26 November 2019, 18:55 CET - Istanbul (Ali Sami Yen Spor Kompleksi)
Galatasaray (TUR) - Club Brugge KV (BEL)
Referee: Ivan Kružliak (SVK)
Assistant Referee 1: Tomaš Somolani (SVK)
Assistant Referee 2: Branislav Hancko (SVK)
Fourth Official: Filip Glova (SVK)
Video Assistant Referee: Massimiliano Irrati (ITA)
Assistant Video Assistant Referee: Stefano Alassio (ITA)
UEFA Referee Observer: Nicola Rizzoli (ITA)
UEFA Delegate: Elena Kobak (RUS)
26 November 2019, 18:55 CET - Moscow (RZhD Arena)
FC Lokomotiv Moskva (RUS) - Bayer 04 Leverkusen (GER)
Referee: Michael Oliver (ENG)
Assistant Referee 1: Stuart Burt (ENG)
Assistant Referee 2: Simon Bennett (ENG)
Fourth Official: David Coote (ENG)
Video Assistant Referee: Christopher Kavanagh (ENG)
Assistant Video Assistant Referee: Lee Betts (ENG)
UEFA Referee Observer: Boško Jovanetić (SRB)
UEFA Delegate: Sviatlana Hrynkevich (BLR)
Group A
26 November 2019, 21:00 CET - Madrid (Estadio Santiago Bernabéu)
Real Madrid CF (ESP) - Paris Saint-Germain FC (FRA)
Referee: Artur Manuel Ribeiro Soares Dias (POR)
Assistant Referee 1: Rui Licínio Barbosa Tavares (POR)
Assistant Referee 2: Paulo Alexandre dos Santos Soares (POR)
Fourth Official: Fábio José Costa Veríssimo (POR)
Video Assistant Referee: Tiago Bruno Lopes Martins (POR)
Assistant Video Assistant Referee: Hugo Filipe Ferreira de Campos Moreira Miguel (POR)
UEFA Referee Observer: Eugen Strigel (GER)
UEFA Delegate: Mike Foster (ENG)
26 November 2019, 21:00 CET - (Stadion Rajko Mitić)
FK Crvena zvezda (SRB) - FC Bayern München (GER)
Referee: Björn Kuipers (NED)
Assistant Referee 1: Sander van Roekel (NED)
Assistant Referee 2: Erwin Zeinstra (NED)
Fourth Official: Dennis Johan Higler (NED)
Video Assistant Referee: Pol van Boekel (NED)
Assistant Video Assistant Referee: Joost van Zuilen (NED)
UEFA Referee Observer: Kaj Østergaard (DEN)
UEFA Delegate: Jack Grundie (NIR)
Group B
26 November 2019, 21:00 CET - London (Tottenham Hotspur Stadium)
Tottenham Hotspur FC (ENG) - Olympiakós FC (GRE)
Referee: Georgi Kabakov (BUL)
Assistant Referee 1: Martin Margaritov (BUL)
Assistant Referee 2: Divan Vŭlkov BUL)
Fourth Official: Nikola Popov (BUL)
Video Assistant Referee: Michael Fabbri (ITA)
Assistant Video Assistant Referee: Davide Massa (ITA)
UEFA Referee Observer: Hugh Dallas (SCO)
UEFA Delegate: Alfred Ludwig (AUT)
Group C
26 November 2019, 21:00 CET - Milan (Stadium Giuseppe Meazza)
Atalanta BC (ITA) - GNK Dinamo (CRO)
Referee: Sergei Karasyov (RUS)
Assistant Referee 1: Igor Demeshko (RUS)
Assistant Referee 2: Maksim Gavrilin (RUS)
Fourth Official: Sergei Ivanov (RUS)
Video Assistant Referee: Bastian Dankert (GER)
Assistant Video Assistant Referee: Vitali Meshkov (RUS)
UEFA Referee Observer: Francesco Bianchi (SUI)
UEFA Delegate: Virgar Hvidbro (FRO)
Group C
26 November 2019, 21:00 CET - Manchester (City of Manchester Stadium)
Manchester City FC (ENG) - FC Shakhtar Donetsk (UKR)
Referee: Slavko Vinčić (SVN)
Assistant Referee 1: Tomaž Klančnik (SVN)
Assistant Referee 2: Andraž Kovačič (SVN)
Fourth Official: Rade Obrenovič (SVN)
Video Assistant Referee: Danny Makkelie (NED)
Assistant Video Assistant Referee: Jure Praprotnik (SVN)
UEFA Referee Observer: Vladimir Medved' (SVK)
UEFA Delegate: José Guilherme Aguiar (POR)
Group D
26 November 2019, 21:00 CET - Turin (Juventus Stadium)
Juventus FC (ITA) - Club Atlético de Madrid (ESP)
Referee: Anthony Taylor (ENG)
Assistant Referee 1: Gary Beswick (ENG)
Assistant Referee 2: Adam Nunn (ENG)
Fourth Official: Craig Pawson (ENG)
Video Assistant Referee: Stuart Attwell (ENG)
Assistant Video Assistant Referee: Paul Tierney (ENG)
UEFA Referee Observer: Haim Jakov (ISR)
UEFA Delegate: Gijs De Jong (NED)
Full appointments soon.
