Swedish debut at 2026 World Cup, Glenn Nyberg in charge of Ghana - Panama.
Match #21
Group L
18 June 2026, 01:00 CET
BMO Field, Toronto
GHANA - PANAMA
Referee: Glenn Nyberg SWE
Assistant Referee 1: Mahbod Beigi SWE
Assistant Referee 2: Andreas Söderkvist SWE
Fourth Official: Khalid Alturais KSA
Reserve AR : Mohammed Alabakry KSA
Vidéo Assistant Referee: Bram Van Driessche BEL
Assistant Vidéo Assistant Referee 1 : Marco Di Bello ITA
Assistant Vidéo Assistant Referee 2 : Bastian Dankert GER
Referee: Glenn Nyberg SWE
Assistant Referee 1: Mahbod Beigi SWE
Assistant Referee 2: Andreas Söderkvist SWE
Fourth Official: Khalid Alturais KSA
Reserve AR : Mohammed Alabakry KSA
Vidéo Assistant Referee: Bram Van Driessche BEL
Assistant Vidéo Assistant Referee 1 : Marco Di Bello ITA
Assistant Vidéo Assistant Referee 2 : Bastian Dankert GER
Very late signal for goal kick by AR1.
ReplyDeleteDon't start to look after small things as not give any impact!
DeleteIt’s a small thing without any important impact. Don’t say the contrary ;) !
DeleteGood direct YC for Ghana by Nyberg. Mandatory one.
ReplyDeleteCorrect YC on 16' for SPA
ReplyDeleteLack of respect??
DeleteOn 16: Agree, too many times in this tournament we have let this foul go without YC or even quiet or public word. Well done, good call
DeleteI also like in this clip by @refnewgen Clip 15': https://streamable.com/thb6ah
DeleteThat he gave a talking to for two fouls to the Panama player. Good player management here.
Fitness is supreme for this referee. A couple of others could take a leaf out of his book
Introduction: https://streamable.com/yqfdec
ReplyDeleteClip 15': https://streamable.com/thb6ah
DeleteYC 16 Clip: https://streamable.com/dsajb3
DeleteThank you for these quick video links. Good job.
DeleteFull-Sequence 34': https://streamable.com/p5s4ro
DeleteNot sure it's a shoulder against shoulder here as he told the players, PK imo
ReplyDeleteWould be soft one.
Deletei think it's a good no intervention because no clear and obvious but PK on field will not have been overturned. And not the correct explanation imo.
DeleteAgree with crn.ple
DeleteClip here by @refnewgen Full-Sequence 34': https://streamable.com/p5s4ro
DeleteI wouldn’t want to see a foul given here, If you watch the sequence you can see he has set his bar here higher and for it to be a foul, would need a low threshold. For me, yes not shoulder to shoulder but I feel it is a legitimate contact whilst challenging for the ball (I like to call it a coming together). The Panama player, as soon as feeling contact has gone to ground looking for the pen.
DeleteGood call for me. No foul.
Good decision not to whistle PK for Panama in 34-35 min.
ReplyDelete35´ : for me, penalty had to be whistled for Panama. Defensor never played the ball and pushed his opponent falling down. Var stuff ? So-so….
ReplyDeleteNever a shoulder to shoulder for me. Limit decision but more penalty than nothing IMO.
DeleteThink no penalty is supportable for me, not a clear and obvious error by Nyberg. VAR correct to stay silent.
ReplyDelete+1
DeleteTo me no penalty seemed like better decision, but if he had given it it would also be supportable
ReplyDelete+1
DeleteGood overall refereeing performance from Nyberg, with a justified yellow card and good detection of fouls. There was one “grey area” incident involving a penalty that could possibly have been given. It is not a VAR matter, as there was no clear and obvious error here. Both awarding the penalty and allowing play to continue are decisions that can be supported by valid arguments. IMO more penalty than nothing but 60/40 % level.
ReplyDelete+1 although I have it 60/40 in the reverse but agree with the sentiment
DeleteSimilar thoughts too but as Osman felt, I felt good decision for no penalty.
DeleteSorry but clear foul and penalty forgotten for Ghana here. Crystal stamp on the foot by behind. Here is Belgian VAR stuff to intervene ! Poor !
ReplyDeleteI thought penalty in real time and after seeing the replay for me it is a penalty. Understandable to an extent not to call live but VAR should intervene for a clear contact from foot to foot.
Delete+1
DeleteClear PK missed
ReplyDeleteClip: https://streamable.com/x9fzln
DeleteVery interesting situation in 66'. There definitely can be argument for penalty but no penalty is also supportable.
ReplyDeleteSupportable on what argument ? Clear foul here. No reason at all to VAR to stay silent !
Delete@filip_MNE how could no penalty be supported? Just interested in your opinion?
DeleteVery interesting situation in 66'. There definitely can be argument for penalty but no penalty is also supportable.
ReplyDeleteCorrect YC, clear SPA
ReplyDeleteAgree. Good one. But definitively weak performance after the no foul decision against Ghana. Stonewall penalty.
DeleteIt is not a "footballpenalty" foer eliteteams in the world!!
DeleteClip YC 72': https://streamable.com/g7hbta
ReplyDeleteNope, it’s a clear careless step on the foot…Maybe I can understand Nyberg watching some kind of holding and missed live, but Van Driessche sould’ve called him to the monitor.
ReplyDeleteBig mistake IMO.
+1.
DeleteIf we're used to Rosetti's no soft penalty mandate, then there is very much a softness to this. There was a contact and I would understand a penalty (and think domestically many would lean towards), but I also understand the VAR staying silent. I'm not sure the fall matched the contact
DeleteDisagree. Clear step on ankle and crystal foul : VAR had to alert Nyberg here.
