CROATIA - BELGIUM
Referee: Anthony Taylor (ENG)
Assistant Referee 1: Gary Beswick (ENG)
Assistant Referee 2: Adam Nunn (ENG)
Fourth Official: Istvan Kovacs (ROU)
Reserve Assistant Referee: Mihai Artene (ROU)
Video Assistant Referee: Marco Fritz (GER)
Assistant Video Assistant Referee: Tomasz Kwiatkowski (POL)
Offside Video Assistant Referee: Rafael Foltyn (GER)
Support Video Assistant Referee: Benoit Millot (FRA)
Standby Assistant Video Assistant Referee: Jan Seidel (GER)
Game 42 - Doha (16:00 CET)
CANADA - MOROCCO
Referee: Raphael Claus (BRA)
Assistant Referee 1: Rodrigo Figueiredo (BRA)
Assistant Referee 2: Danilo Simon (BRA)
Fourth Official: Yoshimi Yamashita (JPN)
Reserve Assistant Referee: Michael Orue (PER)
Video Assistant Referee: Julio Bascuñan (CHI)
Assistant Video Assistant Referee: Juan Martinez (ESP)
Offside Video Assistant Referee: Roberto Diaz Perez Del Palomar (ESP)
Support Video Assistant Referee: Leodan Gonzalez (URU)
Standby Assistant Video Assistant Referee: Pau Cebrian Devis (ESP)
15', correct penalty whistled by Taylor
ReplyDeleteCorrect penalty immedeatly whistled by Taylor. Minute 15.
ReplyDeleteofr and offside, correct decision by VAR
ReplyDeleteNo way that was offside,he wasnt in the play...
ReplyDeleteJust like Griezmann yesterday
totally different
DeleteYep,now they're saying that Loveen was offside.
DeleteThat is different
I really don't like this instructions for offside
ReplyDeleteNo controlled play by the defenders before #9 gets involved. So offside by the new instructions.
ReplyDeleteHowever they seem to have given it for the offside of #6?
Yes, SAOT shows, that #6 was in a minimal offside position.
DeleteTaylor then needed to evaluate in the OFR, whether he was active or not.
As he challenged his opponent for the ball, offside is correct.
Seems so, yes. Showing this graphic doesn't allow another conclusion.
DeletePhu, very very close. Even with SAOT ist was hardly visible if the player really was offside or not.
ReplyDeleteWhy can't VAR just tell Taylor instead of the delay to go to the screen. Looks terrible for me and wastes so much time!!
ReplyDeleteTaylor has to give his subjective view as to whether he thinks #6 is actively interfering, the VAR worked out that he was offside so then up to Taylor for the interfering part
DeleteWhy can't VAR do that - that's my point. Haven't the refs got enough to do!!
DeleteBecause it's subjective and VAR isn't meant to re-referee the game
DeleteWell, needs to be re-visited IMHO
DeleteAlfie. VAR Protocol is clear. Once a decision becomes objective, it is recommended the referee make the final decision.
DeleteI’d like to rewatch the contact which was the reason Taylor awarded the penalty. Was it only the defender’s foot hitting the tip of the opponent’s shoe when landing or did I miss a clearer, more intense contact before?
ReplyDeleteNo there was nothing
DeleteIn that case I’d be happy that SAOT spotted an offside position, otherwise I thought it would have been a very soft penalty
DeleteNot sure the initial call was correct either.
ReplyDeleteMe neither!!
DeleteClaus having problem with comms rn
ReplyDeletehttps://twitter.com/TheEuropeanLad/status/1598336220978974721
ReplyDeleteOffside replay, looks completely absurd tbh. Does anyone know what is the precision of the technology? I dont want to claim that its wrong, just that it is difficult to accept that offside is sth that is clearly in line to human eye. Even for ARs it is a bit cynical that this is strictly speaking a mistake
I don't understand that at all. How is that offside?
DeleteWhat new rule?
ReplyDeletehttps://i.imgur.com/R7D5eTB.png
ReplyDeleteZoomed in image. What part of the Croatian is offside? The only thing past the vertical white line is the arm.
A slight part of the sleeve is, however the Belgian player has even more of a sleeve over the line
DeleteThe attacker's shoulder is clearly past the offside line (created by the head of the defending player). The margin is small, but it's offside.
Delete@ Philipp, is it possible to change my prediction for Round Of 16(I) ? I change my mind for 2 games.
ReplyDeleteCome on man, just say yes or no. Please don't let me with seen.
Delete@Marcus there is no new rule, IFAB just sent a circular to national associations with explanation and interpretation of the law 11, especially deliberate play.
ReplyDeleteI can post it here, if you want?
Was Fritz was so focused on the 'TUNFRA' offside that he didn't notice the original SAOT one, or is that just me focusing on the CRO no.9 after the events of yesterday? :D
ReplyDeleteFIFA/UEFA/IFAB tried to 'have their cake and eat it' with the new offside law and in the last two days we've seen the negatives of this new approach. I wonder if they will revise it for 23/24.
