Discussion about CL Round of 16 Second legs, played on 9 March 2020.
Referee: Björn Kuipers (NED)
Assistant Referee 1: Sander van Roekel (NED)
Assistant Referee 2: Erwin Zeinstra (NED)
Fourth Official: Bas Nijhuis (NED)
Video Assistant Referee: Pol van Boekel (NED)
Assistant Video Assistant Referee: Dennis Higler (NED)
UEFA Referee Observer: Pascal Garibian (FRA)
UEFA Delegate: Georges Lüchinger (LIE)
Fourth Official: Bas Nijhuis (NED)
Video Assistant Referee: Pol van Boekel (NED)
Assistant Video Assistant Referee: Dennis Higler (NED)
UEFA Referee Observer: Pascal Garibian (FRA)
UEFA Delegate: Georges Lüchinger (LIE)
09.03.2021, 21:00 CET
Signal Iduna Park, Dortmund (GER)
Borussia Dortmund (GER) - Sevilla FC (ESP)
Referee: Cüneyt Çakır (TUR)
Assistant Referee 1: Bahattin Duran (TUR)
Assistant Referee 2: Tarik Ongun (TUR)
Fourth Official: Arda Kardeşler (TUR)
Video Assistant Referee: Massimiliano Irrati (ITA)
Assistant Video Assistant Referee: Mete Kalkavan (TUR)
UEFA Referee Observer: Tomasz Mikulski (POL)
UEFA Delegate: Rudolphe Mannaerts (BEL)
Fourth Official: Arda Kardeşler (TUR)
Video Assistant Referee: Massimiliano Irrati (ITA)
Assistant Video Assistant Referee: Mete Kalkavan (TUR)
UEFA Referee Observer: Tomasz Mikulski (POL)
UEFA Delegate: Rudolphe Mannaerts (BEL)
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
ReplyDeleteAnalysis, please.
DeleteI can't remember such a high pressure 15mn-time in recent times, maybe Makkelie in EL final. Kuipers is obviously struggling, but who wouldn't ?
ReplyDeleteSurely an excessive question, but in the 2-2 situation, wasn't a Porto player at required distance from the Juventus wall ? I don't see any referee going for IFK in this situation at that precise time of the game, but I'm looking for further replays.
ReplyDeletehttps://ibb.co/XywhYTh
DeleteCan VAR intervene here?
Thanks for your link, in this picture the Porto player is too close from the wall. In the spirit of the game this is a goal, but IMO, strictly according to the LOTG, this goal shouldn't have stooded. I don't know if VAR can intervene though.
DeleteThis picture gives no in-depth view on the attacker. If he kept the required distance behind the wall then all is OK.
Deletewith another perspective you can see, that the striker is around one meter away to the next player standing away in the wall. Beside this you could argue that there is no wall anymore.
DeleteThere are still 3 Juventus players on the wall. The question is if porto player is not in required distance, can VAR intervene here? IMO VAR can intervene because it's attacking team offence.
DeleteI don't think, the VAR can intervene, because the offence happens before the restart (the free kick execution). After the execution, the player obviously can stand, where he wants.
DeleteBased on the LOTG and VAR protocol, VAR can't intervene even if attacker player is close to wall less than 1m.
DeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
DeleteIs he really not "in required distance"? No proof for that.
DeleteIs it still a wall? The third player breaks out in the moment before the shot. So you could argue about that. All in all no clear mistake.
@Philipp S all penalty offences are before the restart. But VAR can intervene.
DeleteGiven IFAB publicly criticised that intervention in 2.Bundesliga when the substitute stopped the ball before crossing the goal line (-> penalty), I don't see any stakeholders actually wanting an intervention in this (technical) situation.
DeleteBut in that example, penalty decision was really against the spirit of the game because the aim was giving the ball to the goalkeeper for goal kick. In this case, attacking team is making and advantage on freekick goal.
DeleteI'd say there isn't enough evidence to assess this as a crucial mistake, so VAR rightly didn't intervene (could have they if the case was clearer ?).
