UEFA Champions League it's back with Round of 16 games. Here the first assignments of KO stage involving the games to be played on Tuesday 13 February 2024.
13 February 2024
21:00 CET - Leipzig (RB Arena)
RB Leipzig (GER) - Real Madrid CF (ESP)
Referee: Irfan Peljto BIH
Assistant Referee 1: Senad Ibrisimbegović BIH
Assistant Referee 2: Davor Beljo BIH
Fourth Official: Miloš Gigovic BIH
Video Assistant Referee: Pol van Boekel NED
Assistant Video Assistant Referee: Dennis Johan Higler NED
UEFA Referee Observer: Tomasz Mikulski POL
UEFA Delegate: István Huszár HUN
Referee: Irfan Peljto BIH
Assistant Referee 1: Senad Ibrisimbegović BIH
Assistant Referee 2: Davor Beljo BIH
Fourth Official: Miloš Gigovic BIH
Video Assistant Referee: Pol van Boekel NED
Assistant Video Assistant Referee: Dennis Johan Higler NED
UEFA Referee Observer: Tomasz Mikulski POL
UEFA Delegate: István Huszár HUN
21:00 CET - Copehagen (Parken)
FC København (DEN) - Manchester City FC (ENG)
Referee: José Maria Sánchez Martínez ESP
Assistant Referee 1: Raúl Cabañero Martínez ESP
Assistant Referee 2: Iñigo Prieto López de Ceraín ESP
Referee: José Maria Sánchez Martínez ESP
Assistant Referee 1: Raúl Cabañero Martínez ESP
Assistant Referee 2: Iñigo Prieto López de Ceraín ESP
Fourth Official: César Soto Grado ESP
Video Assistant Referee: Juan Martínez Munuera ESP
Assistant Video Assistant Referee: Guillermo Cuadra Fernández ESP
Video Assistant Referee: Juan Martínez Munuera ESP
Assistant Video Assistant Referee: Guillermo Cuadra Fernández ESP
UEFA Referee Observer: Roberto Rosetti ITA
UEFA Delegate: Victor Marius Radu ROU
UEFA Delegate: Victor Marius Radu ROU
Roberto Rossetti observing Jose Maria? Is the a plan maybe ahead of Euro for Maria?
ReplyDeleteI’m starting to think Rosetti will select 24(+) referees for the Euro rather than 18 because the maths isn’t adding up at the moment.
DeleteSanchez is being treated like an italian ref by rosetti. Being subpar or even worse at his games, and still getting CL-KO chances which are fairly undeserved! What does the commitee see in him? Maybe a candidate for the exchange with COMNEBOL?
DeleteInteresting assignments. Our ideas after reading observers' names were partially wrong. Indeed we have Sanchez Martinez with Rosetti (i this case, one could have expected a less experienced name) while Peljto in Leipzig with a regular Elite referees' observer.
ReplyDeleteThe games can be considered quite similar on paper, with big teams expected to win in a quite easy way against such opponents. I see potentially more challenging the clash in Leipzig, but definitely not that much.
For both referees, it is the debut in CL KO stage.
About the Spanish assignments, to me not a coincidence that committee has decided to "open" the CL with these officials and not Gil Manzano / Hernandez Hernandez. Indeed, afer all happened to the referee from Don Benito regarding that possible penalty in Italy - Ukraine, now it will be interesting to see how committee will assign him. I would bet that he will start from Europa League, then getting a rathher "hidden" CL assignment and that would be enough.
Even more "difficult" the position of Hernandez Hernandez, due to the domestic incidents in Real Madrid game. I don't expect him in sonorous games with immediate appearance, but of course I can be wrong and I take the responsibility of being proven wrong by committee (and that would be nice for sure). Rosetti & CO. showed always a certain sensibility to those incidents. First aim is always to avoid any potential discussion even before the kick offs...
IMO Leipzig-Real is clearly the tighter game and therefore the better appointment. I think, if Peljto manages this one without problems, he is nearly sure for the EURO.
DeleteSanchez' appointment should indeed be a test regarding EURO selection. I had thought as a possible second Spanish referee, but maybe even as alternative to Gil Manzano, as you write. However in my opinion, Gil Manzano should still be ahead and I rather expect him in a CL 2nd leg than not.
