Wednesday 10 July 2024

UEFA EURO 2024 Match 50: Netherlands - England (discussion)

Second semifinal at EURO 2024. Felix Zwayer, leading a full German crew, in charge of Netherlands - England. 



Game 50, Semifinals
Dortmund, 10 July 2024 21:00 CET
NETHERLANDS - ENGLAND
Referee: Felix Zwayer GER
Assistant Referee 1: Stefan Lupp GER
Assistant Referee 2: Marco Achmüller GER
Fourth Official: Daniel Siebert GER
Reserve Assistant Referee: Rafael Foltyn GER
Video Assistant Referee: Bastian Dankert GER
Assistant Video Assistant Referee 1: Christian Dingert GER
Assistant Video Assistant Referee 2: Marco Fritz GER
UEFA Referee Observer: Roberto Rosetti ITA
UEFA Delegate: Peter Lundström FIN

234 comments:

  1. For the integrity of refereeing and Zwayer himself I'm hoping for a masterclass here

    ReplyDelete
  2. Good luck to Felix, hope hill will do his best, as he knows. Also hope for top performance.

    ReplyDelete
  3. It will be good! Semifinals and Finals are more often free from dirty things/difficulties than other matches. Big focus avoids often big problems!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Netherlands have their reputation though, 2010 aswell as vs Argentina. Could turn ugly if we're unlucky :/

      Delete
  4. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

    ReplyDelete
  5. What are your predictions for the Euro final? me: Turpin

    ReplyDelete
  6. I wish him all the best for this game. I am critical of this appointment, but still want to see him succeed!

    ReplyDelete
  7. Good luck to Felix and his team ! :)

    ReplyDelete
  8. Rosetti and Kuipers both in the stadium.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Zwayer highly concentrated in tunnel before entrace as always

    ReplyDelete

  10. Turpin as the head referee in the EURO finals would be the biggest embarrassment for Roberto Rossetta since he took over the UEFA referees, even though he has had a lot of stupid things so far.

    ReplyDelete
  11. Good luck to the team and congrats to Stefan Lupp on his 13th (!) career Euro game as an AR. Anybody know if that's a record?

    ReplyDelete
  12. Daniel ORSATO will referee euro 2024 final 🙏🙏🙏

    ReplyDelete
  13. Foul an Kane is clear PK??

    ReplyDelete
  14. Possible penalty Dumfries - Kane.
    All this kind of penalty has been always subject of OFR in serie A last season.

    ReplyDelete
  15. Very bad so far. The dirty game has begun.

    ReplyDelete
  16. For me never ever a penalty shocking

    ReplyDelete
  17. That is an absolute disgrace

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Why 3 dump comments above? All correct so far, good decision after OFR

      Delete
    2. Sorry fritz that is never a penalty.

      Delete
  18. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  19. Ridiculous intervention. Shocking. Never a penalty

    ReplyDelete
  20. As an England supporter that is never a penalty imho

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I’m watching this with friends of many nationalities and ironically (or perhaps not!) the only one who thinks it’s not a pen is the English supporter XD

      Delete
  21. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

    ReplyDelete
  22. I think correct final decision. PK + YC. Reckless tackle and ball was still in play.

    ReplyDelete
  23. Never a penalty because of the contact after hitting the ball by the attacker

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. You know that that is not a rule right?

      Delete
  24. Clear PK, hard to spot onfield live. Excellent job by VAR.

    ReplyDelete
  25. Anybody here who has a substantial opinion? ("Disgrace, embarassing, ridiculous" is not substantial...)
    Defender is slightly but clearly late and hits the striker with his studs after striker plays the ball. Penalty is a good call for me.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. 😂😂 look at the replay there was no stud contact at all lol

      Delete
    2. Agreed completely, exactly as you said. Kane plays the ball; the defender arrives late, leading with the studs, and makes contact with his studs to Kane’s foot. Pretty clear reckless foul.