DeleteAnd let's be honest: no one expects this goal not to count. Furthermore a referee would have figured out that disallowing such a crucial goal for a doubtful infringment is sending himself to the gallows (media/fans pressure and so on).
All in all more a specific topic to discuss than a relevant situation to describe as right/supportable/wrong etcetera :)
@hugostiglitz: Yes, but penalties are explicitly mentioned in the protocol: "offence by goalkeeper and/or kicker at the taking of a penalty kick / encroachment by an attacker or defender who becomes directly involved in play if the penalty kick rebounds from the goalpost, crossbar or goalkeeper."
DeleteBut free kicks are not mentioned.
Yeah, my point was there is no limit if the offence was before restart or not. But you are right, free kicks are not mentioned. I also think it’s not VAR stuff, it should be solved live.
DeleteMost of us agree with this is not the best performance for Kuipers. The reason is that Kuipers usually had outstanding performance in the past, so we can see the "gap" compared to tonight's performance. I can not give any names who can surely control the game better than Kuipers. Indeed, not the best performance, but I fully respect this man.
ReplyDelete2 funny foul decisions from the referee before Porto's goal. Kuipers had an impact on the score.
ReplyDeleteI've only seen the second half and the extra time, but I think Kuipers did pretty well in a very challenging match.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
DeleteRespect, Unknown. I agree with you, RikB. Very difficult match and I liked Kuipers' performance
DeleteIt is possible to delete the kind of comments of Unknown above? Also the Ittational Irrati comment. They don't add anything to the discussion. If you want to be critical; then substantiate that.
DeleteHey 'Unknown.' I admit, giving arguments is a hard thing, but before insulting me, you could try that at least?
DeleteUndoubtedly, Kuipers had mistakes. The penalty wasn't convincing for me. But that doesn't make this a bad performance. He kept control, was usually respected and made no concessions to his way of dealing with this kind of games. I respect that. Wait, respect. Good word to look up, 'Unknown.'
"You don't understand football or you are a fan of Kuipers."
DeleteThis is a blog of analysis, not ad hominem attacks - thanks.
Completely agree with you, RikB.
DeleteAdmin, you delete my message, but you don't delete the trolls' messages. Be fair.
Delete@Unknown Admin also is Kuipers' fun :)
DeleteOfc I think Kuipers made some mistakes in foul detection and disciplinary, but lots of referees would have lost control of this crazy ET, and he didn't. Difficult to be fautless in such a challenging game.
ReplyDeleteKuipers is a tained referee.
ReplyDeleteWow, what a game.. What a tension, a lot of KMI's and a lot to discuss. In general I think Kuipers did a good job. He had control and most of the KMI's were fully correct (all 3 no penalty incidents in the extra time). Both yellow cards for Taremi correct as well; stupid action.
ReplyDeleteI have some doubts about the penalty but acceptable in my opinion. Furthermore missed YC for Juventus for protesting before the second YC for Taremi and his card management was not optimal this evening. Furthermore his foul detection in the extra time wasn't the best but it was a hell of a job.
One last thing to mention; Kuipers surely has the best assistant referees of the world. Outstanding performance of Zeinstra this evening.
Totally agree re. Zeinstra; I only counted one mistake in an extremely challenging evening for him with many important / crucial decisions. 8,7 - 8,9 region.
DeleteNo words for how hard that ET period was for Kuipers! Incredible. IMO In general you can split this game into three broad periods:
ReplyDelete1' - 54', IMO too passive approach by Kuipers, he didn't take the initiative and his disciplinary plan was too hesitant (you can find my views on KMIs in the previous post)
54' - FT, very little happened here! Calm.
ET, actually impossible to assess EVERYTHING without watching again and taking detailed notes; BUT my reflex feeling is that Kuipers did relatively well (8,2/3 area)
Balance: ill-judged approach at the start, but most importantly the KMIs (penalty, SYC) balance themselves in 'the bigger picture'. In ET where any referee would have been in huge trouble, Kuipers (impressively) did not sink. What a game!
I agree with you about some other referees would have been in trouble. But one of the reasons of high tension was first very soft penalty he whistled.