Hernandez probably continues as low Elite for the rest of the season - maybe with an EL game on Thursday - with nearly no EURO chances. Or he even focusses on VAR again in the KO stage and goes to the tournament in that role.
(based on UEFA coefficients, Leipzig-Real is even the top game of the whole round with 7th playing 3rd...)
DeleteWhat is the situation with Halil Umut Meler? Does anyone know anything?
ReplyDeleteWhat do you think about this call in FC Kaiserslautern v SC Paderborn 07?
ReplyDeletehttps://streamable.com/77mjpp
Yes, quite complex situation.
DeleteClearly outside the penalty area, borderline regarding foul, borderline regarding DOGSO.
So the first decision penalty was clearly wrong and VAR had to intervene.
Apparently for the VAR there were strong doubts regarding the foul itself and she therefore recommended an OFR. This is somehow understandable, because the goalkeeper plays the ball first (and maybe referee and AR1 missed that fact). On the other hand giving the foul is still supportable IMO, because one can assess it as dangerous/reckless by the GK.
And finally if the free kick would be given, you also have to strongly consider DOGSO, which is another argument for an OFR (as the referee apparently didn't give a DOGSO-YC for the GK in the first place).
So overall a supportable OFR due to the complexity, I think. No foul is also OK and the dropped ball with the GK the logical restart, because the ball was in the penalty area, when whistled.
But I am also interested in other opinions.
BTW: Referee Martin Petersen and VAR Katrin Rafalski.
DeleteAgree, borderline in several aspects. Yes, the keeper does play the ball first, but why? The attacker retracts his head to avoid contact. I do prefer foul to the attacker here and DOGSO. Only element against DOGSO could be control, but I think that would be overanalyzing. Obviously VAR has to (factually) intervene in regards to the wrongly assessed penalty, but I think the OFR in regards to the foul itself is wrong, as an attacking foul is clearly and obviously wrong - and in my opinion, the most correct decision actually.
DeleteAttacking foul is NOT clearly and obviously wrong*
DeleteI think that when referee whistled penalty he thought about a more evident foul than this one and very likely he had missed first contact on the ball by keeper.
DeleteAll decisions are possible here, including play on (as it was decided after OFR). Staying only at the foul, according to a strict application of protocol, as somebody already said, the call should have been supported. Easy then for VAR to inform referee only about the penalty to be changed in free kick, but in such circumstance I can accept that a VAR wants to invite referee to rewatch because there are clearly too many elements to consider.
Doubts regarding SPA or DOGSO as well, without the foul by keeper I think attacker would have found more trouble for gaining possession of the ball again, so this can be SPA, rather than DOGSO. But I could understand who says DOGSO.
I think the only very evident miss in this incident was AR1, very late in following the action and he couldn't suggest to referee this was outside the box. Quite blatant mistake, at least the position of the incident, outside, should have been spotted live.
Agreed, poor from AR1. This incident was quite clearly outside the box which should have been detected.
DeleteIMO, it's still a foul by the goalkeeper - he plays the ball indeed (more by accident than something else) but the attacker would still have been able to control it. Therefore, FK + RC. In my opinion, the no foul call / collision is somehow defendable but not an optimal technical assessment.
DeleteSeems Felix Zwayer is back to his very best. He was brilliant in the crucial game between B. Leverkusen and Bayern Munich. Still a bit fussy as he always is, but very technically good.
ReplyDeleteI agree. Simply very good.
DeleteRosetti’s special obversation makes no sense to me.
ReplyDeleteOption 1, this is a final test for Sanchez to seal his EURO-ticket. However with all the respect, this game could be easier to referee than the average topgame in La Liga.
Option 2, Sanchez is favored over Manzano, to keep the latter in shadow after what happened and Rosetti wants to see with his own eyes if Sanchez is ready for a QF. But then again, why would you select one of the easier games on paper?
Peljto’s EURO spot should be safe.
