The fourth game of the tournament for Dutch Elite Danny Makkelie, in charge of England - Denmark EURO 2020 semifinal at Wembley. Second part of discussion.
London, 7 July 2021 21:00 CET
ENGLAND - DENMARK
Referee: Danny Makkelie (NED)
Assistant Referee 1: Hessel Steegstra (NED)
Assistant Referee 2: Jan de Vries (NED)
Fourth Official: Ovidiu Haţegan (ROU)
Fifth Official: Sebastian Eugen Gheorghe (ROU)
Video Assistant Referee: Pol van Boekel (NED)
Assistant Video Assistant Referee 1: Kevin Blom (NED)
Assistant Video Assistant Referee 2: Christian Gittelmann (GER)
Assistant Video Assistant Referee 3: Pawel Gil (POL)
UEFA Referee Observer: Roberto Rosetti (ITA)
UEFA Delegate: Myrsini Psarropoulou (GRE)
"We don't like soft penalties. We want clear penalties"
ReplyDelete-Roberto Rosetti
That was obvious tonight.
DeleteI agree, an obvious dive by a notorious diver.
DeleteDid the exact same during Scotland game. Pity, the referee didn’t have the guts to wave play on.
DeleteVan Boekel had a VERY problematic scene in front of him. He surely knew that this isn't a penalty, but his hands are tied to a certain extent, as he sees the light contact - Rosetti underlined very much that they want the VARs to stay in the background when it isn't clear and obvious.
ReplyDeleteBut one has to take the circumstates into consideration - when having such a doubtful crucial decision, why should you waive the possibility to watch it again?
Overall, sadly, Makkelie failed the test in my view. He was okay until the incident, but his wrong penalty was crucial for the outcome of this Semifinal. UEFA has no choice but to reject this performance, as they did with Turpin's and Mateu's.
In the Netherlands, Van Boekel is known as a ref without a backbone…
DeleteHe showed that much tonight. But don't blame him too much for tonight.
DeleteI would fear for his future had he dared to go against Makkelie. He could easily become another victim of Makkelie who will in a heartbeat throw a teammate under the bus to save himself.
The second huge mistake Makkelie after his poor performance Serbia-Portugal, but in This situation we have VAR, and in This time he made huge mistake again. IMO he should back home after group stage
ReplyDeleteNot every contact is foul, and those are players at the highest level. There are no words that will justify this kind of error.
ReplyDeleteVAR called by the teams, there is no other option, like in any other sport. Until you allow escapes to the protocol, VAR will never be reliable
ReplyDeleteWhat a sad end of this match. I was not fully convinced by Makkelie in regular time but he was in control. I agreed with his no penalty call against Kane. But the penalty given is indeed the decision everyone will talk about. Unfortunately in a negative way. I cannot see van Boekel/Blom as VAR team in final.
ReplyDeleteIt's really... it's really sad for UEFA
ReplyDeleteCan some one explain what happend? I watched it 4 times now i still cant figure out?
ReplyDeleteAsk Makkelie, he's gonna tell you.
DeleteRaheem Sterling added Makkelie to his ever growing list of referee's that he's duped into calling a PK in his favor after taking a dive.
DeleteExactly!!
ReplyDeleteLet's put it this way, if the penalty wasn't awarded - would VAR have got involved?
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
DeleteYes VAR would've intervened if no pk was the call cuz that would be a clear and obvious error. This was 1000% a pk and a excellent job by Makkelie to whistle it instead of being scared to make the right call
Deletewwjd you must be joking mate. Very bad decision PK to Sterling, clear and obvious error. No more Makkelie and Van Boekel, they throw this game in disrepute.
DeleteI agree with you wwjd. The contact is clear and it's a trip. I don't know what people mean when they say it was "soft". It's clearly a penalty.
Delete@ Quilava,
ReplyDeleteVAR did not AND cannot intervene because the referees don't look for the best possible decision of their colleagues but for the smallest even non-existing justification of their decisions. It is visible also by the comments here on this blog. I often read how we must support the referees etc. like they are people who need help and not highly paid professionals. So the laws about VAR are made in the same manner - always to support.
