Tuesday, 29 June 2021

UEFA EURO 2020 Match 44: England - Germany (discussion)

Danny Makkelie to officiate England - Germany, Round of 16 game at EURO 2020. Let's comment his performance here. 


Round of 16
London, 29 June 2021 18:00 CET
ENGLAND - GERMANY
Referee: Danny Makkelie (NED)
Assistant Referee 1: Hessel Steegstra (NED)
Assistant Referee 2: Jan de Vries (NED)
Fourth Official: Srdjan Jovanović (SRB)
Fifth Official: Uroš Stojković (SRB)
Video Assistant Referee: Pol van Boekel (NED)
Assistant Video Assistant Referee 1: Kevin Blom (NED)
Assistant Video Assistant Referee 2: Íñigo Prieto López de Ceraín (ESP)
Assistant Video Assistant Referee 3:Alejandro José Hernández Hernández (ESP)
UEFA Referee Observer: Roberto Rosetti (ITA)
UEFA Delegate: Myrsini Psarropoulou (GRE)

138 comments:

  1. Why is van Boekel the VAR and Blom AVAR tonight. In the UCL Blom was always the main var....

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. After TUR-ITA handball incident Blom has not got any VAR appointment in EURO 2020.

      Delete
  2. Because taking a "wrong" decision in the opinion of a few specific people in the comission (while the whole football world appreciates the same decision) means you get demoted to AVAR.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The whole football appreciated that decision? Personally, I discussed the incident with my family and with the referees of my federation and we all saw a clear mistake. Listen to commentators on TV... they were all confused by that decision...

      Delete
    2. Are you serious? That was a clear handball. Even commentators on TV were confused

      Delete
    3. According to the new wording of the LOTG a clearly wrong evaluation by signore Rosetti. Shame that as an Italian he chose to break under the pressure of his compatriots instead of implementing what major part of football community wants.

      Delete
  3. Before the start of this game, I would like to remind our site's users that anonymous comments is a privilege, not a divine right, and one that can be revoked if we feel that they are contributing negatively to Law 5.

    Let's aim for contributions that exclusively add value to the discussion during the games!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. With Makkelie and Orsato today, I want to thank you for your work so far and sadly wish you good luck for the coming hours as well

      Delete
    2. If you're referring to my anonymous comment last night commending Cakir's choice of uniform, I both understand my comment's lack of value but also feel redeemed by Makkelie's choosing the same uniform tonight. ��

      Delete
  4. Come on Desmond.....have a great job !!

    ReplyDelete
  5. First YC, but for me not even a foul

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I agree. Attacker puts his leg in the way of defender. We had some penalty situation the days before with similar situations resulting in "no penalty decision"

      Delete
    2. He just about had the German players top off, a clear foul

      Delete
  6. Makkelie with a clear explanation of YC decision: two defenders. No DOGSO, but SPA. Reasonable choice. No need for understanding more.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Totally agree, YC is enough and supportable

      Delete
    2. His management of players retreating 10 yards was baffling. He used the foam for the defensive wall but THREE players were nearer, one who eventually blocked the shot! Poor refereeing!!

      Delete
  7. If it's a foul YC correct. But attacker enlarged his leg towards the defender, im glad Germany didn't make a goal from that freekick.

    ReplyDelete
  8. That FK to GER is ‘clever’ play - he surely deliberately puts his leg right across the defender and actually impedes/trips him? Very hard to see at normal speed.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Not see the arm pull first?

    ReplyDelete
  10. When to give a YC for tactical foul like Rudiger's just now and when not to as a referee?

    ReplyDelete
  11. FK + YC is a sensible choice and the expected outcome here, but I disagree with the FK here. Attacker puts his leg there on purpose.

    ReplyDelete
  12. I am not a fan to see a referee put YC and RC together in the same pocket. Many referees did this in the past, but it still looks strange for me

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I'd agree. When he pulled out his wallet, you could only see the red card!

      Delete
  13. Card for the foul or protest? I didn't understand.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I think for the foul but after much time because of protesting fans.

      Delete
    2. I think, SPA. The dissent wasn't that much.

      Delete
    3. Stopping a promising attack.