Lazio Bayern Münih
ReplyDeleteHalil umut meler Glenn nyberg slavko vincic François leixter Ivan kruzilak
The last second for team Makkelie was very hectic. This moment at a 3-2 score. AR decision = no goal. VAR confirmed this or rather could not debunk it
ReplyDeletehttps://twitter.com/ESPNnl/status/1756703399268000124?t=_Gvq2mmSNR4dJ_kWsX2pKA&s=19
Hans: The team handled given the conditions very good. There was no clear evidence.
DeleteWhat I find more shocking is that you can see that before the match was started there has been no good check to see if the crossbar and the goal line were parallel on each other.
Now the home team Heerenveen had a enlargment of the goalline and potentially wins three points because of that.
Controversy at Luton town in the premier league against yesterday. Referee: Chris Kavanagh, VAR: Paul Tierney- a combo with long history of controversy when working together. 2 OFR for handball decisions, first one is understandable but very harsh. The second is outright ridiculous, screams of evening up. Maybe a penalty but Italy but never here in England.
ReplyDeleteCrystal Palace vs Chelsea: Michael Oliver with the best performance of the night! Best game management and spot on foul detection
ReplyDeleteThe nature of appointment in AFC it’s really crazy and embarassing, no sanctions, after poor running in AFC Asian Cup, Sivakorn directly act as VAR again in R16 ACL Shandong-Kawasaki with another poor officials Moh Taqi as main referee.
ReplyDeleteAnd now another very poor call by Sivakorn, clearly natural position, ball to the hand.
DeleteSivakorn oh my goodness, how could he call Taqi for potential VC, mindblowing how he could become elite referee in AFC.
DeleteOne comment would be "AFC have lost the plot about handballs", but in my eyes the more nuanced and correct comment is, "AFC have paid for their 'regional quotas' approach and the appointed Thailese VAR has lost the plot".
Delete:)
Yamashita has a good performance in AUS vs IND and she gets one match.
DeleteThe first intervention is absolutely expected in todays game and that has to be said no matter what you think about Pu-Udom (I don't rate him highly either). For me, the second intervention is wrong, I don't believe there is clear indication of intent to injure or excessive force in that situation, correctly rejected by Taqi
Deletehttps://streamin.me/v/64327443
ReplyDeleteFor those who are interested, the official assessment by Rocchi committee about this incident is that VAR must support, not a black or white situation, but grey area (as most of handballs).
Explanation: basically the player with the arms in that position would like to decrease body volume, but the ball exactly hitting that raised arm can't save him from a call. That's what I had thought.
This was called by referee and confirmed by VAR, in case of original NO PENALTY, then NO VAR intervention as well.
Interesting. Looks like a clear-cut penalty in relation to UEFA guidelines
DeleteOT: Alireza Faghani will continue his international career, he is now on the first list as AFC representative for WC2026, he will be the first referee in history to participate in 4 consecutive World Cup.
ReplyDeleteKari Seitz already attended 4 World Cups.
DeleteCould you share that AFC list?
Offside in Lipsia?!?
ReplyDeleteCorrect offside In Leipzig- clearly impacting the keeper well picked up by the AR
ReplyDeleteWell, the player scoring the goal wasn't offside... The commentator on the TV was also already celebrating the goal during the VAR check, which was dissallowed to his misbelief.
DeleteSuperb decision by AR1! Clear impact on the goalkeeper, well done!
Deletegood offside
ReplyDeleteTo be honest, still without rewatching it, this offside call in Leipzig gives me some doubts. Let's hope I'm wrong.
ReplyDeleteIt is possible that AR2 wrongly raised for the player who received the ball, but he was not in offside. The other attacker in contact with keeper was punishable, but active in the play?
I share your doubts, Chefren.
DeleteI thought I'm the only one doubting
DeleteMe too
DeleteHe is clearly affecting the keeper so offside correct for me
DeleteVideo:
ReplyDeletehttps://streambug.org/cv/32c9a7
I don't think, #39 of Leipzig kept the Real keeper from moving. Very difficult to decide.
DeleteAnyway: VAR is Van Boekel, usually a man to trust.
For me, indeed a correct decision to disallow the goal. The attacker was pushing the goalkeeper and therefore actively intervening, trying to benefit from his position. But I see why there are people having doubts…
DeleteAgree with Reg_1707, correct decision
DeleteYes, we can start nitpicking and find offside. But what does football expect?