      Delete
    3. Ecactly. After the ball is shot t goal. Just a duel for the ball. Not even a foul

      Delete
    4. No contact with the studs? Kane's foot snaps back how? Wind? Magnets in his shoe? Zwayer pulling an invisible string?

      Delete
    5. I think he means contact is shoe not the studs. But it is a interesting situation. There are arguments for both. But IMO it's a discussion about what football wants and what the rules are (interpretation of). Calling it a discrace seems unfair and wrong. I looked at it (replay played once) and thought foul. But the more I looked the more I was in doubt.

      But looking at it 'factually'. It goes like this.
      - kane shoots the ball towards goal with a volley
      -dumfries comes in with (half) streched leg in the air and studs forward. This is imo not a block. Because normally you put your body in the shot of the goal. Not pointing leg and studs towards the player.
      -he is late
      -makes contact on foot, with moderate intensity. I deem this as reckless contact and the way he came in also is reckless.
      Conclusion: foul (PK) and YC

      Delete
  26. Correct intervention by Dankert and a clear penalty to England.

    ReplyDelete
  27. I'm sorry but anyone arguing for a penalty is doing so from a completely "over technical" standpoint. Attacker kicks through on defender.

    That is one of the worst decisions in this tournament

    ReplyDelete
  28. Clear PK. Correct intervention and expected decision for me.

    ReplyDelete
  29. I look forward to 30 penalties a game if thats the level of interpretation. An attacker kicking the defender

    ReplyDelete
  30. Penalty kick absolutely right. Good job by VAR

    ReplyDelete
  31. No clear and obvious mistake, so OFR was a wrong VAR-call. No penalty decision should be backed, as would an on field decision to award a penalty should have been backed.

    ReplyDelete
  32. How many other "late" tackles are waved away as the attacker has 'had a shot? Especially when the gk is involved
    Had the ball deflected off the defender and then contact made, what would you give?

    ReplyDelete
  33. If you don't care about penalties, you should take a referee course.

    ReplyDelete
  34. Media erupting everywhere after shocking decision.

    Comments like:

    Has the ref put a few quid on England?

    How much did england give to zwayer?

    Things like this can be avoided by both Rossetti and also mr zwayer making the right call!!!!

    ReplyDelete
  35. New here, what does OFR mean?

    ReplyDelete
  36. Very difficult game for Mr Zwayer

    ReplyDelete
  37. 26’ very interesting, Foden doesn’t go down, but surely there was a clear trip there, and if so, it’s SPA… and if so, a second yellow card to Dumfries.

    ReplyDelete
  38. Clear foul on foden and yc for SPA missed

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Agreed, and it would be a second yellow card and Netherlands playing down a man for more than an hour… but it’s a clear SPA foul and the referee has to give it.

      Delete
  39. The comments here are outrageous

    ReplyDelete
  40. Very very soft penalty, don't like it all. Btw I support England in this match but thats just not right

    ReplyDelete
  41. Foot is not broken, no penalty ;)

    20 years ago without VAR, penalties like that were not given. But was this correct? In my eyes not. The defender was clearly late. The YC was also correct.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. No-one is disputing the contact. The argument is that the attacker kicks through onto the defender and not the other way round

      Delete
  42. For those claiming it was not a penalty… are you joking?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. No we are serieus. Just a duel never a foul

      Delete
  43. Penalty is the expected decision but it's hard to find a logic when these late tackles justify a VAR intervention and when they are waved off as no clear and obvious error.

    ReplyDelete
  44. I think it is a correct penalty, but as has been said frequently on this blog, unfair contact when the ball is already in play and can no longer be played is almost never actually punished, so I was surprised.

    However, I believe that such contact should be properly punished.

    ReplyDelete
  45. Penalties have always been subject for controversy. Damn if you do, damn if you don't. Since it was called for, they now say England "paid" Zwayer. If he didn't, they would say it was revenge for what Taylor did to Germany or Bellingham's comments bla bla bla.