      Delete
    4. Thanks, so one level below DOGSO, now I understand

      Delete
  14. In his first match Ita-Tur Makkeile was looking strong and self confident but after Rosetti's comments tonight he is a little bit inconsistence and shaky.

    ReplyDelete
  15. Imagine Mario Diks: sent home by Makkelie and new AR gets a VAR correction and the other makes an off-side signalation after a CK

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. What does this comment has to do with this match? Both situations were on MD1. It seems you just want to make this point again. One word, pathetic!

      Delete
  16. Drew Smith - please just grow up, you are embarrassing yourself and this blog.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I had literally 0 intent on offending anyone, just made a valid point

      Delete
  17. Drew, not all England fans are like that and wanted Scotland to do well also.
    Pity that football is not as respectful as other sports

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I accept that. Fair enough, I won’t speak of it anymore

      Delete
  18. Having seen Makkelie in many games, I often notice this way of doing it, waiting some moments before whistling or taking decisions like cards, having the maximum concentration on what he is doing. A very quick "rewind" of what had happened in his mind, in a few instants.

    ReplyDelete
  19. This was a textbook SFP IMO.

    ReplyDelete
  20. For me that was more of a RC than the one wales received

    ReplyDelete
  21. I am quite sure that Hategan doesnt agree with a YC in this situation :)

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Haha, Hategan was absolutely correct in both RC he has shown in the group stage

      Delete
  22. I'm sorry but that's a RC for SFP imo.

    ReplyDelete
  23. And again we have Blom at VAR!

    ReplyDelete
  24. Or waiting for input (var). Second yellow card took so long that it looks like that.

    ReplyDelete
  25. Good communication with the AR on the defender putting back the ball in Kane's feet.

    ReplyDelete
  26. How is that not a Red card by far worse than the one Hategan issued, Danny wasn’t brave there!!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Its cause Hategan is strict whereas Danny gives you the "UEFA-approach"

      Delete
  27. It's the same 8 or 8.5/10 that Hategan went red on. Both decisions are justifiable and the VAR probably right to intervene. Let's face it, the game "wants" this to stay 11v11 if at all possible. I don't think Danny will get knocked too much.

    ReplyDelete
  28. https://youtu.be/eYkscy3-h10?t=397

    I was instantly reminded of this situation :)

    For the last ten-ish years I'd say, 45' is not SFP anymore. We can argue whether it should be though...

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Point of contact was higher up the leg today though, I think...

      Delete
    2. In that video, point of contact is mostly on foot. On this incident much higher than there.

      Delete
    3. Yeah, I should have explained better (situation from Greece is even much clearer than this IMO) - many detailed explanations from Clattenburg before stating that not all boxes are ticked for SFP!

      The more textbook decision being RC, but the expectation from UEFA / FIFA being YC.

      Delete
  29. Come on, Hategan and Makkelie faced two different situations. Philips' foot slipped off the ball and it was over the ankle but not involving full studs contact while Ampadu's action was targeted directly on an opponent's leg with full studs contact over the ankle.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Exactly, I don't understand the comparison at all really.

      Delete
  30. Not giving that red card was a bad mistake, and Makkelie probably booked his ticket back home there.

    ReplyDelete
  31. I rewatched the incident before writing my opinion, I think there is a difference between this foul and the one occurred in Hategan game, in that case the player went directly on opponent's foot, here both players are about to hit the ball together and then the player committing foul slips on the opponent. This can be an argument in favor of YC, but RC of course would have been accepted by VAR as well. In my opinion OK not to intervene because this is more unlucky circumstance than Hategan's game, it could have happened the contrary.
    See this frame, a few seconds before the foul:
    https://postimg.cc/jLzymtcv

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yes, that is my point as well. IMO both cards should be supported, but one should take the intent into consideration as well (Hategan: Endangering the health of the opponent; Makkelie: Playing the ball)

      All in all, a good performance so far by the Dutchman in my view.

      Delete
  32. IMO 45' is SFP and red card. But i understand VAR doesn't intervene there because Philips touched the ball first. It can be supportable.

    ReplyDelete
  33. Just one explanation to the 45' decision. Danny is cool headed, while Hstegan is brash.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. And you don't understand refereeing and football...