"Back the Badge", otherwise you risk exploiting your fellow referee's mistakes in front of the entire footballing world.
DeleteYou don’t expect fellow referees, to just back what was clearly the wrong decision. Just because they might undermine fellow referees? In that case, we should get rid of referee supervisors. Who do exactly that!
DeleteMore like 50 seconds but yes no idea where he got that time from, didn't look at his watch until England's chance has gone.
ReplyDeleteThe scene becomes scandalous ATM. I don't think that Rosetti is happy tonight...
ReplyDeleteI agree. He was impressed by the crowd.
ReplyDeleteI am disgusted by this decision. I feel gutted and still can’t believe there was no VAR intervention.
ReplyDeleteIf an extra ball enters the field of play during the match, the referee must stop play only if it interferes with play.
ReplyDeleteNow former Croatian referee, Marijo Strahonja says NO WAY that was a penalty.
ReplyDeleteHow no one from VAR room calledim to look again is unbeliavable.
Jonas Eriksson said VAR will basically support any penalty decision the referee call in this Euro and that the bar is set way too high for when VAR should intervene. He sais that this is not a penalty and way too cheap.
DeleteStrahonja also said if VAR teams thinks that's PK they should never be in VAR on on the pitch again. Finally, I agree with Strahonja.
DeleteYes, I was confused in real speed too. It could also be a "clever" reason to intervene. Manuel Gräfe mentions it now too.
ReplyDeleteMinute?
ReplyDeleteIn my opinion there is a contact from behind that explains exactly why VAR couldn't intervene, there was indeed a touch on attacker, and so the concept of simulation can't be applied there. Perhaps you remember my words about the previous penalty decisions at this EURO, VAR never intervened exactly for that reason, as long as there is even a minimum contact, it will be impossible to see a penalty annulled. Rosetti has applied this criteria the full tournament, he could have easily avoided such situations by asking VAR for intervening more, but this is how comittee like the things, we must draw this conclusion. Maybe Makkelie would have changed idea in front of monitor, but no chance to do an OFR.
ReplyDeleteWhat's the point of having VAR then? If your going to continue to limit how and when it can be used. The bar set at this tournament was and is ludicrously and unreasonably high.
DeleteBut the question is: Does it make sense that VAR can‘t intervene if there‘s contact? This must never be a penalty because this slight contact doesn‘t make the striker fall. Football is still a contact sport. I would have loved an intervention here despite the contact but I can understand the consistency made here even if it feels wrong to me.
DeleteSo we need no VAR when this Situation is no OFR
DeleteIndeed, I agree. How I interpret what happened:
Delete- Makkelie sees contact by the 1st defender on the legs (though there is no contact)
- the VAR must support the decision as long as it is minimally plausible. He sees the hip check by the second defender, and thereby deems the decision supportable, even though Sterling is already falling by then.
Therefore, at debriefing, no one will be happy with the final decision. Makkelie will look at a dive, and the VAR will think that it was not a penalty, just not 'clear and obvious' enough to intervene, by UEFA's standards.
As for the second ball, nothing there IMO. No one got confused.
Even if I don't agree, Chefren, Manuel Gräfe was saying exactly the same. UEFA's line is to not intervene if there is a contact, so for him VAR could not overrule. Gräfe's analysis is really worth to be watched, fair and balanced but with clear statements.
DeleteSterling is already going to ground prior to any actual contact. This in itself should be sufficient for VAR intervention. But the reluctance to go against the on field decisions this entire tournament was blatantly obvious. The ridiculous and unreasonable bar set for VAR hindered more than haelped.
DeleteI think it was a very soft penalty. But decide for yourself: https://twitter.com/ChiquimarcoMx/status/1412889836856487944?s=20
ReplyDeleteThere is contact between the knee of NO. 5 of Denmark with the knee pit of Sterling.
Contact does not mean foul. Football is a contact sport. Ridiculous use of VAR.
Delete"Contact does not mean foul" but when you knee a running player in the knee from behind and cause him to lose his balance, I'm sorry but that's a clear trip.