    Either you make one or the other happy. Impossible for a ref to please everyone. So seriously. It was called PK and not everyone is happy. Nothing new. next.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Absolutely correct! And when reading comments on here and Twitter etc., I have the very strong feeling that it's not about the decision but about Zwayer and people wanting to criticize him any way they can

      Delete
  46. I'm genuinely confused why so many here think it's such a horrible call? Sure, ball was played by the attacker but the contact that happens afterwards is reckless imo. Do I like these decisions? Not really. But with VAR in place that can "prove" the contact, it's the expected decision for me.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I agree. It's like the meler OFR in BEL-SVK MD1. With handball. As a football fan it feels wrong in some way. But it was correct. I believe people should discuss the rules/interpretation etc and not the referee doing his job and making the correct desicion.

      Delete
  47. https://dubz.co/v/b31eda
    Defender is late and he puts the leg. Then, you can have the idea that it's Kane kicking the opponent, but this contact is created by defender because he invades the space of the attacker, after the ball has been kicked. You can't say that this was an exclusive action by attacker who, without any interference, wouldn't have suffered the contact.
    This is the technical explanation for penalty, but it's true that it still belongs to a grey area because not always punished, indeed for this reason, as I said, Rocchi wanted all this kind of incident, to be considered penalty after OFR.
    Instead of writing "shocking, scandal" and so on, would be very nice to have such technical discussions.
    I notice that the UEFA VAR is very similar to the Italian one, both regarding handballs, and penalty area incidents.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Exactly. That's it from a technical standpoint, nothing more, nothing less. Of course, we can debate whether this is a clear offence or not, but calling the decision "shocking" is just wrong. My personal opinion is penalty without a doubt, but it's at most a grey area incident, certainly not anything scandalous.

      Delete
    2. The problem is that VAR wasn't introduced for this. It was introduced to avoid clear and obvious mistakes. Not to detect the things referees almost can't see in real-time (and in this case IMO it was definitely not a clear and obvious mistake).

      Of course you can change this point of view, but IMO only if it's done the same way all over the world and if there is very good communication about it.

      Delete
    3. I mostly agree. This is a frequent problem in the KNVB.
      The decision can be different depending on whether the card is there or not, and there have even been cases where obvious YC incidents were unpunished.
      I would like to see clearer standards in this case.

      Delete
    4. I indeed like these discussions. They are about the implementation and/rules and not about 'shocking, scandeln discrace' referee. it's a difficult area in refereeing. And I think this is the right call. The VAR and ref will have a explenation about why they think this is clearly a PK. I would love to know what it is. But in mean time this blog could be used to have suggestions why and why not to call it. Instead of saying non backed stuff.

      Delete
  48. Good discipline esp from NED, game back to manageable (imagine if that penalty had gone against SPA, ITA or POR)

    ReplyDelete
  49. I think it's been a very good game for Zwayer so far all things considered, but I may be the only one.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. No, you're not. Very good game from Zwayer.

      Delete
    2. It's been a good game in my opinion. It's very easy to judge how a ref performs when we have an entire screen to see everything, as opposed to what they have.

      Delete
    3. Not to be critical, but I disagree. Zwayer has had almost nothing to do other than the missed penalty and, in my opinion, the missed second yellow for SPA.

      What did you observe that made you say it was a very good first half? I’m open to discussion on this, but I just don’t think there was enough that happened.

      Delete
  50. I've been reading this blog since day one. And all these type of situations without penalties in some matches have always been indignantly commented.

    ReplyDelete
  51. He has done well, one decision where he was called to review, otherwise its been fine
    Neither NED nor ENG make games overly difficult

    ReplyDelete
  52. Remarkably calm game despite the controversial penalty. I do think there was a missed yc for a foul on foden. Aside from that, good foul detection and overall control

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Would it not be 2nd YC. Or was this wrongly reported above. Because that does (in observer eyes) change things to a KMI

      Delete
  53. Very good performance by Zwayer so far, may he continue in this way.