DeleteAt the moment of the shot keeper is ahead, he can see, but he can do nothing to reach ball, and ball is far. He tries to return back and he has the player in offside indeed obstructing him, but it's very hard to consider a punishable offside only for that.
DeleteThis decision would have been correct if original ball had been sent to the player in offside, but in this case to be honest I don't see this was an action to be punished.
Player scoring is in regular position.
I tend to think AR1 (sorry not AR2 as I wrote before, but AR1) just raised the wrong player, thinking about the one who had scored.
In this scenario, maybe too superficial analysis by Van Boekel, and I must admit the check was definitely too short for a rather complex situation to read.
Clear offside for interference, the impact is unquestionable here.
Delete@Ref_1707 Based on which paragraph of the offside law you consider this goal correctly disallowed?
DeleteIMO:
- Challenging for the ball —> no, as the ball is someplace else
- Making an obvious action —> no, as there is no impact on the ability of the GK to play the ball (even without the minimal touch in the back the GK would never ever have had a chance to play the ball)
If the onfield call though was for the subjective offside then surely it’s not clearly wrong
Delete@Anonymous 21:31 Then I’m curious again based on which passage of the offside law can one argument that this goal could be disallowed?
DeleteThe push from behind, albeit light, affects the body stance of the keeper, impacting his ability to turn towards the ball.
DeleteThanks for explaining. But ‘turning towards a ball’ is far away from ‘being able to play the ball’. Imo the GK would have never been able to PLAY the ball, with nor without the minimal push. Simply because the ball was way too far away from the GK.
DeleteSorry but some readers here should remember in my opinion that all the considerations about offside start when the offside is active, that means the ball is close and it can be played. You can't analyze only what a player in offside is doing, there must also be a real possibility to play ball! In this case, very hard to think about that, but who says that offside, if called for this reason, is not 100% wrong, should be indeed correct. In my opinion a 5% - 10% punishable offside, but reality says a different thing.
Delete‘When the offside is active’? Never heard that phrase before. The ball does not have to be close. The player in offside position can be assessed as interfering from the moment the ball is played. Now, the factor of whether the keeper had a chance to save the ball is legitimate. It is subjective here, but in my opinion - and of the VAR - offside for interference is not clear and obvious wrong.
DeleteAgree, I have to correct my initial comment. If we interpret the LotG the way they are written and meant – and that is the only correct way to interpret them – we would not find an argument supporting the on-field decision. The goalkeeper is not prevented to play the ball. Given the fact the LotG even require a CLEAR prevention to play the ball, we cannot say the player became active. I admit, I was relying on "what would I expect as decision" rather than the way LotG is actually written, sorry for that. Having looked it up, I have to agree. VAR should have corrected the decision.
Delete22 min man citu defender stamp on FC København but we dont see any var cheek
ReplyDeleteOk…. how is this tackle of Carvajal not being punished…? With Fk and a yellow card
ReplyDeletePeljto struggling
ReplyDeleteWhen the referee starts thinking that he is more significant than football itself, we have a picture like that of Peljto who is about to completely lose control when the game heats up a little bit...
ReplyDeleteCalm down. He is trying to let the game flow and not give out needless early yellow cards. He has missed one foul by carvajal
DeleteIt is not just one missed card by far. He thinks that he is better by the players and already many of them has shown him that he is not right and the football rules are others. Anyway, he will struggle big time.
DeleteMateu Lahoz says in the Spanish broadcast that the offside decision is 'madness'
ReplyDeleteWouldn’t say madness but I don’t think he affected the goalkeepers ability to play the ball at all. Offside is incorrect för sure.
DeleteI agree. GK had no chance to defend it. Real Madrid influence, so it is normal...
DeletePeljto with a not convincing perfomance in Leipzig
ReplyDeleteIf you ask me, Peljto is very bad. Already missed at least two YCs, if not 3. Foul from Carvajal - what clearer YC can you expect! Many protests, low respect from players... For me it's a big surprise to see him tonight on the pitch.
ReplyDeleteWhat's the matter with Peljto? Did he forget his YC in the cabin?
ReplyDeleteHorrible foul detection (Carvajal).
