Saturday, 13 June 2026

2026 FIFA World Cup Match 4: USA - Paraguay (discussion)

Debut of an UEFA crew at the World Cup: Dutch Danny Makkelie in charge of USA - Paraguay. 



Match 4
Group D
13 June 2026, 03:00 CET 
SoFi Stadium, Inglewood
USA - PARAGUAY 
Referee: MAKKELIE Danny (NED)
Assistant Referee 1: STEEGSTRA Hessel (NED)
Assistant Referee 2: DE VRIES Jan (NED)
Fourth Official: ARAKI Yusuke (JPN)
Reserve AR : MIHARA Jun (JPN)
Vidéo Assistant Referee: DEL CERRO GRANDE Carlos (ESP)
Assistant Vidéo Assistant Referee 1 : HIGLER Dennis (NED)
Assistant Vidéo Assistant Referee 2 : AL-MARRI Khamis (QAT)

56 comments:

  1. This match and the opening match are undoubtedly the most difficult of these first two days. Hopefully Makkelie will ride well and not try to be too fancy like in the last WC.

    ReplyDelete
  2. 30 seconds and we already saw crunching foul..

    Could be tough match.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Spa/reckless whatever you want to call it.

    Clear YC.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Did he give an other YC or just a mistake by the tv director ?

    ReplyDelete
  5. Paraguay players feeling hard done by in the opening 20 minutes. They have shown visible frustration, including sarcastic thumbs ups toward Danny Makkelie after a denied throw in, an incorrect corner decision, and what they believed was a foul on Almirón. Their captain has also already been booked for dissent.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Replies
    1. Clip: https://streamin.me/v/92235d95

      Delete
    2. 2 clear offsides and they gave the free kick for the 2nd offside which was at a worse placement.

      Delete
  7. Not sure how letting players celebrate for a few seconds rather than the flag going up straight away is better than what we had before...

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I think AR1 should have raised his flag for the 1st offside who was really clear. Still don’t know how audio alert really work and how it help them.

      Delete
  8. Why is there such a significant delay in raising the offside flag, even when the offside position is as clear as daylight? Is this a serious FIFA instruction related to the new technology?

    ReplyDelete
  9. Routine first half for Makkelie. Good foul detection in one sided game with no major decisions to make or card worthy fouls after early one

    ReplyDelete
  10. Makellie had a good first half. He reversed some fouls, forgot a YC in 29' in favor US, but perhaps he understood that the moment already favored the home team too much.

    The main point that bothered me was the delay in calling the offside, in addition to allowing slamming with the player sitting down.

    Overall, PAR is a more foul-prone team than it is showing today, but perhaps because of the large score difference for a first half in favor of USA, they have already become dejected, even forgetting the Paraguayan tradition of tough play and consistent defense, and this factor is helping a lot Makellie keep the match under control, I was expecting a little bit more challenged game, but the result became it so easy

    ReplyDelete
  11. Wrong YC shown to USA at 50'

    ReplyDelete
  12. Very theatrical fall by Almiron,resulted in YC for Usa player.

    And now VAR that resulted in YC for Almiron.

    Great usage of VAR.

    ReplyDelete
  13. Completely wrong YC for Ream

    ReplyDelete
  14. Is this according to new VAR protocol, how is this mistaken identity?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. ×1 did the foul was taken ?

      Delete
    2. Very puzzled by this VAR intervention. Technically it is not a mistaken identity case. But rather a correction of an incorrectly awarded foul +YC. Nota sure if the new protocols now allow that kind of situation.

      Delete
    3. This is a required review with the new laws caution given to the wrong player of EITHER team

      Delete
  15. Is that allowed in the LOTG? Wouldn’t be the first time Makkelie ignored them

    ReplyDelete
  16. Initially incorrect YC, but not sure that's a correct use of the VAR protocol. Mistaken identity isn't a basis to overturn missed simulation, much less AFTER the free kick is taken.