DeleteI always said that such approach to VAR like this of Rosetti, Rizzoli, Velasco Carballo, Clos Gómez, whole German FA doesn't help football and football refereeing at all. To have such a great and helpful tool and to not make use of it lead to an unclear picture with injustice being felt even more. "That was so easy to review it, why hasn't it been done?, what is purpose of having VAR?" - are the thoughts of whole football community, and they are right!
ReplyDelete+1, Ray.
DeleteAlso to add - I see VAR existing only in two ways - either the teams and the referee to have a certain amount of calls like in tennis or volleyball, or when it becomes much more perfect and computerized like the goal line technology. But right now it is absolutely useless and brings only harm to football. We already see the players attitude towards it.
A referee who is poor on the pitch, will also be poor behind the monitor.
DeleteA referee who is reluctant to make the brave decisions on the pitch will also be reluctant to make the brave decisions behind the monitor.
On the other hand, imagine Makkelie facing the view from behind during an OFR. Immense pressure and so difficult to decide, too. And I'm sure many people would argue that there was a clear contact if the penalty would've been cancelled...
DeleteI thought that it actually did interfer with play (at least a little bit). It isn't really wrong or a by-the-book-mistake, but there are certainly arguments in favor of stopping the play, which would have been ckeverer in my view.
ReplyDeleteArsen Wenger: No PK. Why didn't VAR intervene, I don't understand
ReplyDelete99% of the world agrees that this penalty shouldn't have been. No matter if they are former elite refs, amateur players or someone who saw a football match for the first time ever.
DeleteWell, it's too bad. This is why I prefer letting players decide, as was the case yesterday. Yes, it could have been a PK perhaps, anbd rightly called in a lesser match, but at that point of the SF game? Now we have controversy. What a shame for what was another wonderful game.
ReplyDeleteThe players did decide. Joakim Maehle decided to stick out his leg and trip Raheem Sterling in the penalty area. A tremendous lack of skill and judgement by a defender at this level to make such a mistake. He doesn't deserve to win this game.
DeleteTwo balls on the pitch and no penalty. Roberto will say to Danny : you did a fantastic job ; as long as I, Roberto, am Chairman, you will get ALL important games in the future, Danny, do not worry. Sorry, Danny, now I have to go because I already decided before the tournament that Bjorn will whistle the final and now I officially have to confirm this. Aleksander C. agrees of course
ReplyDelete😂😂😂 that is very accurate
DeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDelete@Rob; No Surprise. Kuipers is Final Ref. Certainly.
DeleteRosetti doesn't appoint anybody. He's the "yes man" at the head of the Ref Comm that is told by the higher-ups what to do and who to assign.
DeleteAfter this game and ridicolous penalty everybody will speak about refereeing.
ReplyDeleteMakkelie ruined reputation of referees at this tournament.
https://streamable.com/3yn6pf
ReplyDeleteSo tonight we have seen ,,what makes dutch ör german referees better than others??? What r their characteristics,,last 7 matches and with final they handled 5 games ,,if other referees really poor shame for europe refeering
ReplyDeleteNow Strahonja said that Kevin Blom is also big problem in Makkelie's team.
ReplyDeleteHe also sai that he was there for scandalous Serbia-Portugal match, Villareal-Zagreb also had some questionable decisions and so on, so on...
Do you always think Makkelie's team is to blame of?
DeleteMaybe Makkelie should look in the mirror.
England attacking ,impossible to stop play
ReplyDeleteIt's easy to blame Makkelie, but main reason is Rosetti, VAR ban. As result, he ruined the career of potentially strong referee.
ReplyDeleteThat will not ruin Makkelie‘s career, no worry
DeleteMakkelie has been and will continue to be shielded by the UEFA Ref Comm. Other members of his team have been thrown under the bus by Makkelie himself.
DeletePlease everyone, watch the replay from the angle first shown at 109’ before forming an opinion on the PK. That angle makes the foul very clear, I think. Unfortunately, this decisive angle wasn’t shown until 5 minutes after the PK so everyone already made up their minds. https://twitter.com/keithshanley/status/1412890551473647621?s=21
ReplyDeletePlayer was already going down at the time of contact.
DeleteThanks for the link. It's even more obvious that Sterling is already going to the ground (diving) prior to any actual contact.
