      The FIFA Ref Comm regularly assigns UEFA referee's to World Cup matches involving a UEFA team versus a team from another confederation. And it's nobody thinks twice about it.
      Why not extend that courtesy to all referee's from non UEFA confederations?

      Delete
    2. Good question. I don't think the issue is necessary one of confederational neutrality, so much as the nations involved.

      Geopolitical relations between United States and Mexico are quite strained (I know, that eg. United States and Russia and Pustovójtova handled USA-SWE). Of course, we all remember Geiger in MEX-PAN, but it is not a partly unwritten rule that Mexican referees will not officiate United States and vice versa even at a CONCACAF level, let alone in FIFA.

      On the other hand, I would say that Melissa Borjas would have been able to handle USA-NED, but she should be out having been 4th for a Semifinal.

      Again, I believe that Venegas would deserve it move than Umpiérrez, but I find it nearly impossible that it will happen.

      Delete
    3. All very valid points Mikael. Thank you for reply and your input.

      Delete
  8. Watching the semi, Netherlands v Sweden, regarding the penalty incident, there was little or no player reaction from both teams, physical contact is part of the game.

    ReplyDelete
  9. With Netherlands in final and Makkelie out for this reason, I think we will easily know whether FIFA has considered mistake or not what happened yesterday: it will depend on Irrati's possible appointment.
    At moment del Cerro Grande is maybe main candidate for being VAR in final.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Irrati does not deserve an appointment IMO. He's been very inconsistent this WWC, and the crucial mistake from yesterday should disqualify him from the final.
      Plus, he did the Men's WC final in 2018 - it's worrying if FIFA has literally one (or two) VARs they trust.

      Delete
  10. OT, a question about the new LotG:
    In Law 16 it says:
    "The ball is in play when it is kicked and clearly moves"
    "If, when a goal kick is taken, any opponents are inside the penalty area because they did not have time to leave, the referee allows play to continue. If an opponent who is in the penalty area when the goal kick is taken, or enters the penalty area before the ball is in play, touches or challenges for the ball before it is in play, the goal kick is retaken."

    That means (strictly by the wording), if a player still is in the penalty area (because he had no time to leave) and he e.g. directly gets the ball from the goal kick or directly challenges his opponent after the goal kick, the match continues.
    Do you think, that is, what IFAB wants here? Or just a bad wording?
    Especially "touches or challenges for the ball before it is in play" doesn't make much sense IMO.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I asked this same question of David Elleray. His response was, like a free kick, if the attacker intercepts a quick kick, they are entitled to it. If the attacker PREVENTS the kick, then we have another matter.

      This makes sense.

      Delete
    2. OK, thanks, that makes indeed sense. Hopefully, all referees will know that...

      Delete
  11. 68' situation.

    Here is some thinking for all.

    If two players both fairly play a ball that is knee high and kick each other before either touches ball, do we have a foul? No. I've seen this lots.

    In this case, both NED and SWE player are playing ball. Feet clash a few inches ABOVE the ground before EITHER actually touch it. Why does SWE player have more right to ball than NED player?
    Is the contact a clash of feet or a foul?

    I honestly saw a penalty kick until someone made this argument. I don't disagree with the argument.

    Unless there was a communication problem (the comm button was pushed but not activated), I honestly also can't see VAR not communicating with referee that a check is in progress at the stoppage.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I think, here it's a foul and not a clash, because
      a) the SWE player is in possession of the ball
      b) the NED player kicks against her leg, while the SWE player basically is just running

      Delete
    2. Swedish player moves her left leg slightly sidewards - away from the ball - when at the same time the Dutch player makes her tackle. That’s why there was a slight contact, partly caused by the Swedish, which in no way resulted in her falling to the ground. Also watch how her left foot, a fraction too late, swipes outward while the contact was in the opposite direction. That at the very least suggests a voluntary going down.
      So in the end I totally understand Irrati’s decision, because in my book it is not a clear and obvious mistake to not award a penalty.

      https://streamable.com/iyyns

      Delete
    3. Phillip -- Neither player is truly in possession of the ball. Both are challenging for it. Neither has arrived yet (SWE attacker not planted) when there is contact.

      Delete
    4. Hm, I disagree. The SWE player runs into the area with the ball, stops it, then runs back with it. She always is in control of the ball and would just continue having it without the tackle. For me, that is possession.

      The argument by Anonymous is indeed valid. If Beaudoin did see exactly that and communciated it to Irrati, no intervention would surely be correct. If Beaudoin thought, the defender played the ball, there still should be an OFR to let the referee take that decision.

      Delete
  12. 67' Possible penaltyhttps://streamable.com/yrnhf

    ReplyDelete
  13. NETHERLANDS vs SWEDEN
    Marie-Soleil Beaudoin (CAN)
    Massimiliano Irrati (VAR)

    (-) 60.00 SWE 9 should receive yellow card for holding

    (-) 66.09 Possible penalty situation (SWE). Incorrect play on decision. VAR must intervene.

    (+) 84.20 NED 8 yellow card for SPA

    (+) 93.40 SWE 16 yellow card for reckless

    (+) 114.55 NED 10 yellow card for reckless

    RF

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. https://streamable.com/h5tez

      https://streamable.com/b1ket

      https://streamable.com/0wrsi

      https://streamable.com/pby5c

      https://streamable.com/damnr

      Delete
    2. Thanks again for your work RF. I didn't get a chance to say on the last one before it closed but I completely agree with your assessment on the USA v England semi final as well. Especially on the VAR penalty decision, I'm with you.

      Delete

  14. HELLO everyone Have you been going through a lot in your relationship lately as a result of sudden change in your spouse attitude towards you ? If "YES",the end has come to that problem that keeps you awake when you are suppose to be asleep. When people you know to be nice and caring suddenly begins to act in a cruel manner there is need to ask questions such as, what exactly is wrong with my spouse ? Is this problem spiritual ? These and many questions that would cross ones mind at some point. I was in that kind of a confused state at some point in my relationship that I felt the weight of the world was resting on my shoulder, I was abandoned by my hubby when our son was 3 weeks. He left us for no reason. Though I wasn't too sure of what exactly would make him leave us I felt it was something extra ordinary(spiritual) that must have taken place in his memory. I was asked to contact this address to get help,Great Matatan the spell as soon as I did all my problem was sorted out. I can categorically state here that the kind gesture of ( matatanspell@yahoo.com CALL/WHATS-APP:+233 20 926 0493 )has helped me restore my family.

    ReplyDelete
  15. When I found Dr. Aire I was in desperate need of bringing my ex lover back. He left me for another woman. It happened so fast and I had no say in the situation at all. He just dumped me after 4 years with no explanation. I contact Dr.Aire through his website and He told me me what i need to do before he can help me and i did what he told me to, after i provided what he wanted, he cast a love spell to help us get back together. Shortly after he did his spell, my boyfriend started texting me again and felt horrible for what he just put me through. He said that I was the most important person in his life and he knows that now. We moved in together and he was more open to me than before and then he started spending more time with me than before. Ever since Dr. Aire helped me, my partner is very stable, faithful and closer to me than before. I highly recommends Dr. Aire to anyone in need of help. Email: drairehome@gmail.com, Call him or add him on whatsapp via: +2347036740271

    ReplyDelete