I think they have to, everyone is confused and it's a mess quite honestly.
DeleteAt first I was focused on the second ball to #9. Didn't realize it was the other player until we saw the lines at the monitor.
DeleteCroatia number 9, surely play has been reset by the time the ball reaches him.
DeleteIMO, the previous official interpretation of deliberate play by defender when assessing offsides was really good and didn't need to be changed. But after Mbappé's goal in the UNL final, the so-called football experts, who most often are total ignorants, created a media scandal and IFAB changed the interpretation of "deliberate play" in offside law.
DeleteSo, even if there wasn't this marginal offside shown by broadcaster, another CRO player, who in the moment of pass was at a blatant offside position, would've made it offside anyway...
I think the same 'experts' were furious at referees in TUNFRA and CROBEL for disallowing the goals and still don't have a clue about actual offside interpretation.
Offside phase is certainly reset by the time 9 gets the ball 3 belgium players have played it and two of them in full control.
DeleteNot sure why Croatia number 9 is being mentioned - the lines were drawn to #6 who was (just) in an offside position, he then jumped up for the ball and challenged the Belgian player which means he was involved in active play therefore offside.
DeleteThing is he really doesn't look offside. Number 9 is clearly off
DeleteRewatching it, I think, that the third contact by a defender is still deliberate play - he is not challenged and can expect the ball. The fact, that his first touch is quite bad is not relevant.
DeleteSo #9 probably wasn't in an active offside.
But a very interesting situation to discuss the new interpretation.
Defenders must have an opportunity to CONTROL the ball. If they are merely groping at it (feet or otherwise), the plays are considered NOT deliberate. IFAB produced numerous examples showing the differences.
DeleteSilly question for you: is there a "cut" of referees after group stage? Does Referee committee publish something about it or we have to just suppose who is sent home?
ReplyDeleteExcellent choice by the Committee for Canada x Morocco. Claus, a coolheaded referee who's used to officiating frantic games in Brazil and at Copa Libertadores, is managing the clash with authority and keeping it under full control. Canada have taken a quite aggressive approach and are making it quite challenging for the Brazilian crew. A few mandatory cautions besides a series of vehement verbal warnings doing the trick.
ReplyDeleteGodd offside call in 1st half stoppage time disallowing Moroccan goal.
I really don't understand why everyone is speaking if nr 9 take the ball after an deliberate play or not when clearly the double line was at nr 6, also SAOT showed later that offside offense was for nr 6. Why are you discussing for the other players, are you watching the match or what?
ReplyDeleteCan someone clarify how 6 is actually in an offside position. https://twitter.com/CFCKonrad/status/1598337314513616896/photo/1
Delete@Anthony: Because the situation around #9 is more interesting.
Delete@EnglandREF: Because the part of the attacker's arm, with which a goal can be scored is nearer to the goal line than the same part of the defender's arm.
I would also to add that IMO all this confusion was created by OFR. Nr 6 is clearly challenging the defender for the ball so i didn't understand why an OFR was wanted for that play. Just wasting time
ReplyDeleteYou said the answer. He was challenging an opponent. Which is subjective.
DeleteSubjective when we have some distance between the players not like in this case when attacker was even touching the def
Delete83' (CROBEL): That looked like a deliberate pass to the GK IMO.
ReplyDeleteLOL. It was a botched overhead kick.
DeleteBackpass by CRO?
ReplyDeleteSorry but Taylor has a big problem with additional time!
ReplyDeleteNow he ends the game but Croatia has a quite long substitution and no reaction...
Agree. He should have allowed at least that Belgium attack. Furthormore, 4 minutes were not enough. Why doesn't he follow Collina's instructions.
DeletePlease. No criticise Taylor. Not Permitted.
DeleteTaylor may have ruined his chances with the added time. 4 minutes was really low in the first place due to Croatian time-wasting, but to end the game before 4:00 despite a Croatian substitution during added time is unacceptable for me
ReplyDeleteThis is also why I haven't liked the extensive added time during the World Cup. It may feel like time-wasting is less efficient, but if we add 6-7 minutes in games where nothing happens, you are, in fact, NOT punishing time-wasting by giving 8 minutes for that - the first and second half had the exact same number of added time, which is simply against any common sense
DeleteMy goodness, "ruined his chances"? Yeah, crucial mistake :P
DeleteIf I ignored my supervisor's instructions so blatantly at my job, I would be worried. But I also think we may only see 1 referee from each country in the next stage and if that is the case, Oliver gave the better impression (to me)
DeleteTaylor is above Oliver. Much more reliable.
DeleteExact. Taylor has much more OFR than Oliver. Reliable Taylor, always OFR (mistake)
DeleteArbitro Euro, do you really want me to list Oliver's blunders?? LOL
DeleteI see that this section of comments is reserved for fanboys.