Peljto having a poor night so far.needs to take control
ReplyDeletePeljto seems overhelmed
ReplyDeleteThis happens when referees do not fulfil their duties. And part of these duties is to show cards.
ReplyDeleteThe game is under complete control. Not ever close to being out of hand
ReplyDeleteWhich game are you referring to?
DeleteThe game where the blog is having a meltdown over one missed foul/ yellow card
DeleteIt's not about one, it's about three missing YC plus one doubtful offside decision plus a ref that is not able to earn the players' respect.
DeleteExactly, every decision is being disputed even if it’s clearly correct, suggests ref is getting in respect from players
DeletePerhaps there are arguments based on LOTG to disallow Leipzig's goal for offside. However, 100% agree with one anonymous comment above. If the Leipzig player wasn't standing there behind the goalie, it would still be a crystal clear goal, right? Don't think the goalkeeper could have done anything. And yes, rules are rules and have to be maintained, however rules must be supportive to the game. It shouldn't be about the rule. Question to IFAB: do we really want this…
ReplyDeleteI dare to even take it a step further. Imo there is no part of the law which support disallowing the goal.
DeleteHow can you say that there is no part of the law that supports disallowing the goal when Lunin gets pushed by an attacker standing in an offside position?
Delete@Elliot Please quote the phrase which supports this decision. Which exact passage do you refer to when argumenting the goal was correctly disallowed?
Delete(and if the push would have been the reason an OFR would have been advised)
@ Elliot
DeletePushed or touched? Is this football or Mikado?
@Anonymous I refer to the moment tgat Lunin gets pushed which puts him off balance and makes him unable to turn for the ball
Delete@HaGo When you are in an offside position, you can't do anything that might have the slightest of impact on the play. Even a bare touch can be enough for an offside to be called
But the law doesn’t speak about ‘turning for the ball’, it states ‘being able to play the ball’. Imo there is a significant difference between those two wordings.
DeleteThe law even requires ‘making an obvious action which CLEARLY impacts on the ability of an opponent to play the ball’
Maybe too lenient (dtr, dissent, missed Carvajal's SPA tackle) Peljto tonight but why noone talks about (very!) good aspects like excellent advantages in 23', 24' and 36' or great dealing with mobbing in 27' (yeah, Kroos could have been cautioned for SPA there)?
ReplyDeleteSince when not showing mandatory cards is called good refereeing?
DeleteGreat dealing with mobbing and dissents is to show YC.
DeleteThe Leipzig manager was booked offscreen after Peljto didn't stop play (IMO, rightly) when LEI17 was lying injured but Real Madrid had a very promising attack.
DeleteBiggest mistake for sure, missed Carvajal's foul (¿lack of concentration?), which was also the perfect chance to open the cards after two 50-50 SPA situations in which he decided not to do so. Unlucky.
In German TV, UEFA is harshly criticized to appoint a referee with not much experience to that game. Maybe, UEFA underrated the difficulty of the game. Maybe, they better had appoint Letexier in Leipzig and Peljto in Rom.
ReplyDeleteI think it's too easy to draw such conclusions being sure about what would have happened in case of...
DeletePeljto was in a very good form and deserved this appointment, basically at moment the main point for discussion is the offside, this could have happened also to another referee, and in that case, if you think offside is wrong, you have definitely to blame more the video match officials than the field referees.
I agree, Chefren, but you seem to concentrate too much on offside in min 2.
DeleteWhat about the not shown YC?
Clearly, a goal not given is more important than a missed yellow card
ReplyDeleteOT: Dieter Pauly died today aged 81. He was one of the great referees. Pauly’s appointments in consecutive seasons to the early-round European Cup ties Juventus vs. Real Madrid and (Maradona’s) Napoli vs. RM were probably more prestigious than finals at that time. An old school, ‘real’ referee, his ability to arouse respect on the pitch from players was quite outstanding (think Orsato). He would have been 82 tomorrow :(. Rest in peace, sir.
ReplyDeleteRIP
DeleteA great referee; I remember him in the Champions league big matches of the 80'
DeletePeljtos foul detection continues to be - let's say - interesting (56').