    ReplyDelete
  17. I didn't quite understand the meaning of the wording in the new rules, but if that's what it means, then the meaning of the phrase 'Mistaken identity' itself must have changed.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. But then now everything will be an OFR, don’t really understand it.

      Delete
    2. If the referee gives a yellow card to Team A for a foul, but it turns out the foul was actually committed by Team B, the referee has no choice but to review the video footage.

      But what happens if it turns out it wasn’t even a foul by Team B?

      Delete
  18. I mean, the order of process may be questionable, but any announcement using good English (of course, all Dutch would!) and includes a clear explanation, rather than just sanction, must be welcome!

    ReplyDelete
  19. That is really weird OFR after the FK was played for mistaken identity ?? Don’t really understand it even with the new protocol.

    ReplyDelete
  20. Surely there’s no need to go over to the monitor? The referee can just communicate the decision.

    ReplyDelete
  21. Danny forgot to announce the decision first!!

    ReplyDelete
  22. Very weird sequence of events there with free kick taken before VAR calls referee's attention. And then shouldn't mistaken identity be for teammates only?

    ReplyDelete
  23. I didn't understand OFC calling for a review of the yellow card. That would only be possible with a second yellow card. I also didn't think the player PAR simulated. I think Makkelie's gestures aren't very clear and he seems to get lost in the foul call.

    ReplyDelete
  24. This is the new protocol then I assume :
    « a player wrongly being shown a red or yellow card when the offence was committed by another player of either team »

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. A case for VAR with new protocol

      Delete
    2. I mean, I'm more than happy if the protocol is now expanded to allow for simulation to be punished after the fact, especially when a player has been cautioned who has done nothing wrong. Anything that punishes diving and cheating can't be bad. And this was clearly the right decision in the end

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

      Delete
    4. But if the LoTG says only the identity of an offender can be reviewed, that means the decision itself cannot be changed if it's not a PAI, such as a free kick in this case? How do you then issue a caution to a player you gave a free kick in favour? Must have misapplied the protocol

      Delete
  25. Pelanty missed by the ref 60 min

    ReplyDelete
  26. Just re-read the updated VAR Protocol which states: "if the referee penalises an offence but has clearly misidentified the player who committed that offence, only the identity of the offender can be reviewed".

    The explanation to the amendment reads: "reviewable decisions/incidents now include two infrequent but potentially match-changing errors: ... mistaken identity when the referee shows a yellow or red card but has clearly penalised the wrong player of either team for the offence in question; the offence itself cannot be reviewed except in the context of mistaken identity".

    I guess the "either team" provision may (?) allow this type of review. But certainly not clear from the wording. I'm not sure there's a sufficient nexus between mistaken identity and misinterpreting the offence in the first place as this latest review seems to imply.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yes I think it’s the new addition saying that in this case there is a clear simulation by Paraguay player then wrong YC and possibility to recommend an OFR.
      Here the problem is the delay, I don’t think you can do that after the FK was played.

      Delete
    2. But the reviewed should happen before the fk taken if its taken the action is dead . What hapend if th fk was taken and goal was scored

      Delete
    3. Agree @adnane clear mistake here.

      Delete
  27. In other words, VAR intervened because an incorrect corner kick had been awarded, and that incident directly led to a yellow card decision for a USA player. That's why Makkelie had to go review the footage himself, which ultimately resulted in a review for mistaken identity?

    Is it really necessary to make it this complicated? It's very difficult for people who try to read the rules precisely.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Not sure it’s the CK but just the fact that now it’s possible for VAR to review a play when a player is receiving a YC or RC but he is not the one committing a foul but his opponent is. Agree not very clear for any one.

      Delete
    2. If it was actually the opponent who committed the foul, does that mean it doesn't have to be a yellow card for the opponent?

      Delete
    3. Fk was given no corner by any chance

      Delete
    4. adnane
      Indeed. Thank you.

      Delete
  28. Should it been a penalty at 60' for USA, although shot was made?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yes thr Paraguay player was late and stepping in us player foot so it was pk

      Delete
  29. Good advantage before goal for PAR

    ReplyDelete

Thank you for writing a comment on our blog!