DeleteI want to extend your view hugostiglitz by stating that part of the difficulty of this match was created by Kuipers’ not convincing first part of the match. Having said that quite impressive to not have lost the game in ET.
DeleteI’m not sure I can agree on the KMI’s balancing out. The penalty awarded to Porto IMO is rather a mistake, while I consider the GK challenge on Ronaldo as rather a foul, lunging into the opponent and touching a ball somewhere in between). The scene around the second YC to the Porto player was not so convincing, but nobody can argue the validity of that sanction I guess. My feeling is that Juventus has a bit more to complain about concerning KMI’s than Porto, and probably they will
DeleteAgree with both anonymous - would have been much (much) better not to whistle the penalty at all! Having done so, SYC call (dissent? DtR? I'm not convinced...) ensured that Kuipers will avoid huge controversy in the 'bigger picture'.
DeleteWill be a very long debrief with Mr Garibian, that's for sure :)
I must say that the situation around Dortmund's second goal just after half-time could've been handled a lot better by the VAR.
ReplyDeleteThe missed foul on Haaland should've been checked by the VAR in the 45 seconds before Dortmund began their attack which lead to the disallowed goal.
The Sevilla goalkeeper being off his line surely could've been noticed quicker than the 30 seconds it took after the penalty for the VAR to tell the referee it was a retake.
Actually if Sevilla made a goal after penalty save, it would have been much more difficult situation. I totally agree with you VAR should have intervened faster there.
DeleteIndeed. Surely the VAR and replay operator should have the goal line camera selected and ready to rewind immediately after the ball is cleared!
DeleteKuipers in control, calm, great management, but I am really confused about the GK challenge on CR7.. Speed, sweeping leg really high and stiff. What happened to accessing YC for wreckless play to protect the players?
ReplyDeletePenalty totally invented: Porto player Taremi threw himself to the floor as soon as he felt touched on the left leg. Porto GK on CR7: reckless tackling, sends CR7 to the floor, irrelevant he touches the ball.This is a penalty. Sorry, Kuipers totally insufficient.
DeleteAre you a juventus fan? Please don’t be stupid that was one of the best tackles I’ve ever seen!
ReplyDeleteDont really see the neccesity to call me stupid, since I only asked a simple question. What does the LOTG states regarding wreckless play, how many of its categories does apply in the spirit to protect the players, or can one, in this situation, only state that the GK touched the ball first, have no responsibility for the speed, the positioning of the upper leg and therefor "it is one of the best tackles ever"? If this would have happened outside the technical area, by the sideline, Pepe challenging Chiesa, would a play on be the sufficent call?
DeleteI think, it's the referee's interpretation, whether the more important factor in such tacklings was playing the ball or "felling" the opponent. And the more reckless or dangerous a tackle is, the less exculpatory is the touch of the ball.
DeleteAnd yes, outside the penalty area refereres would give the foul more easily, because there is always this barrier, that one wants to be very sure for a penalty.
So in yesterday's situation, I think, both calls would have been acceptable.
Furqan Miah please change your tone.
DeleteTo be honest, you are lucky not to be totally banned after one of your last comments from some time ago that I had to delete, which was quite disgusting.
Why is Kuipers getting so much hate? It was a intense game that’s why he was given it by Rosetti, and he was the best person to deal with that. Aside from that he had an unbelievable game, hardly any mistakes!
ReplyDeleteErling Haaland's penalty kick, what to make of VAR decisions in Dortmund-Sevilla Champions League
ReplyDeletehttps://www.cbssports.com/soccer/news/refs-take-erling-haalands-penalty-kick-what-to-make-of-var-decisions-in-dortmund-sevilla-champions-league/
Good explanation of what happened. But she just accepts that the VAR intervention was correct, without discussing whether it was a clear and obvious mistake.
DeleteAnd mentioning the APP in the last part is rather confusing, because that didn't really play a role here.