      Delete
  34. To add, from a replay, Makkelie in excellent positioning, he surely saw exactly what had happened therefore YC is the "real decision" he would take for this foul, we can't have doubts.

    ReplyDelete
  35. Lawaj, this blog is better off without your polemicising, you are BANNED.

    I invite all users to ignore his comments from now on, they will be deleted.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I read his comment and there was absolutely nothing wrong with it at all. He gave an opinion is that not what this page is for? Get a grip. Oh sorry my bad i don't want BANNED.

      Delete
    2. I have no time for trolls, sorry.

      Delete
    3. Clear censorship!!! The comment was an opionion like everyone else's. Come on, let's talk sense!

      Delete
    4. So you're a troll for giving an opinion? Ok. There have been a few comments of his I've been like give it a rest but there was nothing wrong with the one he was BANNED for.

      Delete
    5. I have greatest of respect for Chefren and Mikael however strong opinions that only reference the nature of a referees decisions should not be banned IMO. However, if they are not allowed then it is of course the decision of the moderators. I just think however wrong we might feel an opinion is, unless it is announced using insulting language or includes a factual lie then it should be allowed. Regardless, thanks to Mikael and Chefren for their work on this blog.

      Delete
    6. Lawaj, your comments about Hategan are so repetitive and annoying. It was explained in post match analysis that his decision was absolutely correct, fact that was sustained by Rosetti when he said that there were 3 mistakes, which have been identified. I'm pretty sure we'll see Hategan in the middle for a QF and maybe as FO on Wembley.

      Delete
  36. With Rosetti in the stadium.

    ReplyDelete
  37. We were spoiled yesterday with a pair of entertaining and exciting goal-fests. Today we're brought back down to earth with this snooze-fest.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I agree, a full disappointment, what a boring game and this should have been the most interesting one of Round of 16!
      Let's hope for the next minutes...

      Delete
    2. TBH I do not expect England can play eye-catching football

      Delete
    3. It's not about it being "eye catching". It's about not playing in such cautious and overly conservative manner. Don't be afraid to win.

      Delete
    4. When the team not playing in conservative manner, the game will become more open and more interesting, which is what I meant by "eye-catching" from a fan perspective. We are basically talking the same thing

      Delete
  38. I don't think it is boring.
    Good tactical game

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I agree, at least more interesting than the 1st half of Sweden-Slovakia:)

      Delete
    2. That's funny! You compare a round of 16 match between two "top" teams to a group stage match between two second tier sides to justify the "boringness"

      Delete
    3. Come on!!!!!!be polite! be respective! I compared only based on the level of entertainment of the game itself! Does this bother you?

      Delete
  39. An England team that barely creates chances vs German team who almost went out - hardly the most stunning.
    Prob one with most history
    Typical of England, not moving ball quick enough

    ReplyDelete
  40. Some good assessments by AR2 Jan de Vries for this goal!

    ReplyDelete
  41. Now free kick and YC for SPA, to keep control on the player who had committed the foul, Makkelie indicated him immediatly after the whistle.

    ReplyDelete
  42. Very good foul detection on 76' and YC as well.

    ReplyDelete
  43. I hereby ban myself [post deleted by user]. Just kidding. I really enjoy this blog because it helps develop a refereeing culture or places a value on good refereeing, and the comments are really helpful in understanding what it takes to be a good referee. So let's all try to be respectful and also please give a warning or two telling what behavior isn't wanted or is wanted before banning anyone.

    ReplyDelete
  44. Another good NO FLAG decision by AR2 for 2-0. The game seems coming to its end.

    ReplyDelete
  45. very good onside by AR2 on second goal. Well done!

    ReplyDelete
  46. Good to see that Germany finally decided to come out of its shell and play in an attacking manner after 80 minutes

    ReplyDelete
  47. Very good job by Makkelie, like almost always. He is one of the best referees in the world nowadays.

    ReplyDelete
  48. IMO, Cakir and Makkelie must be absolutely safe about their presence for the last 3 matches of this tournament. One place is empty and should be occupied about the ref with best performance in QF.