    ReplyDelete
  54. Very good first half. Not sure how hard/easy was to spot penalty live

    ReplyDelete
  55. Coming from The Netherlands, I must say Zwayer does a fine job. Acceptance on the pitch is fine, penalty was (after review) rightly awarded. Some good advantages.
    He's just doing a good job so far.

    ReplyDelete
  56. Jonas Eriksson not a fan of this VAR intervention on Swedish Television (make of that what you will)

    ReplyDelete
  57. I think it was a good first half. It's not an easy game. Let's treat referees as humans and not as perfectly flawless robots.

    ReplyDelete
  58. my instict say not a penalty, but after OFR i look for 3 times and change my mind because dumfries hit with toe, in outside area always foul bit i dont know of inside square

    ReplyDelete
  59. Re the penalty I despair. It was a normal football collision. All referees in every game will be expected now to punish this. In real time Zwayer seen this as normal contact- if anything Kane kicks the defenders foot. VAR without doubt is the ruination of the beautiful game.

    ReplyDelete
  60. The tone of some comments make me a bit embarrased to be an admin of the blog, but it is a habitual experience of a big championship for us I guess. Penalty given was nightmare incident for Zwayer to face on his nightmare evening (UEFA's fault) and my opinion is that in reality no offence was committed by Dumfries. The comments "well Kane has kicked the defender" read very off the mark, but the idea they are trying to convey but can't express in words is actually right - English striker executes the shot fine and the only contact happens in the middle of Kane and Dumfries; ie: Kane starts at point A, Dumfries at point C and then their feet collide naturally at point B as they were both moving in that direction. The classic reckless foot-up foul is when the defender hits the attacker at 'point A'. HOWEVER, in a game where for the German officials it is more like arbitration (in the English sense of the term) than real refereeing, given there was EVIDENCE of a clear contact occurring, in Dankert's shoes I would have intervened too. It is also coherent with UEFA's general approach 'if it looks like a penalty it should be given even if it isn't' (cf. Mateu's Wales-Ukraine and Kuipers Slovakia-Spain). NO, no way was Dumfries foul "reckless" though and this YC is completely wrong. You can sit in all these seminars and actually learn less and less about how to referee a football match, what the players are trying to achieve with certain actions, etc. Theoretically Dumfries small kick at Foden in a SPA scenario could be a SYC but I don't see this as a YC, missed foul only imo. Don't you think also: what a bizarre, non-event of a game for a Euro semifinal? It surely helps Zwayer but this isn't the football that I fell in love with!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Had this incident happened anywhere else on the field, it would have been foul and YC. I agree with Chefren’s comment - the VARs at this EURO are behaving like Italian VARs, and if they follow that approach, this is always a penalty

      Delete
    2. I like your approach with points A B C... I would just add that if both "meet" at point B they should both execute their movements in a way that limits the risk for the opponent to get injured when they hit each other. Since the defender hit the striker with his studs I feel like he failed to use that caution and therefore I would support the penalty.

      Delete
  61. IMO, very tricky scene regarding the penalty. Actually it's rather the attcker who performs a very dynamic dropkick and then kicking the defender's boot intensely. There was a camera angle from behind Kane at around 14:30 showing this that was not used in the OFR. But in the end Dumfries is too late and takes the risk with open studs. The expected decision is penalty and I'm fine with that.

    Otherwise, not too difficult 1H but still it's a quite dynamic match in which Zwayer looks very sharp. Convincing performance for me so far.

    ReplyDelete
  62. For me it is INSANE to whistle such a penalty. Kane played the ball, the ball was going over the bar, then there was some contact (when the ball was going out) and oooops - penalty! Really??? Nice gift for England, very nice. The gift that always get only "big" teams.Kane was very good actor, made to look as he was injured, but suddenly he was totally ok, he was immediately ready to take the penalty with that "injury", he took the penalty with the same leg, he ran very normal celebrating with the fans... Disgusting.

    ReplyDelete
  63. I guess the game is boring since the discussion is still about the PK decision. The game is on the second half now.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. You guess correctly. Absolutely nothing for the referee to do outside of the key incidents.