DeleteI don't know what you see there, but this angle discloses the wrongness of the penalty. The first contact on the knee is way too light and can't be the reason for Sterling's falling, the second one on the hip occurs when Sterling is already going to ground.
DeleteWhy are you trying to defend something indefinsible?
DeleteThat angle doesn't change anything. It is an extremely soft penalty that shouldn't have been given to fit the tournament's standards.
DeleteBefore the knee-to-knee contact from the #5? No he isn’t.
DeleteThe notorious diver is most definitely already starting his diving motion prior to any actual contact.
DeleteThe way you are talking makes it clear that you are not looking at these plays without bias against the attacker involved.
DeleteI think all heve seen the contact... And we all know that it is tooooooo soft for a fall and for a penalty. But it is enough for VAR to make a support call. And that is the problem - that everything in the referee's world is made to support their decisions and not to look for the best possible solutions. And it leads to lack of development.
ReplyDeleteIs Sterling not already going to ground (diving) before any actual contact?
DeleteFor VAR it doesn't matter. Only the existing of a contact is absolutely enough to support Makkelie by the rules. And it is cynical.
DeleteThe "bar" set for VAR by the Ref Comm. Was/is unreasonably and ridiculously high.
Deleteİf Makkelie didnt whistle penalty,,var invite hım for potential penalty check.? Just wonder the rule..
ReplyDeleteMost people think so.
Delete@Chefren. Do you think Rossetti is right when he set that criteria you described?
ReplyDeleteMakkelie and his team in 2021:
ReplyDeleteSerbia-Portugal (mistake from AR2)
Villarreal-Dinamo Zagreb (something about VAR and offside lines, IIRC)
Turkey-Italy (missed handball, wrongly supported by VAR, unbelievable offside mistake from AR1)
England-Denmark (scandalous penalty decision)
More mistakes, more matches for Danny. Who knows maybe he will be at least 4th in final?
TUR-ITA..
DeleteMakkelie don't know the rules. Offside from a corner.
https://streamable.com/j0nbvh
Deleteplease watch the penalty kick that Makkelie awarded to Olimpiakos against APOEL in the play offs of champions league.
DeleteThe knee does hit sterling....so PK. Soft call, but it.s not wrong or overturn able
ReplyDeleteMakkelie and u r from Nederland. Please comment objectively..
Delete"We don't like soft penalties. We want clear penalties"
Delete-Roberto Rosetti
It is a PK! Watch the replay from behind Sterling. No doubts.
DeleteDo you have the link about Rosettis citation?
Deletehttps://www.reuters.com/article/uk-soccer-euro-referees/soccer-uefa-does-not-want-soft-penalties-says-refs-chief-idUKKCN2E113H
DeleteThank you for the link ! I don't understand why Uefa always sees it differently. If Rosetti's citation is correct, he should resign!
Delete@Modern < By the Book Tragicomic
DeleteIn a normal game i would be totally OK for support by VAR. But this penalty was match deciding whistle on semi final. It should have been OFR because it was the most important decision of the tournament and it was wrong.
ReplyDeleteNot even in a local Sunday Men's Pub League match is this penalty call, "okay". It's a dive.
DeleteAs long as divers are continued to be rewarded with freekicks or penalties. What reason do they have to stop?
Always a penalty it's not soft it's a 7/10 pk I don't understand the reluctance to accept the decision. As people keep saying if it wasn't the sf you'd support the call. Well thanks by glley support the fricken pk decision in this match it takes a huge fricken set to be brave enough to make the right call that late in the game I applaud Danny for making it
DeleteExcuse my lack of knowledge with VAR here. I'm very familiar with American FB reviews... if a questionable call or a missed call is observed, the call comes down from upstairs and the referee goes to the video monitors... NFL also guides him. In many cases, the head coach and throw the flag and ask for a review. Generally, the correct call is made...either changed or upheld. Why would this not be the case here at such a critical point? Is it Makkelie's choice to review "to be sure" or must that come from VAR ref?
ReplyDeleteThe difference is that in American Football there are a lot of clear decisions. It's pretty easy to see if somebody crossed the goal line or if somebody actually caught a ball. European football referees have to make a lot more judgement calls, for example for foul detection.