ReplyDeleteSorry for today's delay!
Sonorous matches for Soares Dias and Taylor, however in both cases, one of the teams is alreay qualified for the next round.
ReplyDeleteKarasev with the most important match regarding qualification on Tuesday - good appointment for him.
Not so great matches for Kruzliak (most likely only about EL) and Kuipers (Bayern already qualified and only a small chance for Belgrade).
The time will probably show that Brugge-Galatasaray is not so important match, but one of the possibilities is: PSG win against Real amd Brugge win against Galatasaray - Real will have 7 and Brugge 5 points. In MD6 Brugge-Real will be a direct clash for Chapmios League Round of 16. On the paper, Real is sure there, but again, you never know...
DeleteReasons for Kuipers in Belgrade might be political. In Munich, at the end of the game, goals from Dinamo Zagreb-Atalanta have been repeatedly shown to supporters of Crvena Zvezda before police let them from stadium and we know that Croatian and Serbian political situatiojln is not that great. Therefore, maybe UEFA expects some kind of revenge for what has happened in Munich and with usual hot atmosphere in Belgrade, maybe TOP experienced elite referre is not a bad solution.
I agree on Karasev, great match for him regarding the standings and situation that Atalanta did not lose any match at home. In Manchester I expected elite referee because Shakhtar, Dinamo and Atalanta all have chance to qualifie to Champions league Round of 16. I would say they Vincic has a great trust by UEFA, ot is very strange that he was nkt promoted to elite already.
Karasev in such derby...have some doubts. The RESULT of this match can change everything for 3 teams....
DeleteBoth english refrees appointment in same stage it is so important for english football
ReplyDeleteJure in AVAR with Vincic and Makkelie, it's mean no Skomina for Wednesday match?
ReplyDeleteSkomina had matchday2 and matchday4, so we can expect him in important and sonorous game at matchday6
DeleteUEFA Delegate?
ReplyDeletePerfect appointments for Taylor and artur soarez
ReplyDeleteWhat happened to Felix Zwayer is he injured
ReplyDeleteNo, he had a match today in Germany (Regensburg-Heidenheim).
DeleteHe also was appointed on CL MD4 (Real-Galatsaray), so he is not missing. :)
https://streamable.com/f3dxr
ReplyDeleteRight decision?
Yes double touch, keeper couldn't touch ball again.
Delete100% incorrect decision as the GK never ''kicked'' the ball. It hit his shin guard not his foot. It must be a retake.
DeleteIt was right decision for me I agree with Chefren. But is it dogso?
DeleteIf you read the laws of the game you will see it's absolutely incorrect. The ball must be kicked. That's why it's called a goal kick.
DeleteHere you go:
https://ibb.co/fHq8vMm
https://ibb.co/zHRGF4c
I think, victor has a very good argument here.
DeleteThere was no discussion about the decision in Germany, but maybe there should have been...
A kick is described as anything from the knee and lower.
DeleteI think that regardless to definition in the Laws, something like spirit of the game could or even should be applied in this specific case ... It means: retake.
DeleteThe only other thing here: 1) If that happens in the middle of the field for a free kick, it results in a IFK as well and 2) Read the body language of all the players, they’re expecting the IFK. It’s unfortunate, but I believe the referee made the correct decision here.
DeleteNate: This is a black and white situation. There is no opinion here. Where you got ''A kick is described as anything from the knee and lower'' from, I have absolutely no idea.