DeleteDisagree with DB too, this is not a glancing blow, this is a clear studs contact on the back of the leg. This is not a soft penalty. The penalty in the first half definitely would have been soft.
DeleteAgree DB with the fall, the fall didn’t correspond to the contact, so I understand in real time how this was missed. there was such a delay between the contact and falling down but VAR missing this? Maybe VAR indicated to the referee, “did you see the contact on the back of the leg with studs”. If the VAR asked this question and referee responded yes. Then no OFR
@DB would you count the penalty given by Turpin in the Eng v Cro game as soft?
DeleteNo, but I would say they are markedly different. Both in height, and level of contact. (I'm not saying I think a penalty is not supportable if Nyberg gave it, but I also don't see it as an error.)
DeleteFair call, agree with you that they are different but I think the Turpin foul, was a foul but soft.
DeleteWhy do you see it as not an error? As in not a error so VAR didn’t call for OFR?
This is not a penalty for players on the real toplevel. Different if you are in a position towards the goal!
ReplyDeleteThis is completely ridiculous argument.
Delete100% direction of the player does not influence whether a penalty should be awarded.
DeleteNyberg is in many terms an excellent referee (communication, feeling for the game), I always enjoy to see him, but his big problem is that too often he doesn’t spot penalties on the pitch. You saw that in the European competitions this season many times and also today.
ReplyDeleteI think it’s possible that this was his last game at this World Cup.
The PK was missed, yes, but I think he will have a second game anyways.
DeleteAnd I agree, in fact he is top 3 on my own UEFA Fav referees ranking :)
Yes second game but not more with his low average performance. Also for Van Driessche too.
DeleteI haven’t watched him in European competition this season so can’t comment. I think the VAR let him down unless, VAR had a conversation before opting against OFR. To say he doesn’t spot penalties on this game, first one, happy with the no pen call, second one, he missed the contact but the contact didn’t correspond to the fall (can maybe understand how it was missed).
DeletePotential violent conduct by 14 red ? YC is enough for me
ReplyDeleteManagement 90+9': https://streamable.com/e939h4
DeleteGood YC for panamean player (foul on goalkeeper). But i don’t understand why Nyberg let the game continue at +11’ without good reasons and took too many risks on the end…
ReplyDeleteNah,atleast 3 cards should have been shown there.
ReplyDelete1 for dangerous play and 2 for altercation between players from both teams.
But he should booked also players during confrontation yes. A little passive at all as he was during the match…
DeleteFor me, the pattern this WC is referee’s are not awarding as many YC’s as we usually expect. From this point of view, understandable why extra YC for melee were not shown,
DeleteFantastic performance from Glenn Nyberg, who solved many penalty area decisions accurately (34’, and two during the 64-67 minutes). He led the game with strong and effective management of difficult teams, conversing well with players and even a coach (15’, 23’, 69’) and using close positioning and presence that relied on his impressive fitness (45’+1, 75’, 90’+9’).
ReplyDeleteHe used a consistently high threshold of foul selection, though there were a few instances where this threshold went perhaps a bit too far (37’, 89’). These mistakes are the only blemishes on an excellent performance by the Swede, one of the best of the tournament so far.
@Daystare9 agree on your analysis very good however you agree with the non-pen at 67. What’s your take on the non-call?
Deletehttps://streamff.com/v/e0932fe2
ReplyDeleteSome of the comments about the 66' penalty area incident are quite far away from reality. You have to consider the whole action when making an assessment, and not just blindly follow the close-up replays. It is obvious that the intention of the Ghana player in the whole play is to try and generate a contact and win a penalty award. He is running away from goal, in a very low danger part of the penalty area, 'feels' the position of his opponent using his right arm, and plants his left leg down very deliberately with little interest in trying to gain possession of the ball. The player from Panama doesn't even make a challenge (unlike Modric/Turpin earlier)! The nature of the contact is somewhere between trifling and careless. The attacker falls to the ground of his own volition and in a delayed way. It doesn't change the assessment of the incident, but the behaviour of the Ghana player after the small contact (much exaggerating the effects of what happened) is another nod toward there not actually having been a foul. Both Nyberg and Van Driessche were absolutely correct in their assessment(s), and I'm pretty certain that this incident will be highlighted as an example of POSITIVE officiating by Busacca/Collina in the FIFA seminar tomorrow morning - and not a tournament ending mistake, as some people here have written.
Overall, Nyberg handled the match in a good manner and should be praised for his performance.
Are they televised these press conferences?
DeleteI agree with many of your comments. Shouldn’t just look at slo-mo: agree. Feels the position of the defender: agree. Looking for the contact: Agree (let’s be honest, all attackers are waiting for the contact to go down). The fall was unnatural: Agree and I think this is why it wasn’t given on field.
DeleteHowever: when he plants his left leg down, GHA clearly in control of the ball and he hasn’t lost possession. Clearly was moving to keep control of the ball and not expecting contact. Agree PAN defender doesn’t make a challenge but he doesn’t need to. He was careless with the placement of his foot and that’s his fault. It was a careless contact but still a penalty.
On the fall after contact, it looked unnatural. Let’s remember it’s hard to perfect a dive when you’re not expecting it especially when your foot is planted. It’s hard to fall in a natural way when you’re trying to stay on your feet
Excellent analysis, Mikael. If we go to analyze only the contact, one should say penalty, but in particular watching the live sequence, it's evident that at a certain point, attacker puts deliberately himself there, being aware of defender behind and waiting for the contact. Penalty would have been supportable call, but reading more carefully the nature of the action, you have this assessment that can't be denied. Good that VAR didn't intervene in my opinion, would have been a manufactured penalty.
Delete