DeleteAre you one of them? Saying Taylor is above Oliver is a matter of fact. Again, do you watch PL and UCL games?
DeleteIn case you missed my comment above, Philipp, is it possible to modify my prediction for Round Of 16(I) ? I change my mind for 2 games. Yes or not?
ReplyDeleteNo, it's not possible to change your predictions. In case you forgot to will one in I could add it...
DeleteOh, ok. Thanks.
DeleteTrue. I think Oliver has higher chances for something big on this tournament if we compare these two English referees.
ReplyDeleteWhy because Oliver add more minutes at the end 😅
DeleteOliver with higher chances? He was quite lucky that FIFA didn't show the replay of yesterday's incident in KSAvMEX. It looked like a clear penalty should have been awarded to MEX in the closing stages of the game as a Saudi defender took the place of his goalkeeper inside the box. Oliver is unstable. Has always been. Remember SwitzerlandvsSpain at Euro 2020? Taylor is above him on all levels.
DeleteGood, true David! Unbelievable. Your favourit is clear
DeleteA question of reliability, attested by Premier League appointments. Maybe you should watch more PL games. You are the one who seems to be the fan of Oliver :P
DeleteClaus is the go-to referee for blistering KO games. Big presence, natural authority, great self-possession under intense pressure, apart from very smart card management. Committee was spot-on in giving him MORvsCAN as the teams ran for all they were worth, as expected.
ReplyDeleteVery good Claus. We hope for the same for 2 referees a now
DeleteOffside situation (and all other VAR decisions) explained here.
ReplyDeletehttps://www.espn.com/soccer/fifa-world-cup/story/4807433/var-review-every-decision-at-the-world-cup-analysed
Just checked the crucial incident in Taylor game, everything correct by VAR, good procedure. The penalty whistled looked to be a correct call as well. Impossible for AR to raise flag for this offside, he must be praised for keeping it down and to be honest I would dare to say that without technology this looks like a clear ONSIDE.. but we must trust the call made by SAOT of course. Well done by English team and it will be interesting to see who will get a game in KO stage, I think only one possible, given also that England is still there at moment.
ReplyDeleteAnalysis of CROBEL
ReplyDeleteKey match incidents:
15' - https://streamable.com/wwa7vw
Following an OFR, a very soft penalty kick awarded in favour of Croatia for an alleged step on foot cancelled due to offside - SAOT indicated a marginal offside position by 6CRO who clearly challenged an opponent. Good VAR intervention and correct decision made by the referee. Even if not this marginal offside, most likely there would've been another offside offence by 9CRO who, at the moment of pass, was in a clear offside position and - after undeliberate (under new instructions) play by 5BEL - rather challenged 21BEL
Overview:
Surprisingly, Anthony Taylor faced a very easy game to referee. Both teams played in a very fair manner and therefore there weren't many challenges or duels to assess for the Englishman.
Taylor handled the game in his usual style - very focused and seriously / professionally approaching his job. The penalty kick award was very harsh but given we have no proof of no contact at all, most likely (barely) supportable. The only YC was issued to 19BEL for SPA tackle in 66' - at least supportable decision.
Perhaps he should've been more strict with CRO players dissenting after three FK calls in 7', 44' and 70' but I guess he managed it quietly.
In the 83rd minute, there was a possible deliberate play to GK who handled the ball but it was just a wrongly performed attempt to clear the ball by the defender - correct play-on from very alert Taylor.
After his first game ended with a RC to Korea Republic's coach for furious dissent after (rather wrongly) not allowing his team to take a corner kick, Taylor faced a similar incident in CROBEL as well. He added four minutes to the second half and there was a quick substitution procedure in 90+2' lasting ~15-20 seconds. As Belgium were launching a last attack in 94:00, going by the book (and tournament's instructions?) he should've allowed it rather than blown for the end of the game.
Overall, another decent performance from Anthony Taylor with a very soft penalty correctly cancelled after OFR due to offside and minor issue with lost time compensation.
Marks:
Anthony Taylor - 7
Gary Beswick - 7
Adam Nunn - 7
Marco Fritz - III
Thank you for the great analysis, I can fully agree with every word.
DeleteAlthough I'm Croatian, I definitely didn't like the penalty decision in 15': there was a certain minimal contact, but literally at the tip of the shoe and, IMO, not enough to award a penalty for. As for the incident in 83', my thoughts are the same as yours.
Thanks for appreciation!
DeleteA rule question, does a team captain designated on the match sheet have the right to give up his armband during the match to a reservist entering the field if this titular captain does not leave the field? In the Croatia-Belgium match, Kevin De Bruyne, without leaving the field, gave up his captain's armband to Eden Hazard, who entered the game. Is this allowed? No reaction from Anthony Taylor or FIFA? In advance, thank you for your answers.
ReplyDelete