DeleteThe VAR Is only supposed to intervene if there's an clear and obvious error by the main referee. The problem is, where do you draw the lines. If it's regarding an offside decision, it's easy, there's either onside or offside, no room for discussions. But what's an obvious error in foul detection. Tonight the danish player touched Sterling's Leg, even though it was a very soft touch. But is it enough for a VAR intervention? Probably not because it wasn't a clear error because of the contact. When VAR was first introduced, a lot of people complained that it would take away the key decisions from the main referee, so they restricted the intervention possibilities.
Also there are no coaches challenges or anything like that in European Football. I think this decision from tonight is comparable to an Pass Interference review. If I remember correctly there were very few times a PI call was actually overturned, because they didn't want to take authority away from the main referee.
But anyway, the main difference is that American Football has a lot more black and white decisions, which makes it easier to review them.
Ok, good explanation. I knew there were no challenges like in so many sports here now so that's where I wondered who could initiate the "review". Thanks!
DeleteWe all know that the penalty decision is Unavceptable and the Var ref needed to be brave to call Danny to rescue him but Unfortunately he didn't. Bad start and horrible end for Makkelie !! Lets imagine If this mistake was against Italy ?! Rosetti would send Danny for long vacation.
ReplyDeleteThe ironies of football life:
ReplyDeletea) Sterling's dive "bought" by Kassai accelerated the process of introducing VAR to UEFA tournaments (then the CL).
b) It didn't change Sterling's behaviour or the referees' reaction to his simulation (it stands for referees on the pitch and as VAR).
c) For the particular referee one may paraphrase Chekhov's dictum: What starts as no consequential mistake (the offside decision after a corner-kick) ends as a crucial tournament-deciding mistake.
d) For all the young Dutch referees' admirers: The last, and probably tje only, great Dutch referee was the late Leo Horn who took his last bow some 60 years ago (acting as linesman at the 1962 WC final)
A sad day for refereeing. Hopefully at least this error by Makkelie serves to revise the VAR protocol. On the one hand, they sent Mateu and Turpin home due to penalties that are too soft (they admit that there are clear errors), but, on the other hand, they do not allow the VAR to correct what they themselves consider a mistake.
ReplyDeleteThere have been mistakes that have ruined a referee's career. With VAR this should not happen, but unfortunately it still happens. Time to review the VAR protocol
I think it is a decision that Mr Johnson deserved after his involvement against the creation of the ESl. I think it is very important that Kuipers will not be appointed for the final. It is just not morally right
Delete@Xabi
Delete+1
@Xabi
Delete+1
Never a PK for me, just ridiculous, now let's move on and focus on the final
ReplyDeleteMakkelie has the potential to get to Kuipers level, he really is a fantastic referee. His performance tonight was amazing but unfortunately the penalty decision was wrong imo.
ReplyDeleteOverall it’s not a penalty as there is not enough contact to go over, but good decision by VAR not to get involved as there isn’t no contact whatsoever, not a clear and obvious error.
ReplyDeleteTonight's penalty is by far the worst call in the entire Euro..Sadly deciding a winner of a Semi Final. Mr Rosetti must go as well as Mr Ceferin. YOU ALL REMEMBER Mr Johanson as Uefa president, honest-mild-super class-inspiring.. What are the attributes of Mr Ceferin ? ...
ReplyDeleteCertainly we miss Mr. johanson
DeletePer UEFA RAP 2021:1 Clip F17 explantion says the following:
ReplyDelete"If the referee, who is an exellent position asseses that the intensity of physical contact is low, then play may be allowed to continue..."
Clip F13, F16, F17 involves calls inside the penalty area with soft contacts. UEFA does not want to have penalty where the contact is soft/fair/50:50.
However, UEFA don't want the VAR to intervene in case of penalty is given even with soft contact.
I believe in case of today's penalty, even if there was a contact, it's intensity was "low" hence no PK would a more apporporiate call. But I do understand why VAR hasn't intervene throughout this tournament when PK calls were made with soft contact. FIFA/UEFA needs a better VAR protocols reagrding soft penalty.