      Delete
    2. This is the most forgettable Euro I have seen. Shows how European football has changed. Just simple and safe passes around the teams without much happening at all.

      Delete
    3. It was the same in 2020, and 2016. European soccer is not as exciting as, for example, Copa america.

      Delete
    4. The Copa America hasn't been good and definitely hasn't been "exciting".
      It's been garbage brutish football aided and abetted by incompetent referees.
      Brasil v Uruguay promised a lot and only delivered a forgettable match with a poor referee who was overly lenient and overly permissive. I'm looking at you Dario Herrera (ARG).

      Delete
    5. More to do with players and referees being used as commodities by EUFA ,as they increase fixtures such as the pointless Nation League ,the result is by the end of the season player performance levels have fallen greatly

      Delete
  64. Zwayer can only lose today. If he decides in England's favour, they say that England have bought him. If he decides in favour of Holland, they say he wants revenge on England.
    Have mercy on him, he's doing his best and had a good performance so far

    ReplyDelete
  65. I think Zwayer was pretty brave in taking up this assignment. He could've said hell no for this or that. But considering everything that happened before, he went on to the fire. A little respect for that perhaps? Maybe not from the usual retractors. No matter what brought him there, he's doing a fair job.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I wonder whether referees at EURO can refuse games?

      Delete
    2. I don't even know that. I was only guessing. Can they? Let's say there's a personal conflict. idk. In court you cannot be a jury if there's a personal involvement with any of the parties.

      Delete
    3. +1 @MF // If he had said "No Thank you" someone elso would referee today

      Delete
    4. Well, you can always refuse.
      And with a good HR management, this should be accepted and not punished. However with UEFA, it's unclear how they would react.

      Delete
  66. Everyone knows that no team other than Germany and England could have won a penalty in that position. In fact, there wouldn't even have been a VAR check.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. You have to take into account the German and English lobby in UEFA.

      Delete
  67. The Zwayer VS Bellingham saga continues with this YC 🤣🤣

    ReplyDelete
  68. 80’ Strong offsite decision

    ReplyDelete
  69. Excellent onside by AR2. The referee team has had a good second half.

    ReplyDelete
  70. Great offsite call by AR2.

    Yall remember the legendary BVB-Bayern game where the Bellingham-Zwayer thing started, I guess. I was at that game and Achmüller was AR1 for that game. I was sitting righ behind him like 5th row or sthg. The dude is FAST when he sprints, holy moly.. That surely helps for those on-/offsite decisions especially in counter attacks...

    ReplyDelete
  71. No problem on the YC to Saka for SPA 86’, but should also be a yellow to Mainoo for the reckless foul earlier in the sequence. I wish we got more replays of that one.

    ReplyDelete
  72. I was about to write that Zwayer is quite lenient wuth dissent, but that changed immediately. 2 YC in a row now.

    ReplyDelete
  73. You don't give very obvious corner, and then for dissent give YC. You want to show that you are a boss. Well, you are not!

    ReplyDelete
  74. Missed YC for Marino, correct one for saka then YC to Ditch captain for dissent after a missed corner.

    Zwayer siding with England tonight

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Zwayer is subtly losing the plot here (huge delay before cautioning Saka, why?). Big delay in making his calls which are becoming more dubious.

      Delete
  75. Now in 90' what a fanthom foul for England...

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. *phantom And the goal after that. Very good job from Zwayer. He should be ashamed! What a shame of a ref, received this SF just because Germany is the host. UEFA disgrace.

      Delete
  76. Well, we know he isn't totally clean and has skeletons in his closet.

    So that explains a lot.

    ReplyDelete
  77. Few extra notes in zwayers back pocket now

    ReplyDelete
  78. Dortmund director’s disaster work continues btw, still no SAOT impression from the Achmuller offside call.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Got nothing to do with Dortmund afaik (sorry, gotta defend home turf :D ). Broadcasting center is in Leipzig, where VAR-room is also located and usually the whole international feed comes from there. Even German tv was slightly complaining that there were no proper impressions for the offsite situation.