    ReplyDelete
  49. Good and expected performance by Makkelie, not sure if he will get a match again, maybe SF, not the possibility was not that high IMO

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. but the possibility was not that high IMO *

      Delete
  50. Well done by Makkelie and his team! All yellow cards correct (maybe one SFP but i think at least supportable), great foul detection. I think a QF will be deserved.

    ReplyDelete
  51. He did very good job as expected. The game was not that challenging but he proved that he is a candidate of SFs.

    ReplyDelete
  52. It's a really interesting EURO, that's for sure. France, Netherlands, Germany, Portugal.... all out. Wow!

    Czechia, Switzerland, Ukraine or Sweden in the QF. Must be one of the more interesting EURO's in quite a while.

    Also, good performance by Makkelie, complete acceptance.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. And to think that Austria and Croatia were close to eliminating Italy and Spain! Hungary in group stage, wow! France with such a team, full of stars, eliminated by Switzerland. Amazing, unpredictable tournament!

      Delete
    2. He had no real acceptance by German players. They only had acceptance to the sport.
      Another match other players and this could have escalated.

      The big picture was good, but the foul detection and the card management was not

      Delete
    3. @JR I am surprised by your comment. this was a tense match, due to the teams involved. Good approach by Makkelie, who kept his calm and with his cool attitude he kept the tension under control. some players did protest, as usual in every game nowadays. Makkelie really had full control.

      Delete
  53. Good, expected level performance by Makkelie IMO. Sensible use of sanctions and some very good assessments by AR2 de Vries.

    ReplyDelete
  54. Why was lawaj banned.his opinions are sometimes strong but he doesn't insult anyone. we need people like him with a different opinion bcos that's what will make the blog balanced

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. No, it will bring the blog more anti-intellectual nonsense. Calling the second Soares Dias' performance excellent, Brych's last performance excellent, bashing Hategan for good decision, comparing Hategan's and Makkelie's incidents... It's enough. This blog is not the right place for posting such bullsh*t.

      Delete
    2. @anonymous 20:05

      +1

      Delete
  55. @anonymous 20:05

    u shoud not call anyone's opinion 'anti-intellectual' because they disagree with you or many others. now for using the word b*llshit, you too should be banned.

    ReplyDelete
  56. I don't like lawaj, but mikael w it is wrong and disgraceful to ban him for talking his own opinion. Is that not what this blog is for. anyway fine match by makkiele and his team.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Sorry, but I strongly disagree with this postmodern idea that everyone's opinion is equal and everything is about perspectives, nothing is objectively wrong (or right).

      Quality should be protected and I will take every step necessary to preserve the expertise of this blog. And besides, he was so blatantly trying to troll us, I can't believe that isn't obvious to everyone...

      Delete
    2. Oh,my God. What a horrible comment, Furqan Miah! Mikael, you have my support.

      Delete
    3. Thanks Xabi, that means a lot!

      As you can imagine, I was rather surprised to see such a comment :)

      Delete
  57. Makkelie with a good performance. A SF appointment will follow, I believe, potentially the final, even though Cakir seems clearly the right referee to be at Wembley on 11th July. Kuipers and Taylor also in the run. We'll see.

    ReplyDelete
  58. Catalan newspaper SPORT confirming Mateu is out of the Euro and sayind Del Cerro is set to officiate a QF match.

    Tomorrow a new set of officials will leave.


    https://www.sport.es/es/noticias/eurocopa/mateu-lahoz-sigue-eurocopa-11862682

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I think they will be dr. Brych, Rapallini (also if i planned a qf for him) Ekberg and Siebert and maybe also one between Orsato and Hategan or Oliver.

      Delete
    2. Ref Paul, generally agreed. I just think Oliver must stay in the tournament based on his good performances. He would be a very valuable name for ITA-BEL or SWI-ESP.

      Delete
    3. The article says that dCG could be appointed in a QF. But based on performances I think he can be happy with a 4th official appointment. Anything else would be a political choice because they want a Spanish referee in KO phase.

      Delete
    4. Considering that Oliver with italians is not well seen: i think that he could handle Switzerland-Spain, Kuipers in Italy-Belgium, Denmark-Czech Republic for Vincic and Del Cerro could handle England-Sweden/Ukraine. The alternative is also Hategan. But I think the Romanian will be only fourth official.