F20 and F22: I see more contact in these clips than the Sterling one. UEFA wanted no PK call on both
Delete+1 always good to see comparisons with the RAP
DeleteI am not his fan, but in case someone is interested, Croatian TV referee expert Mario Strahonja:
ReplyDelete"I am sad and emotionally drained. This is scandalous. People, there is no contact here. If the referee has already fallen for this fall, then the VAR room had to give him a second chance. It is absolutely unacceptable to award such a penalty in the semifinals of the European Championships ", said the indignant Strahonja and continued:
"He made the decision immediately on the field and at that point he had an obligation to convey to the VAR room what he saw. He apparently said he saw Sterling being kicked in the leg. The VAR room inspected it and the judges are also sitting in it. that for them contact for a penalty, then they should never enter the VAR room again.They just had to say, ‘Please check again and judge for yourself’, and they told him, ‘No, it’s okay, there’s a contact and your decision has our support. ' Completely wrong I can't even explain how it happened These judges have gone through countless trainings and received countless guidelines This decision will not be explained to anyone"
I agree with previous comments, so this is in line with previous situations, but really it is obvious that the protocol should be revised somehow.
DeleteI thought there should have been an intervention on the Mbappe penalty given by Mateu Lahoz so sure as hell I wanted an intervention on this one.
ReplyDeletePretty big scandal to decide a Euro Semi-Final.
Off Topic:
ReplyDeleteEsteban Ostojich will be the referee for Brazil vs Argentina on Saturday at 2100 BST.
Ostojich, Lostau and Claus seem to be considered the current top 3 in South America.
Tnx. I wanted to predict that since Argentinian and Brazilian refs are out, as welll as SF refs. Good luck to him! I like his style, he can do it well.
DeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
DeleteIt is very concerning if UEFA see Makkelie as their best referee once Lahoz, Orsato, Brych and Kuipers are all gone. I am really not a fan of his card management, and he made too many wrong calls throughout the tournament.
ReplyDeleteBy the way Mikael, Chefren and anyone else who rubs the blog, apologies for my earlier comment. It was in the heat of the moment, Makkelie definitely doesn’t hate England (lol)
Are you on about him giving too many cards or his lack of cards?
DeleteHe never gives cards. Delaney made 5 fouls yesterday, no booking. Vestergaard 4 fouls, no booking. He’s a very poor ref
DeleteA "hand of God" moment for Sterling. VAR guidelines and protocols should be revised after this.
ReplyDeleteThe problem is that Makkelia has the be sent home after the first poor game he took. Rosetti go home, Ceferin go home.
ReplyDeleteUnfortunate evening for Danny.
ReplyDeleteConstantly decieved by a bunch of petulant kids.
Flailing arms and elbows went severely under punished especially during the first half. Players had a hard time adapting to his style, and his communication appeared weak.
Possible IDFK for England at the free kick to 0-1, Danish "wall" appears to be within less than a meter of the English wall.
A couple of instances with balls not completely across boundary lines and the extra ball on the pitch prior to the penalty.
This is a mid 7s performance for me, unfortunately.
I was - and will remain - a stark defender of VAR. However - if VAR, yrs after its initiation, cannot be used to correct a match-deciding decision in extra-time of a sf of one of the three biggest tournaments this sport has to offer, it makes one think...
ReplyDelete+1
DeleteAgree 100%
DeleteNever a PK for me, just ridiculous.
ReplyDeleteAfter the night, I think this is such a slap in the face to refereeing at the tournament, a big dark shadow over all the great performances we have witnessed. Unfortunately UEFA favourite Danny Desmond Makkelie lost his fantastic reputation, we shall see how that reflects his career.First Serbia-Portugal, then the opening and now this.
ReplyDeleteThinking about it, I would really like to praise fantastic play on decision by Lahoz and his team. And as someone mentioned, I remember Kassai and famous phantom pk on Sterling in Kyev. So we made a whole circle somehow. The result is Sterling:football 2:0.