DeleteIFAB clearly says at page 185: ''The ball is kicked when a player makes contact with the foot and/or the ankle''
With a trust in our readers, anonymous comments have been allowed again.
ReplyDeletePlease be responsible in using this option.
Graz (Merkur Arena)
ReplyDeleteRZ Pellets Wolfsberger AC (AUT) - Borussia Mönchengladbach (GER) Group J
Referee: Serdar Gözübüyük (NED)
Assistant Referee 1: Charl Schaap (NED)
Assistant Referee 2: Jan de Vries (NED)
Fourth Official: Allard Lindhout (NED)
Source: KNVB.nl
Where us matchday 2 referees champions league
ReplyDeleteFantastic appointment for Tales. - Juventus v Athletico.
ReplyDeleteUEFAs number 1?
LIGUE 1 - MATCHDAY 15
ReplyDeleteFriday (29.11)
Marseille - Brest, 20:45 CET, referee: Johan Hamel (VAR: Amaury Delerue [Cat. 2])
Saturday (30.11)
Strasbourg - Lyon, 17:30 CET, referee: Mikael Lesage (VAR: Karim Abed [Cat. 2])
Reims - Bordeaux, 20:00 CET, referee: Jérôme Brisard [Cat. 2] (VAR: Nicolas Rainville [Cat. 3])
Nîmes - Metz, 20:00 CET, referee: Hakim Ben El Hadj (VAR: Wilfried Bien)
Montpellier - Amiens, 20:00 CET, referee: Jérémie Pignard (VAR: François Letexier [Cat. 1], AVAR: Clément Turpin [Elite cat.])
Lille - Dijon, 20:00 CET, referee: Jeremy Stinat (VAR: Alexandre Castro)
Nice - Angers, 20:00 CET, referee: Antony Gautier (VAR: ?)
Sunday (01.12)
Nantes - Toulouse, 15:00 CET, referee: Florent Batta (VAR: Nicolas Rainville [Cat. 3])
Rennes - Saint-Etienne, 17:00 CET, referee: Eric Wattellier (VAR: Karim Abed [Cat. 2])
Monaco - Paris, 21:00 CET, referee: Benoît Bastien [Elite cat.] (VAR: Clément Turpin [Elite cat.], AVAR: François Letexier [cat. 1])
Gautier's VAR is reported to be Hakim Ben El Hadj, who is due to officiate Nîmes-Metz at the same time. Quite a mistake by the DTA...
Nice - Angers, 20:00 CET, referee: Antony Gautier (VAR: Amaury Delerue)
DeleteÇakır is rested round 3. 4.. forgiven red card in Slowenien Österreich. YC Coquelin is ok València Chelsea London.
ReplyDeleteKarasyov? :)
ReplyDeletehttps://forvo.com/word/%D1%81%D0%B5%D1%80%D0%B3%D0%B5%D0%B9_%D0%BA%D0%B0%D1%80%D0%B0%D1%81%D1%91%D0%B2/
DeleteThe YC issued by Kruzliak in 14' to Lemina (Galatasaray) was a possible RC for SFP. I think that with a bit more intensity it would have been 100% clear RC. Still OK by VAR to support this choice, player very lucky.
ReplyDeleteAnd Lemina was complaining.
DeleteCome on man!
Veery challenging start for Kruzliak...
ReplyDeleteLets just be honest here and say he is having a poor game so far. He needs to let the game flow more.
DeleteCan anybody explain me why Anthony Gautier removed some years ago from Fifa list. He is one of best referees in France right now.
ReplyDelete*?
DeleteIt was for personal reasons. He wanted to be more present for his family.
DeleteIt was his own choice. But I agree with you, he would have deserved a big international career.
DeleteMissed 2nd YC for Galatasaray (SPA).
ReplyDeleteTo be honest, not the best performance by Kruzliak in Instanbul.
ReplyDeleteWhat an incredible game for Ivan Kružliak. Very disappointing performance by him and Massimiliano Irrati if you ask me - Slovakian never took charge of this game and Irrati missed multiple interventions to correct crucial mistakes.
ReplyDeleteI'll try to post some clips when possible.
I did not see a so bad game... Irrati didn't make any mistake in my opinion, and Kruzliak as well hasn't done so bad...