      Semifinals for Taylor and Cakir, and final act to Kuipers.

      Delete
    5. The article says it is likely Del Cerro gets a QF appointment. They call it a normal scenario. Personally I'd rather go with other referees, such as Vincic, Karasev, Hategan or Oliver, who have had more convincing performances.

      Delete
    6. Ref Paul, Cakir, Kuipers, Taylor (potentially Makkelie) are the strongest names for the last three games. I don't quite see any other referees being such safe choices for the tournament to proceed calmly and with total acceptance by players, teams and fans.

      Delete
  59. Gotta be a joke considering what we've seen on Sunday.

    ReplyDelete
  60. I quite liked Makkelie this evening. Definitely deserving of another game. And don't rule him out for the final. Pitana also had opening and final games at WC18.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. He is very young for EURO final IMO. But ofcourse he is a candidate.

      Delete
  61. England moves on, so no more room for two English refs in the last 7 matches. Only of them will continue.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. It's not inevitable that one of them will leave. I can see Oliver handling SWI-ESP and Taylor in SFs. It is fully deserved btw.

      Delete
    2. Oliver for SUI-SPA.. Taylor must cross his fingers. Who knows: Rapallini, Orsato (if Italy out), Makkelie: those names are all possible choices.

      Delete
    3. But as somebody pointed out, given the reputation by committee for Taylor, it would be very unexpected to see Oliver getting a better last appointment than Taylor in the competition.
      In case, it could be that SUI - ESP, after today, will be for Taylor. We will see.

      Delete
    4. Even if England make it to SFs, Taylor can have the game England will not be potentially involved in. He deserves another game.

      Delete
    5. Remember that both Clattenburg and Atkinson performed well at Euro 2016, but only Clattenburg continued after R16. If two Dutch and two English referees will be retained for last 7 matches, that will only leave 3 games for the others. Deserved or not, UEFA will want more representation and they have more choices to achieve that.

      Delete
    6. Anonymous 29 June 2021 at 21:03, that's it.

      Delete
    7. @Chefren, I think that Taylor should be more than satisfied: he got Portugal-Germany: a real top clash, and he was good. In Denmark he was able to stop the play when Eriksen collapsed in a few seconds, and got Prince's rewards. In Italy-Austria he was not the best.
      If I was Rosetti I would keep Makkelie, Cakir and Taylor for a semifinal. Vincic, Kuipers, Del Cerro and Oliver for quarter finals and Kuipers to the final.
      Let'see what referees' countries will do.

      Delete
  62. If we see all games and performances, for me personally Cakir is in the leading position right now. But let's wait how Oliver and Vincic will perform, if being HOPEFULLY nominated again in QF.
    Behind Cakir I would see Taylor, then Brych and Kuipers.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The fact that some people still see Brych in convention for the final after Bel Por baffles me tbh. For me the choice is between the 2 dutchies and Cakir for now (maybe some QF refs can come in convention too) Taylor/Oliver out for me considering that Clatts had the final 4 years ago and Eng will likely make it to SFs

      Delete
    2. Andrasch is a total Brychette. Unbelievable how someone can still bring up Brych's name for the rest of the tournament. From that point of view, then I say Mateu for the final...if it's to be delirious let's go for it :)

      Delete
    3. The funniest part is that he still thinks Brych can whistle the final OMG!!!

      Delete
  63. My opinion is totally different. As a leader I see Rapallini, then Cakir, than Makellie.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I'd say Rapallini has no chances. He's been decent, even though way behind Çakir, Taylor or Makkelie, but he's not European...

      Delete
  64. I’m glad that the quality of this blog is protected by Mikael and Chefren. I really don’t like the comments that are abusive and negative towards the referees because of other opinions in a trolling way, many times by anonymous people. Question: why not prevend anonymous people to react? Keep up the good work Guys and keep this blog for the really interesten and professional opinions

    ReplyDelete
  65. HIGHLIGHTS

    https://we.tl/t-NCgN8r0Hvk

    ReplyDelete

Thank you for writing a comment on our blog!