      Delete
    2. It was clearly offside

      Delete
  79. How is it possible that all players can run into the field and celebrate!! It is not floorball!

    ReplyDelete
  80. Zwayer has lost the plot in the last 5 minutes, hesitation in his decisions, missed corner and phantom foul when Netherlands were in a promising attack

    ReplyDelete
  81. Excellent news, no Taylor for the final 😇

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. He wasn't even considered for it. He's already back in England.

      Delete
  82. Very good game from Mr Zwayer. Missed the corner to the dutch, but it was kind of hard to spot

    ReplyDelete
  83. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

    ReplyDelete
  84. Poor Zwayer tonight game was above his level looked flustered never looked in full control. Everything went for England

    ReplyDelete
  85. Congrats to Felix Zwayer on top performance in Dortmund. And, like or not comitee made two excellent selection for semifinals. Now,time to predict referees for SUPERFINALE.

    ReplyDelete
  86. Very lucky Zwayer at the end, when he was starting to lose the control.

    It could be a spectacular failure with this appointment, and now we have a very, very lucky ending with this undeserved appointment.

    ReplyDelete
  87. Can someone help me why zwayer more valued than Daniel Siebert

    ReplyDelete
  88. I can guarantee you that Zwayer will be blamed by Dutch players / media. Many 50/50 decisions (attacker and defender both committing a foul) seemingly being awarded to England. On top of that, even English pundits saying it should not be a penalty. This is what happens when a single country is in charge of refereeing: Italy has the strictest use of VAR out of all UEFA members, and yet everyone else must comply to Italian standards, instead of finding a middle ground. Today we have a Dutch and English team with German officials. All 3 would be perfectly happy with a no penalty call (it's the preferable decision in all countries), yet a penalty has been given. With English pundits calling this a joke of a decision, Zwayer has 'lost' this game, in my opinion thanks to the ridiculous UEFA instructions

    ReplyDelete
  89. Good performance by Zwayer and his team ! Good job, Felix !

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. People here have no idea ! Very embarrassing and rude !

      Delete
  90. I predict Orsato for the final

    ReplyDelete
  91. Just 2 mins stoppage time? Wow. Bery shockingly last 15 mins from Zwayer

    ReplyDelete
  92. It was a messy ending :-/ Im not sure how much Zwayer is at fault (ignorance from my part here). Officially 2 min of ET was given but then both teams started making multiple changes making those 2 minutes run like nothing.

    Is that allowed?? The game had to be extended for more time because of that. Anyway congrats to England and I say Turpin will be the main referee. Marciniak fourth.

    ReplyDelete
  93. Marciniak or Turpin for the final? Taylor is out now, Orsato and Makkelie sent home. Those are the only 2 I can see it being given to

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I dont know about Marciniak,UEFA must have in mind his decision to award penalty vs Newcastle.

      IMO,Turpin.

      Delete
    2. Based on the performances, Letexier would be the most fair nomination. But of course, we know how it works, so I expect Marciniak/Turpin. If Vincic will get the finale match, we all know the reason...

      Delete
  94. I think the Dutch will have the feeling Zwayer choose a little bit to much the England side in 50-50 situations.

    IMO not a very solid performance, I missed a clear line. Of course it wasn't a bad performance, but I expect more of a referee in SF.

    And if even the English press states the penalty-situation wasn't a foul, then for sure it wasn't a clear and obvious mistake.

    ReplyDelete
  95. Yep,the Dutch media will blame him for sure.

    But we cant deny that English media put a lot of pressure on Zwayer with that Bellingham scandal.

    Now,after penalty calland no foul before goal,they will praise him and not one soul will talk about that scandal.

    Double standard at it's finest with their toxic media.

    Now ,how will Marciniak whistle when we have recent history with Newcastle handball?