I would like to emphasize one detail, and it is not the first time this happens with Kuipers. When the team that loses is expected to win, then the additional time is a marathon. I think that it is not fair, especially when you have 120 minutes +3, letting the game for 2 more minutes is completely unnecessary. And then we remember the situation in Milan-Zvezda... There should be some sensible margin 30-45 seconds, unless there is a medical team entering the field etc.
ReplyDeleteIn 120+, I thought, there were enough stoppages and delays to justify the extension.
DeleteHowever in 90+, I was more surprised, that he continued after the 5 minutes, because there was only the disallowed goal with a quick VAR confirmation.
Yes, both additional times were extended a lot. It seemed to me like he wanted 5' and 3' of active play, which is a bit unfair to the team leading at the moment, because in that case additional times would initially have to be 10-15 min. And I havent seen those dead-ball situation, e.g. medical team, very slow substitution.
DeleteAnd the strangest part is that it is not logical from personal aspect, I can hardly imagine a referee who would want a 50-50 penalty situation in 120+5, in a situation that he added 2 or 3 minutes, in knock-out match. It is brave in a way because it is risky, but not too smart from that perspective.
There is always complaining here about AT management by referees. Personally i really liked the fact that Kuipers extended AT (and rightly so). Do you really want a ref (like Brych for example) who signals 3mins and blows at 2.59? That is rewarding time waste. Yesterday it might have been a bit extreme but id rather see the AT Management of Kuipers yesterday than +3 = final whistle at +3.00
DeleteJust to give you all an impression of how media of a neutral country (switzerland) reacted to Kuiper's performance: he isn't a topic. TV commentator sees the penalty as little soft, but correct and clever by the attacker and the no-penalty call after the GK challenge fully correct as the 2YC to Porto player.
ReplyDeleteI know that interpretations by media aren't telling us anything serious about a referee's performance, especially about the technical part. But it gives an impression of how he is considered by public. media people here didn't have the impression that Kuipers "lost control" or had a "direct impact an the score".
But I wonder how his performance is seen by italian media?
German commentators were critical with the penalty, but agreed that it's not VAR stuff.
DeleteRegarding the 2nd YC, they accepted, that it's correct in Law, but felt it showed a lack of feeling for the game, because it had too much influence on the outcome (with the 2-1 scored soon afterwards) for a minor offence.
Overall, they realized, that it was a very challenging match for the referee, where he wasn't faultless, but didn't criticize him too badly.
And what did german commentators say about the performance of Cakir?
DeleteI didn't watch Cakir's match, but in a highlights clip, they praised him for keeping the overview and coming to the right conclusions in the phase with the VAR interventions.
DeleteHowever I have the impression, that most people think, there wasn't a foul by Haaland and the VAR intervention was wrong. And that Diego Carlos should have received a RC for his elbow offence.
Between Dortmund scoring the 2-0 initially (~47:25) and the kick-off (~55:15) nearly 8 minutes passed. I would say, this time should have been the minimum time to be added on - however only 6 minutes were shown after 90 minutes.
ReplyDeleteI would appreciate someone posting a 'highlights-video' of the main decisions of both CL-matches. There was a lot going on in both games.
ReplyDeleteIs that a real account?
ReplyDeletehttps://twitter.com/DelCerroGrandeC
The bio says "supporter account", so I don't think it's him. There is a similar one for Mateu Lahoz and looking at some of the RTs, they are not them.
DeleteI watched the Dortmund - Sevilla game this morning. Thoughts:
ReplyDeleteKMIs
Long sequence starting at 47' - UEFA's refereeing leader is much more pro-intervention than many here believe! So I think he'll appreciate the end result, which I agree took a bit too long.
67' - perhaps a bit trifling, but given the nature of the penalty to Dortmund, very good 'big picture refereeing'. I don't think that Can can (haha) have too many complaints in the end - YC is actually wrong, but good to support the call itself.
76' - not enough for a VC/RC IMO, though an incident worth discussing on an educational level.
Managing the game
Çakır did fine/okay, but I don't think this was a "very good performance" or sth like that. In the first half he needlessly irritated Sevilla with some small, basic errors, and didn't synthesise (whistle tones, warnings, presence) his disciplinary control that well. Game was more football-focused in the second half, Turkish ref did well.