DeleteIf you ask me Kružliak made 5/6 crucial mistakes...
DeleteBut now I'll get shouted down as a hardliner that doesn't understand the reality of football :D
Correct penalty given by Karasev. However, very annoying procedure before the penalty kick was taken. Speaking to the goalkeeper and the players to not cross the lines is simply too much if it takes so long.
ReplyDeleteIn my opinion that was done just appropriately while he was waiting for VAR approval of his penalty decision. Much better than standing and doing nothing.
DeleteVery solid performance by Russian in the first half.
Karasev started with strict criteria in Milano, 2 YC and, in my opinion, soft penalty (although supportable).
ReplyDeleteCorrect no goal for Bayern by VAR because handball.
ReplyDeleteFoul? Really?
ReplyDeleteFor me it was not clear enough for a VAR intervention.
DeleteIndeed, I was thinking that he would review the FK + RC to make it PK + YC, not that.
DeleteThat were exactly my thoughts.
DeleteFor me the right decision at the end should have been: PK and YC
I agree with Soares Dias (POR) and VAR Martins (POR)
ReplyDeleteWrong VAR-intervention in Madrid including a big mess. RC for DOGSO and penalty was changed into direct free-kick in the midfield for a very, very slight push. Not a clear mistake. RC for DOGSO could be discussed as well.
ReplyDeleteShocking VAR management in Madrid. That soft push is never VAR stuff!
ReplyDeleteHowever, in my opinion it was not foul by keeper because it was Icardi going against him to get penalty. Also, in my opinion this should have been read as genuine attempt to play ball, so in case YC not RC.
I can count at least three mistakes there.
Soares Dias initial decision was foul + RC, not a penalty, given his position on the field.
DeleteAgreed, Chefren. If I remember well, not the first bigger mistake by Tiago Lopes Martins as VAR. One can discuss about the penalty. It seemed like a foul to me. But YC for DOGSO would have been correct. VAR intervention was simply wrong.
DeleteVAR correctly got involved but for the wrong reason - the correct decision should have been penalty + YC.
DeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
DeleteThe amazing thing is Soares Dias reaction to the foul in real time was to immediately wave it off as no foul after having a very good view. This is not then a missed incident and imo definitely not a clear and obvious error. Correct outcome should have been penalty.
DeleteImo is penalty and yellow card. I consider penalty because Courtois's entire body is moving in the moment of contact with Icardi.
DeleteAnyway, this is an outragegous mistake by VAR and by Artur Dias. It was a foul that vey soft touch against Marcelo ? Imo it wasn't foul. Anyway, even if was a (supersoft) foul, there is not a not crucial mistake, not enough for VAR intervention
Let me say that Eugen Strigel won't be happy with this decision, I'm very sure. In Germany, this VAR intervention would definitely (!) be considered wrong. Clear perception by the referee, so the VAR may only intervene in clear and obvious errors in perception. Clearly not the case here. Very slight push that I would not consider a foul.
DeleteSorry, but IMO wrong intervention by Tiago Bruno Lopes Martins. Soares Dias had seen the incident and made a gesture to play on (IIRC). It is not a clear and obvious mistake and then intervention was not justified. Furthermore, Soares Dias also made the wrong decision: it was a penalty + YC and not a foul + RC.
ReplyDeleteFully agree.
DeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteKuipers
ReplyDelete7th yellow card for elbow, correct
41st disallowed goal for assist by handball, after VAR (no OFR as it's a factual decision now)
That was farcical. Soares Dias was looking right at the initial incident. How he can say that it was "clearly wrong" not to call that is beyond me. This is the definition of re-refereeing.
ReplyDeleteVAR was supposed to make refereeing better and reduce controversy. The more elite referees opt to use it in this manner, the worse things are going to get for everyone.
And, leaving VAR aside, how the AR can allow him to call that a free kick and award the red card when it was clearly inside the penalty area is also a big mistake.
That was awful.
All right!
ReplyDeleteVerrati was denied a yellow card for protests and the expulsion of the Paris SG coach also for protests with fourth referee Veríssimo (POR)
Sporting truth above all!
Video of the big incident from the Real Madrid v PSG game:
ReplyDeletehttps://streamable.com/7vhdr
I don't think this is the correct decision. Could be big consequences because of it.
Thank you very much Jackson.