ReplyDeleteYC for the push against Carvahal but no penalty why?
ReplyDeleteAre you serious?
DeleteAxaxaaa it was in Real PK area, man.
DeleteYC for Simakan for an off the ball push on Carvajal. Correct by the book, but I wonder how it was 'produced'. VAR input? AR2 who had a good vision?
ReplyDeleteAR2 had a clear view of what happened. He might have correctly reported to the ref.
DeletePraise the Lord!
ReplyDeletePeljto showed a YC to Carvajal!
Copenhagen - City: Wrong foul leading to YC for dissent - first YC of the match in 72’. Not the first YC you want to give…
ReplyDeleteSeemed to be several instances of clear dissent before the YC was shown. Then more dissent ignored at 74'. You move your arm like that to moan in England/Germany you'd definitely be booked and I thought Uefa were meant to be clamping down on that
DeleteYes, the YC is correct and unavoidable. Just a shame that - in this case - it was a wrong foul that led to the dissent
DeleteIs the YC for COP2 for the studs-up tackle sufficient or was this a SFP?
ReplyDeleteObviously I’m talking about the Copenhagen-Man City game (73’).
DeleteYC. Not enough force for RC. However, you could argue that it was a borderline situation.
DeleteCorrect YC for LEI9 - reckless stamp.
ReplyDeleteGreat performance by The spanish referee Guardiola at Copenhagen :-)
ReplyDelete88' Another arm waved and tolerated in Copenhagen. Odd to see so much dissent accepted when you are most used to watching PL football
ReplyDeleteShould have been another YC for dissent
DeleteWhat a poor performance by sanchez Martinez.. Many bad discessions on small freekicks, clearly favour from referee to City
ReplyDeleteIt's not the best tonight for Peljto. Sorry, that didn't convince me today.
ReplyDeleteThe luckiest man tonight for sure was Peljto,even more lucky than females that will be getting gifts for Valentines day.
ReplyDeleteFrom 1st half and not punishing anyone or even trying to warn players to 2nd half where he can only thank players that made his life easier.
Diaz's injury and not respecting fair play and not some serious retaliation from Madrid players,plenty obvious YC's missed,missed very obvious shove on Carvajal that could led to something more serious.
He should be lucky that Carvajal was on mandatory YC or that Rudiger was injured or that Real doesn't have someone like Ramos.
Very weak performance by Peljto, but he had plenty of help from players and that saved him today.
Sánchez Martínez and the rest of the spanish refs are very bad.
ReplyDeleteExcellent Peljto! Bravo!
ReplyDeleteYou forgot to mark your remark as sarcastic!
Deletehahahahahahaha
DeleteWhy would it be sarcastic? Excellent decision to disallow goal for offside.
DeleteRidiculous
DeletePeljto - scandalous performance!
Delete
ReplyDeleteOffside for Leipzig was wrong in my opinion. Please abolish VAR, that's what I say as a referee. Sorry ! This is not my football
The on-field decision was offside. With ou without VAR, the goal would have been disallowed...
DeleteNot a surprise that we got a very weak start of this years CL KO stage. Sanchez is not an Elite level ref and I still dont understand why he got a second chance that quickly after his horror night in Eindhoven. Expected Peljto to do better. Unfortunately he seemed not in control today! Great night for Rosetti. Im curious how the very overrated Italian will do in Paris tomorrow but I expect a very hot night there as well.
ReplyDeletehttps://streambug.org/cv/1f256e
ReplyDelete23min
There is pelanty for FC København?
Rodri deliberately plays the man and it is a clear (careless) step on foot, penalty would indeed be the right technical decision. 73' would have been, and should be, a RC for a 'classic' SFP - lunging tackle, medium-high intensity, studs to shin contact; however nowadays it will be an RAP8 I guess.
DeleteClip fpr 73':
https://www.streambug.io/cv/e83021
73' a clear RC in my oppinion. No reason for the defender to go with his force frontal to the ankle, very, very dangerous
DeleteBetter video (without interruption) of the penalty area incident:
Deletehttps://streambug.org/cv/18990b
Sorry but that's an evident penalty.