Balance: Sorry to say, but Çakır, still a top class referee, has in my eyes lost the 'X-Factor' which made him roughly European no.1 for many years. His performance was definitely satisfactory, and in the bigger picture a good one for UEFA, but on closer inspection there were some fairly significant deficiencies IMO.
My mark would be 7,8(2), or 7,9(3) tops. Btw, is it just me who finds the (widely excellent) UEFA scale a little outdated nowadays, especially in VAR games?
I agree with the most of your report Mikael W!
DeleteYou are right that his synethesis was differently (presence > whistle tones).
But I think in times with no spectators in the stands that's fine. You can handle a match differently with fans or no fans.
To say something general about Cakir's performances of the last months: IMHO he is suffering the most from the European Top 10 referees that the games are played behind closed doors.
His technical level of decisions was good but not excellent!
His strenghts are pressure in a full stadium and body language combinated with presence on the pitch. This is why most of the player respect him as a referee and a human. And now without spectators his 'ideee of refereeing' is destroyed and especially the technical area is very important for refs in COVID times.
Thank you Mikael for sharing your insights with us. We are really lucky you love football (refereeing) so much, because there can not be much other compensation for your work :D
Delete“UEFA’s refereeing leader is much more pro-intervention than many here believe!”
DeleteIt would be very interesting to know what this statement is based on?
Video episodes from the UCL match Dortmund B-Sevilla:
ReplyDeletehttps://t.me/REF_EX/213
https://t.me/REF_EX/215
https://t.me/REF_EX/220
https://t.me/REF_EX/222
https://t.me/REF_EX/223
Here is former Referee Cristina Unkel's take on the situation in Germany basically she said Iratti was right to intervene and recommended Hallands goal be disallowed and that the award of the penalty was proper as well
ReplyDeletehttps://www.cbssports.com/soccer/news/refs-take-erling-haalands-penaltykick-what-to-make-of-var-decisions-in-dortmund-sevilla-champions-league/
I Finally Got Helped !! I'm so excited right now, I just have to share my testimony on this Forum.. The feeling of being loved takes away so much burden from our shoulders. I had all this but I made a big mistake when I cheated on my wife with another woman and my wife left me for over 4 months after she found out.. I was lonely, sad and devastated. Luckily I was directed to a very powerful spell caster Dr Emu who helped me cast a spell of reconciliation on our Relationship and he brought back my wife and now she loves me far more than ever.. I'm so happy with life now. Thank you so much Dr Emu, kindly Contact Dr Emu Today and get any kind of help you want.. Via Email emutemple@gmail.com or Call/WhatsApp cell number +2347012841542 Website (https://emutemple.wordpress.com/)
ReplyDeleteFive weeks ago my boyfriend broke up with me. It all started when i went to summer camp i was trying to contact him but it was not going through. So when I came back from camp I saw him with a young lady kissing in his bed room, I was frustrated and it gave me a sleepless night. I thought he will come back to apologies but he didn't come for almost three week i was really hurt but i thank Dr.Azuka for all he did i met Dr.Azuka during my search at the internet i decided to contact him on his email dr.azukasolutionhome@gmail.com he brought my boyfriend back to me just within 48 hours i am really happy. What’s app contact : +44 7520 636249
ReplyDeleteI was diagnosed of herpes virus, I have tried all possible means to get cure but all my effort proved abortive, until a friend of mine introduced me to a herbal doctor called Chief Dr Lucky, who prepare herbal medicine to cure all kind of diseases including herpes virus (Herpes), when i contacted this herbal doctor via his email, he sent me herpes virus herbal medicine via courier service, when i received the herbal medicine he gave me step by step instructions on how to apply it, when i applied it as instructed i was totally cured from the virus within 3 weeks of usage. Contact this great herbal doctor today to get your cure.
ReplyDeleteVisit website : https://chiefdrluckyherbaltherapy.wordpress.com/
What's App number : +2348132777335
Via Email : chiefdrlucky@gmail.com