DeleteI am not watching the game but that is a simulation by PAR No.9, do you not think?
When you watch the slow motion replay you can have that impression which is why I always revert to real time. In real time it looks like a keeper mistake and a foul.
DeleteThanks a lot, Jackson. Penalty can be discussed, although it does not seem like a clear foul anymore. AR1 with a lack of concentration as he could not help the referee to assess where the foul has taken place. Actually quite clearly inside the penalty area. VAR intervention for the foul in the midfield is, I'm sorry for that expression, ridiculous. Very strange how Soares was convinced to give the free-kick.
DeleteIMO Soares Dias might have just lost his place for the Euro 2020... Shocking decision.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteSorry but Soares Dias as professional VAR himself must understand that the possible foul on Marcelo was not VAR stuff. When such things happen, I'm really in trouble trying to understand such blackouts.
ReplyDeleteHowever, it seems as he indeed had whistled foul outside the area so in that case RC was more reasonable, but then we should add a very clear mistake (it was absolutely inside). In that case VAR had only to inform referee to change FK in PK and RC in YC. This would have been very easy. But this mistake... whistling that previous possible foul.. from Portguese officials and VAR experts... is shocking. Sorry I can't find other words. Rosetti will be very angry.
Artur Dias saw that contact against Marcelo and urged him to get up. He clearly didn't consider that soft touch as foul. Why VAR intervened ? It wasn't a missed contact, the referee saw it very well and didn't consider foul. As I know, it's against protocol. Only the referee can evaluate the intensity of a contact (foul or not foul), VAR interven only when the referee completely missed the contact. AVR don't evaluate the intensity of a contact !
DeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
DeleteDon't agree with you all. Two-handed push, no interest in playing the ball. It's a clear foul and good intervention Tiago Martins.
ReplyDeleteTotally agree!
DeleteClearly this is an unpopular opinion, but I think that is a foul.
Watch the live sequence, RLM player wins the position and only cannot execute the headed pass to his teammate because he is pushed by his opponent.
I guess on further, slow motion, replays it looks like nothing.
For me - correct intervention by Martins.
But I guess you all think I'm (we're) crazy.
This comment has been removed by the author.
DeleteSoares Dias had a zero angle. Veríssimo had a clear view and should have reported it over the micro.
DeleteNever forget : football is a sport of contact..... This is never an obvious mistake !
DeleteMikael, I appreciate your opinions, but here it did not look like a foul in the replays and in real speed.
DeleteI kind of agree with Anonymous here. Maybe this is not VAR stuff but it is for sure not such a „shocking mistake“ that „will cost Soares a place in EURO 2020“.
Delete@Mikael, how can you say Soares Dias had no angle? There was no one obstructing him and he was just shy of perpendicular. He had an angle that might have been even better than the one shown on video because, at field level and normal speed, he had a better chance of assessing the actual level of force in the contact.
DeleteAlso, I don't think this can be stressed enough... whether you think it's a defensible foul call or not, that is NOT the standard for VAR intervention. Once we are at the VAR stage and analyzing an APP, not calling the foul has to be so clearly wrong that nearly any neutral observer would agree it was a mistake. The reaction on this page alone shows the football world does not have consensus that this was a mistake. Hence, it does not rise to the threshold of VAR intervention.
If you or Soares Dias called this alleged foul in real time, that would be perfectly okay. But once you make an affirmative decision to allow play go on, there simply is nothing close to enough evidence to warrant VAR intervention.
usaref +1
DeletePenalty for Bayern??? What?????
ReplyDeleteVery intelligent comment.
Delete@mikael
ReplyDeleteArtur Dias saw that contact against Marcelo and urged him to get up. He clearly didn't consider that soft touch as foul. Why VAR intervened ? It wasn't a missed contact, the referee saw it very well and didn't consider foul. As I know, it's against protocol. Only the referee can evaluate the intensity of a contact (foul or not foul), VAR interven only when the referee completely missed the contact. AVR don't evaluate the intensity of a contact !
VAR is a disaster if you put it in the wrong hands ... for good VAR you need good referees ....
Well I agree with you that it was a bad miss by the referees team on the pitch - between them they had to see that. Especially Fabio Veríssimo had a perfect insight there.
DeleteYou can see that RLM player is about to head the ball freely to his teammate and is prevented doing that by a push; that change in possession results in the latter situation. Even philosophically it is not right that it goes unpunished, no?