Incredible mistake by VAR, I think that live tyou can have a wrong perception, it doesn't look like a step on foot, but it is! And indeed OFR to be called! I would sare to say this replay went unnoticed with a very quick look from the VAR room... can't find other explanations TBH...
About the possible RC, YC is supportable due to extremely low tackle, almost grounded, so that's reason, but indeed the other criteria say SFP and this would have been a better decision by Spanish referee, in case.
IMO you are being too harsh with Peljto tonight. On-field decision was offside and VAR confirmed that decision. In case of different on-field decision I would understand discussion. But, player is pushing gk in moment of shoot!!! What are we talking about?! Make it simple. Only “big” mistake was missed tackle by Carvajal and thats it. Criteria tonight was that both teams had several not awarded little fouls but I would call it braveness by Peljto. Multiple times play-on situations positively affected on this game and heated it to level what fans want CL KO football to be - interested ! Many good adventages.
ReplyDeleteSeveral of you are questioning his behaviour on dissent situations, but ask yourself did that made players reasonable in second half or as you called it “absence of crazy players like Rudiger, Ramos…”?! It is always easier to show YC but sometimes maybe you just need to prove that you are an ELITE!
Great yc for Vinicus. Lack of respect towards both of opponent and referee. No management in such situations.
DeleteGood performance by Peljto and his team. Great job guys!
ReplyDeleteHahahahahahaha
DeleteAFC Referees Candidates WC 2026:
ReplyDeleteAbdulrahman Al-Jassim (QAT)
Salman Ahmad Falahi (QAT)
Mohammed Al Hoish (KSA)
Khalid Al-Turais (KSA)
Adel Al-Naqbi (UAE)
Omar Al-Ali (UAE)
Ahmed Al-Kaf (OMA)
Alireza Faghani (IRN)
Yusuke Araki (JPN)
Yoshimi Yamashita (JPN)
Adham Makhadmeh (JOR)
Ilgiz Tantashev (UZB)
Ma Ning (CHN)
Kim Hee-gon (KOR)
Nazmi Nasaruddin (MAS)
Ahmad Al-Ali (KUW)
The expectation is that 8 or 9 referees will make the final cut
DeleteNo Alex King?
Deletesource?
DeleteAlex King not enough experience and treatment, so far the Australian it’s only number 3 and he would become no.2 or even directly no.1 after Faghani retire, I mean Australian FA choose safe choice to push the old and very experienced referee than to promote the younger after what we saw in AFC Asian Cup
Delete*even no.4 before Chris Beath retired
DeleteIf AFC's quota is 6+2, then Abdulrahman Al-Jassim (QAT), Mohammed Al Hoish (KSA), Ahmed Al-Kaf (OMA), Alireza Faghani (IRN), Yoshimi Yamashita (JPN), Adham Makhadmeh (JOR), Ilgiz Tantashev (UZB) and Ma Ning (CHN) are more likely to attend WC26.
Deletehttps://ibb.co/9y8DrHc
Deletehttps://ibb.co/t8B2MCB
Deletehttps://www.instagram.com/p/C3T-QgGSnYf/?igsh=MWQ2dzc2aWw4OXVoOQ==
DeleteOfficial Malaysian FA announce their referee Nazmk
Instead of Al Jassim, I think it would be no surprise if Salman Al Falahi is chosen. For regional quota I don’ think we will have 2 Qatari as main referee. For Makhadmeh after what happened in Asian Cup, I think he is lack of political support so this is a chance for Al Ali after good run in Asian Cup.
DeleteMy predictions:
1. Alireza Faghani (IRN/AUS) (AFF)
2. Ilgiz Tantashev (CAFF)
3. Ahmed Al Kaf (WAFF)
4. Ahmad Al Ali/Mohamed Al Hoish (WAFF)
5. Ma Ning (EAFF)
6. Salman Falahi (WAFF)
7. Nazmi Nasaruddin (AFF)/Kim Hee Gon (EAFF)
8. Yoshimi Yamashita (EAFF)
7 and 8 will appear as FO (political assignment)
Still surprise for me that Mohamed Abdulla Hassan Mohamed is out, if the final lead by him it would be wonderful but unfortunately Ma Ning so dreadful.