    ReplyDelete
  96. Ultimately, the wrong decision to appoint Zwayer to the game.
    There will be a perception from many fans (merited or otherwise) that most decisions went for England. With his history that was always going to result in the sort of nonsense and speculation we're already seeing on social media and even on this blog.

    He was set up to fail tonight with this appointment unfortunately. It's a shame as he'd had a good tournament and this performance wasn't especially bad (nor especially good) but will result in the sort of negative publicity that would have been easily avoided with an alternative referee.

    Onto the final, I'm guessing it can only be Turpin or Marciniak. Possibly having Siebert as 4th official

    ReplyDelete
  97. Unfortunately not the best ending for an otherwise good performance...two small mistakes against the Dutch (no corner, doubtful foul), with dutch players being visible upset at both decisions.
    And then, few minutes later the goal is scored and probably these two decisions will stick in the mind of the dutch players

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I think the penalty will also stick in the Dutch players minds :). It wasn't about the last minutes only.

      Delete
    2. Of course, because it's a big decision. But from what I saw, it felt like the penalty was actually quite accepted by the dutch players. Other then the two decisions in the end.

      Delete
  98. And his 2 minutes?????

    Why?

    Cause he expected OT?

    Fouls,complaints, subs,atleast 3 to 4 minutes should have been added.

    But here we had another case of referee who wants to speed up process to stay alive until OT.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Those minutes you're asking were actually added. The game didn't end after the 2m precisely because of all the changes made.

      Delete
    2. You are not getting me mate.

      The game didn't end at 2 minutes precisely cause England scored.

      We all know that when the game is tied refs add 2 minutes cause they cant wait for game to be over.

      Delete
    3. I think 2 minutes was ok. There was not much of interruptions

      Delete
  99. Am I missing something? It was a good performance. He played the added time (nothing happened so 2 mins is fine), penalty was correct. Only Mainoo missed YC and a missed corner each way

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I have a feeling this particular ref has his haters who would criticized anything no matter what. Biased comments.

      Delete
  100. Virgil van Dijk: “The referee ran back inside straight after the full time whistle, that says a lot."

    He’s not wrong.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. You're a Zwayer hater... Ugh! It's the Netherlands' own fault and not Zwayer's

      Delete
    2. That says he doesn't wanna deal with BS more than he has already. If it was the other way around, we know who would've been the one making those comments.

      Delete
    3. Ok i'll try again in a nicer way. Let's just say if the Netherlands had won, he wouldn't be saying that. There.

      Delete
  101. you must look replay maybe 5 times for judgement that must be penalty, give Zwayer applause.

    ReplyDelete
  102. This performance was expected because after all said between Zwayer and Bellingham in the media it's obviously that will play on Zwayer's mind when making 50/50 decisions. He was always quick to whistle in favour of England but very hesitant in whistling for Netherlands. He was really nervous today even though he tried to hide it with smiles and gestures. It just makes you question all over again the rationale behind his appointments for this game.

    ReplyDelete
  103. Noisy and scandalous statements amidst the silence of others can lead to an erroneous conclusion about the prevailing opinion. Therefore, I decided to write that it was normal (but not the most ideal) refereeing and a fair result. And again about the penalty, think how many referees have been punished in recent years for not determining a foul in a similar situation.

    ReplyDelete
  104. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  105. Yes, for the avoidance of doubt.

    We don't like them (England).

    Go learn about football rivalry rather than stupid stuff about VAR interventions.

    ReplyDelete
  106. Look, this is not a penalty at any time! It is the movement of the foot from Kane who hits the right side of the defenders foot! Never, never a penalty!

    ReplyDelete
  107. For all of the complaining about diving and play acting the English media and Britts in general constantly do.
    I can't help but notice that this English team has been one of the (if not the worst) teams in regard to playing acting/diving and generally going down very easily.
    Just an oberservation.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. +1, perpetual offenders Kane and Bellingham.
      (the penalty was ultimately a supportable call though).

      Delete
    2. Believe me this has been noted by those of us north of the border for years.
      Very adept at playacting

      Delete

Thank you for writing a comment on our blog!