Also that is a simulation if you ask me, by PAR No.9.
I see myself more and more often as voicing the opinion of a minority on the blog nowadays, no comment on that, just an observation.
I am writing this as general comment (before having seen the situation):
DeleteEven if you think, that it is a clear mistake: If you recognize, this is the minority opinion, this should be an indication, that it was not a clear and obvious situation in any case and therefore nothing for VAR.
Debatable penalty given by Kuipers. To be discussed whether the defender unnaturally spread his frame as it was a sliding tackle.
ReplyDeleteIMO, terrible decision and procedure. Very bad Soares Dias and VAR. Unbelieveable
ReplyDeleteIt was sliding tackle for sure... Unnbelivble... What VAR doing???
ReplyDeleteApart from that mess, I think Dias is doing well tonight.
ReplyDeleteBut one can’t dissociate his performance and this decision. Pity.
DeleteHe just had a very good spot for a yellow card to Marcelo for a stamp on top of foot.
DeleteWeak Taylot tonight... no clear criteria for fouls.. missed fouls and YC including a potential SFP.
ReplyDeleteI disagree, I feel like he kept the game under control.
DeletePlayers were falling rather easily trying to get free kicks, and Taylor wasn't having none of it, which was generally accepted by the players from what I saw.
He did miss a YC in the potential SFP incident, but I feel that a RC there would have been harsh (accidental, no intensity, even though it was technically a stamp on Ronaldo)
But there were many occasions when there was a foul... It might have been harsh to show a RC--I never said otherwise--, but it was definitely a foul.
DeleteLooking at the video (thanks Jackson) I can add:
ReplyDelete1) Poor management by AR1, he communicates with referee immediately after the foul (you can see the hand close to his mouth), then we could assume he suggested free kick to Soares Dias. He has big responsibility on this original mistake (wrongly outside the box).
2) Soares Dias makes the "stand up" gesture to Marcelo, this is the 100% clear confirmation that VAR was not needed there. Even in case of more blatant foul than the possible one happened.
3) Please watch again this push from behind, with or without that touch, to be honest, my sensation is that Marcelo would have made the same thing (falling down). Absolutely no clear and visible effects.
Enough?
HIs gesture to Marcelo is inconsequential... Look a Taylor tonight... every time he gestures play-on and he missed a foul that was potentially SFP...
DeleteAlso, can't the same be said about the potential penalty? Attacker was going down way before he collided with the goalkeeper.
Thank you for all those who disagree with me doing so pleasantly, just interested to present their own views.
ReplyDeleteI present my view.
From what I learnt in my own matches, Soares Dias is an unlucky position where it is trickier to perceive the foul. He has a zero angle, and is probably focusing on the PAR player and a likely contact at the feet. From his angle it probably looks like quite 'illogical' fall from RLM player - probably player in question also went through his mind, which confirmed his impression that it wasn't a foul.
Fabio Veríssimo has a much better insight there. He can see that RLM player has won the position, is about to head the ball, and the two-handed push impacting his ability to play the ball. This turnover of possession results in the freekick and RC, by the way.
I would present the view it is (objectively) clear that it is a foul, and not not a foul.
Also if you ask me, you either don't have VAR and accept referee's mistakes or apply VAR for all fouls that would result in a penalty, for all fouls before goals or penalties, for all Violent Conducts, for all Serious Foul Plays.
In the end, I think that football community and also blog community here is ready to accept some referee's mistakes and also the existence of VAR. Then we have no clarity and are in the same position as matches without VAR. At least if you ask me, that is an untenable position.
Mikael, if you look at the video and you stop it at the exact moment, you notice that the contact between Marcelo's head and ball happens before the push. So also under this aspect absolutely no effects. Marcelo had already done what he could do there.
Deletehttps://ibb.co/WGRFRP7
Of course, let me specify, this doesn't mean NO FOUL because this foul can be absolutely whistled, but this is another small argument in favor of Soares Dias original decision to play on.
I hardly perceive this as decisive push, sorry.
Having said that, of course the blog is the best place for such discussions and I'm proud we can debate and share our views in our big family.
I would argue the push and the playing of the ball happen simultaneously :)
DeleteI am happy that two admins of the blog can both present their different views supported by evidence - even if they are diametrically opposed.