My third and last intervention on Makkelie's PK decision of yesterday (and even the second ball on the pitch within the reach of the cameras) : Danny Desmond from Dordrecht of all places will continue to be fully covered by Committee and A. Ceferin, the real boss of Ref Committe. You will see that he will get very soon the most sonorous matches again. There is no meritocracy within the Ref Committe, that is guided by Mr. Ceferin. Ceferin dislikes for example Cakir and likes both Brych and the 2 Dutchies. But that is already the case, very long before the tournament. Fourth and new favourite of Committee : Vincic, by accident of the same country as Mr. Ceferin. The rest of the list with UEFA referees has become totally meaningless (cfr. a.o. 2 catogory 1 referees in tournament, of which the German did very well ; the Swedish is not ready yet for big games). Life stinks and in the top refereeing world, it is the same unfortunately. Very last thought : Van Boekel and Blom will most probably also be the main VARs in the final. If I were Roberto, I would at least designate Irrati as main VAR for that game.
ReplyDeleteYES; His countryman Vincic, the other prince of Ceferin
DeleteMy opinion on the penalty:
ReplyDeleteThe interesting question is, whether the decision was only soft or wrong.
As an isolated incident, one can say, that the foul decision is not a mistake, because there are two contacts by the defenders, which could have influenced Sterling and therefore it is a case of tripping - so only a soft, but not a wrong decision.
But then we have the UEFA instruction not to give soft penalties. So while it could be correct by law, it is surely not correct by this instruction.
And even without this instruction there is the common practice by referees not to assess penalty situations like midfield duels, but only give penalties for clear fouls. This argument is increased by the fact, that it is a probably decisive penalty in a KO match.
So we can assume, that in Makkelie's perception this was such a clear situation, that he couldn't ignore it even with the considerations above - and this would be clearly a wrong perception.
It could also be, that he was thinking of the not given earlier penalty to Kane. Maybe he assessed that as a 75/25 penalty and concluded that two situations, that were more a foul than not (in his opinion), were enough to award a penalty. But this is pure speculation.
Second point is VAR. As there seem to be clear instructions by UEFA not to intervene for tripping penalties, if there was any form of contact, the VAR was correct to confirm the decision.
However one should discuss, whether such an instruction is helpful.
Yes, there is the "clear and obvious" condition in the protocol and it is right, that this means a high bar for intervention. But the purpose of VAR is to get rid of decisions, where nearly everyone thinks, they are bad. Following this, it would be useful, to slightly lower the bar and also allow interventions for 90%* mistakes. In the perception of the public, it surely is the bigger VAR mistake, if he doesn't intervene for a 99% or 100% mistake than if he intervenes for a 70% mistake. And if the VAR wrongly intervenes for a supportable decision, there still is the referee at the OFR, who can maintain his initial call.
This approach would have helped with the critical mistakes at the EURO, giving an even better picture of the refereeing - although there would have been more OFRs overall.
*My idea behind these percentages is to represent the proportion of qualified referees, who would decide differently after watching the replays. This is obviously not measurable in the moment, but it should give the idea, what should be achieved by the VAR.
One more point reagrding VAR: While you should not write that into the protcol, it might be sensible to encourage the VARs to tend more towards an OFR (in grey areas regarding intervention), if the decision is crucial for the match or even the competition.
Delete@Philipp S Every touch is NOT foul. This game is not basketball..
DeleteI agree with what others have said. VAR should be used more meaningfully...
Very interesting blog and some very insightful stuff here on the appointment of match referees for big matches in tournaments and elsewhere - something I've long been interested in.
ReplyDeleteBig decisions that referees get wrong change careers and unfortunately for Danny Makkelie last night will cast long shadow over the rest of his career and possibly cost him a major final or two in the future (perhaps I'm being naive there ;))
After last night for me only one referee could be counted upon for the final and that is Cüneyt Çakır - who is, by far, the best referee in Europe. So naturally I am shocked to read on here he has already been sent home.
The non-use of VAR last night is arguably a bigger decision than the decision to give the penalty itself. Many will legitimately ask . . . "What's the point of VAR?".
I've seen it many times in big matches though in Europe (not at this tournament). It seems the bigger the decision the less of the chance of VAR recommending an intervention. Which brings me to my point - Is there a sense that the VAR referee does not want to intervene to overrule his senior colleague for fear of some sort of embarrassment or repercussion? Is it really wise to have match officials from the same association (who would know each other quite well) reffing the game and doing VAR as well? This promotes a lack of independence.