For notes, very potential political appointment beside Yamashita is Nazmi Nasaruddin from Malaysia, they have HQ in Kuala Lumpur and Subkhidin Moh Saleh.
No Fu Ming, Muhammad Abdullah Hassan Muhammad, Jumpei Iida... Good to see Salman Fallahi there, he is definitely a talent.
DeleteI think 3 names you mentioned surely will be 3 names from the AFC for VMO, especially since Shaun Evans, Sivakorn, and Al Marri in trouble, if there are 7 names for VMO, the 4 later will be Moh Taqi, Kim Jong Hyeok, Omar Al Ali, and Khalid Al Turais.
DeleteStill not confirm from Korea is Kim Hee Gon or Kim Jong Hyeok and I got information that only 6 main referees from AFC will appear in WC26.
DeleteThis information from Arbitro Internacional already said that FIFA intends to have 6 main and 2 support
Deletehttps://twitter.com/ArbitroInteBlog/status/1635634399415869446
Korea is Kim Jong Hyeok not Kim Hee Gon. So I think Araki have no chance if there is Kim Jong Hyeok and Yamashita.
DeletePeljto and Nyberg were promoted at the same time right?
ReplyDeleteI don't think there could be a bigger contrast between referees. Nyberg steps on the pitch and from the first minute he is accepted by players. He can probably make small mistakes and still will be accepted. That is why he can officiate big teams straight away. Peljto, on the other hand, is not a natural authority and instantly accepted. In big games or heated games, his foul detection must be flawless to not get into trouble.
Very good observation - agree 100%
DeleteI think that Peljto has great potential, in my opinion the best UEFA referee at the moment.
ReplyDeleteIf you disagree/againts offside decision from Peljto, the one who must take the responsibility it’s not Peljto but as Chefren/the others expert said it was the man in charge in behind, Pol Van Boekel. About missed YC, I don’t think we could blame him very much till he can’t get (demotion match) further “deserved” appointments.
ReplyDeleteOFC Preselected 2026
ReplyDeleteAUKWAI Ben Ariel Solomon Islands
KAWANA-WAUGH Campbell-Kirk Aotearoa New Zealand
Who is CONCACAF preselected?
Same names as before plus 2 female refs
DeleteVideo clips from Leipzig vs Real Madrid
ReplyDeletehttps://we.tl/t-ZcuwUNrywI
Thank you!
DeleteMy views:
2' Wrong decision, not a punishable offisde, as the player in contact with keeper never becomes active in play (ball too far and keeper without chances to reach it), goal should have been allowed. I think VAR with more responsibility than AR who very likely raised for the other player.
17' and 23' we can accept NO CARD decision
23' and 24' excellent use od advantage
27' by far more YC than previous situations, maybe good moment to start with cards, but referee had different ideas, for me clear SPA here and player interested only in stopping opponent
29' here clear YC missed, significant mistake, he didn't see the foul so he didn't book
36' good advantage, player could have been booked afterwards, reckless challenge
52' very good cooperation AR2, you can see him in a replay after the incident immediately starting communication with referee, YC is enough, impossible to see for Peljto
66' YC is correct
76' very deliberate action by player, indeed, I would have liked to see a YC for the blatant intention when he wnt against opponent, but in today's football such situations are less punished than the past, to follow in the same minute a very correct YC
84' a well deserved YC ffor unsporting behavior, in 85' the same, reckless action
89' you can accept NO CARD
So, to summarize: the crucial incident of the game went wrong, but I think you can't blame too much Peljto and maybe not even AR1, the communication between them and the VAR must be analyzed here, my idea is that they didn't take the needed time to verify. About the referee, the most significant mistake is missed YC in first half, indeed.
In addition to that, I think he tried to change his style for this game, becoming rather lenient, saving cards and showing them only when strictly needed. This wasn't the same in the excellent games he had in group stage, then justifying such assignment. Still, with a different outcome and without the big YC missed, there wouldn't have been discussions, but in this scenario the overall picture of the performance is a bit damaged. Not the referee we saw a ferw months ago and one could have expected more. Still, not a poor performance, but definitely below the (higher) expected level we had for him.
Sorry for the offside incident that put eveything in a certain shadow just from the beginning.
That's of course my view.