Surely that is a good thing!
Kuipers excellent. For me he is number 1. CL final or EL final. Maybe both :):) I hope final Euro 2020
ReplyDeleteExcellent? Penalty is for me clear mistake by Kuipers. According to new rule is not punishable handball. I think VAR must intervention.
DeleteLol kuipers can't get the UCL final twice...
ReplyDeleteUCL final Turpin
Uel final makellie
Euro final Cakir,skomina,kuipers,brych or Turpin....
We will see today match for Turpin
DeleteGood decisions by Kruzliak to give 2 red cards after the 1-1 in GAL-BRU. No need at all to destroy that flag, good decision.
ReplyDeleteI agree. All right decisions by Kruzliak. The players are themselves to blame.
DeleteCL final Kuipers, EL Turpin
ReplyDeletei don't think that Kuipers go to referee for final in the Champions League 2020.
DeleteVideo of the 2 (correct) RCs by Kruzliak due to excessive goal celebration in Brugge goal.
ReplyDeletehttps://www.dailymotion.com/video/x7oi3sa
https://streamable.com/7vhdr
ReplyDeleteLook carefully at the discussion between Artur Dias and Marcelo (after the foul of Courtois). From 42:42 to 42:52, those 10 seconds are preety relevant for the fact that Artur Dias confirmed once again to Marcelo it wasn't foul !!! Look at Marcelo's reaction at 42:52 !!!
It is very interesting how history repeat itself. For the third time in last several years, top clash was given to referee that is not belonging into top elite referees. And for the third time controversies (I wont say mistakes, because there have been different oppinions about those controversial decissions). Aytekin in Barca-PSG and Oliver in Real-Juve. Based on their appointments they still did not regained Committee's trust and it past almost three years since Barca-PSG and year and a half since Real-Juve. No matter what will UEFA say if Soares Dias decission was correct or not, I am affraid we won't see him appointed to top clashes for a year or two....
ReplyDeleteWe could have known that based on his first top clash, Germany - Netherlands, in which he made a terrible decision (crucial mistake) as well.
DeleteThink about Gräfe too, who suddenly got Real-Juve, made a mistake and dissapeared.
DeleteCheren how about Taylor performance....
ReplyDeletePossible red card for athletico on foul on Ronaldo...
Check by Stuart attwell no red card given...
For me I also think no red card is a good decision there...
I didn't watch anything of this game, sorry!
DeleteDoes anyone here have a video of the penalty situation in Kuipers game (52' minute)? In my opinion that is never a penalty, especially if we consider the "new" rule: "when a player falls and the hand/arm is between the body and the ground to
ReplyDeletesupport the body, but not extended laterally or vertically away from the body..."
https://streamable.com/0zpt0
DeleteIn my opinion grey area. In this case it is up to referee to decide whether penalty or not. You can whistle it, not a mistake.
Never a penalty. You can see in many RAP sitations that this is not a penalty.
DeleteIndeed, grey area. IMO correct decision
DeleteNever a Penalty. The new LotG are very clear for such situations.
Delete@Chefren I think you are not really familiar with the LotG.
See the Leverkusen clip with the keeper.
Dear Unknown, the most significant LotG changes about handballs are about a goal scored. Regarding the "normal" handball, some words have changed but basically there are always the same criteria of last seasons, and this penalty is surely a supportable decision. Otherwise we should think that also Dutch VAR in Kuipers game were not familiar with LotG. Just write your opinion instead of attacking people. You can think that this penalty is wrong, no doubt, but allow people to have different ideas.
DeletePeople here don't differentiate fall from deliberate blocking intervention. Penalty is the only correct decision in this case. Sad to read so many uneducated comments here..
DeleteThank you for the video and your opinion, Chefren. I still would have prefered no penalty call but I can see your argument about grey area, hard to decide.
Delete@Anonymous I don‘t know if you are referring to me (uneducated...) but I still would not call that situation a deliberate action as the player was sliding and was pretty much just trying not to fall down completely.
@Anonymous - If you ever watched RAP you would know that this is never a penalty.
DeleteWhy is nobody thinking about that it was a just a penalty for PSG without YC cause the foul was just SPA and not DOGSO?
ReplyDeleteI think, SPA and DOGSO are both possible there, because there are indeed good arguments for SPA.
Delete