For another Dutchman to be given the final, likely to be Kuipers, seems brave. I doubt UEFA will care as the decision was probably made before last night's match. . . but another major gaffe on Sunday will surely have ramifications?
- Erikson's statements on the subject are very important.
Delete- Probably other referees think the same.
http://refereeingworld.blogspot.com/2021/07/eriksson-best-referee-was-sent-home-by.html
I wrote after the call that it was supportable but not entirely clear. Perhaps "expected" should be used instead of supportable for two reasons: first, in the clip at https://twitter.com/ChiquimarcoMx/status/1412889836856487944?s=20, although the soft contact by the first defender on the back of Sterling's leg probably wasn't enough to make him fall, his likely dive was very well done and he didn't fly through the air but rather went to ground softly. The contact by the second defender was substantial, but when it happened Sterling was already going to ground. So secondly, the defending is extremely clumsy, not just in how they dealt with a known diver but for any offensive player inside the penalty box. So, between Sterling's very deceptive dive and the heavy-handed defending, the call is, imho, expected and supportable if not correct, especially in real time, and the problem is with Sterling and not Makkelie.
ReplyDeleteAnd what would be your opinion in this situation from Shakhtar-Basel EL qf? https://streamable.com/34lqdh
DeleteAlso we have a contact and clumsy reaction by the defender, and we have an attacker with an ultimate goal to get a penalty.
Players dive all the time. We know this. The responsibility is on the referee to do his homework before the match and everyone knows that this England team has two players who, shall we say, happen to periodically fall over in the box and they are Kane and Sterling. In fact both players dived/simulated and tried to con the match officials prior to the eventual penalty. Sterling was diving as the OG was scored and Kane dived in the second half.
DeleteConsequently no penalty should be given to those players unless it was completely without doubt in the mind of the referee.
Forlan, the streamable clips never load for me, but if you're referring to the clip at https://youtu.be/6h3r9eOAkuQ?t=231, slowed down to .25 speed it does look like a penalty to me based on there being enough contact for a foul and not an obvious dive. I've rewatched the Sterling clip a few times now, and it doesn't look like the first Denmark player is going for the ball, unless his reaction is very slow, since Sterling has already pushed the ball past him. I think if it was only the first contact, it would not have been called, but the second contact isolated would be enough for a call, in my opinion, had Sterling stayed on his feet. So should the fact that he is already falling preclude the call? I think most would say yes. So then we have to say should Makkelle be able to see that Sterling is already falling before the second contact and assume that the first contact is not enough to bring him down. That seems to be a lot to ask of him. Granted, I did not write that the call is necessarily correct, but I don't think we can say that is objectively wrong, either, because we can't know 100% that Sterling is diving (though of course past behavior is a good prediction of future behavior). So because there are two contacts and Sterling goes down, Makkelie probably thought that it looked close enough to a penalty to call it. You can see from his lackluster signal to the penalty spot that he isn't 100% convinced, either.
DeleteNo, sorry, it's just a wrong call. We can't try to relativise it. Anyone who ever played or refereed soccer game should clearly know that it's a refereeing mistake.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
ReplyDeleteNo, no, no. Stop.
DeleteThanks Mikael W for removing that comment - extremely inappropriate. Although I am not a fan of censorship, I fully support your action. This was way out of line.
DeleteWhat was discriminatory about it? Ridiculous. I was merely quoting, and it was a fine text of opinion, from personal lenses. Alas,farewell then. So long and thanks for all the fish.
Delete"Die Szene wird ihn verfolgen" - Urs Meier kritisiert Schiedsrichter Makkelie für Elfmeterentscheidung bei England vs. Dänemark
ReplyDeletehttps://bit.ly/2UzJ4GI
'Absolutely incomprehensible' - Sterling penalty award in Euro 2020 semi-final baffles former FIFA referee Meier
https://bit.ly/3qWGp5T
A QUESTION. As the penalty itself is reviewable, the VAR should have noticed the laser, right? Was it a mistake not to intervene? Could the penalty be retaken in such cases?
ReplyDelete"Here you can see how the green laser is pointed at Kasper Schmeichel just before the penalty kick"
https://bit.ly/2UviIWb