Referees in charge of 2020-21 UEFA Champions League Round of 16 - Second legs, to be played on Tuesday 9 March.
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)
The 7th(!) appointment of Kuipers in CL this year and I don't think it would be his last one.
ReplyDeleteI know that Kuipers is one of the best referee in the Wordl, but IMO he has match in every round and it is overkill, in Elite is more referees which are good and they have maybe 1 or 2 matches in CL we can see in This season we have group referees which are favor and it is unjust
ReplyDeleteDisagreed with regard to Kuipers, this is exactly what many readers on this blog always advocate: appointments based on performance principle, and I cannot remember Kuipers at fault this season. Safe pair of hands which Rosetti desperately needs.
DeleteWow! Another appointment for Kuipers. He really is something else. My theory now is that his first R16 appointment in Barcelona - PSG game was a replacement. In line with 2020 appointments I'd say Anthony Taylor was the most logical one for that match, but since English referees weren't allowed to travel. What do you think?
ReplyDeleteCompletely correct analysis IMO
DeleteYes, I believe that Premier League (and FIFA) referee Andy Madley confirmed in a podcast that Anthony Taylor was appointed for BAR-PSG and Michael Oliver was appointed for SEV-DOR in previous legs but their whole team including AR's and VAR's would've needed to quarantine when they returned to UK so they didn't attend.
DeleteIt will be interesting to see whether we will see English officials used later in the tournament, both Elites are certainly capable of handling CL or EL knockout games even in later rounds in my opinion, but they may not be appointed again depending on the restrictions.
Agree with both Marko and Matio - game in Turin does need a really top name, and it's fair enough that having replaced Taylor in the 1Ls that Kuipers gets the inset he was roughly planned for.
ReplyDeleteIt's very easy to criticise writing on this blog, I don't have the responsibility to find a referee for every UEFA match around Europe in COVID times; Rosetti and the committee don't have my envy!
But it does start to become a bit much, was there really much need for Hațegan in 6/6 GS rounds, Kuipers in 5/6; this sort of trend was even visible in 18/19 season. It's a tough season for everyone in elite football but referees are human beings and do get fatigued too...
Good appointment for Çakır - compared to yesteryear where he was THE man, I wonder how much UEFA trust him just at the moment?
I think, Cakir is still trusted by UEFA given his recent appointments (important match on MD6, biggest EL R16 game).
DeleteProbably not Top 5 at the moment (Kuipers, Makkelie, Brych, Orsato should be before him, maybe also Turpin and Taylor), but certainly Top 10. I.e., a CL SF would not surprise me, but it's not guaranteed that he gets one (should depend on involved teams and, of course, performance until then).
Regarding appointments in this round, it depends on the availibility of Taylor and Oliver. If they can get games, there should have been a solution without double appointments - otherwise they were nearly forced. And once you decide for using someone twice, Kuipers is an obvious choice due to quality and country-wise availability.
Maybe that many GS matches for him could be avoided - but then again, there were also some replacements, which couldn't be planned.
I appreciate both Kuipers and Cakir, but, with all due respect, where are the young, upcoming UEFA referees? Where is the new generation developed through the UEFA referee programs in the last 5 years?
DeleteIt’s CL Round of 16, hardly the platform to ‘try’ the young and inexperienced referees. That can be done in Group Stage. And I’m sure we’ll see Makkelie, Oliver, Turpin in the remaining matches.
DeleteDebuts for Stieler, Soares Dias, Grinfeld and Vinčić in this KO stage - I don't think you can accuse Rosetti of a lack of courage (in terms of generation change).
DeleteWhat personally I find a bit irksome is the random nature of his appointments:
- why 6/6 for Hațegan in last CL GS? And no other referee (because the Romanian was ignored in summer 2020?).
- why ditch the very clear and fair MD1/2, 3/4, 5/6 system, which Rosetti did in his first (non-COVID) season?
- what rationale was there about the choices for CL debuts on this last MD6?
- I already wrote about the way he treated Italians...
Rosetti definitely has guts, which undoubtedly deserves our respect, but I really struggle to understand his logic on some things.
Interesting set of appointments, can understand why Kuipers has been given Juventus - Porto because of the penalty drama at the end of the last game but i do think that he has had loads of games in this year's champions league and he also had Arsenal - Benfica in The Europa League to
ReplyDeleteAny news about Skomina recovery? Is it possible to see him in April in UEL or UCL?
ReplyDeleteHe had knee operation right after injury, then he had a covid and after that he went to another knee operation.
DeleteOMG! I wish him a full and speedy recovery!
DeleteHow you know Ref? Even ZNSS not published about Skomina injury
Deletevery good to see a pair of quite experienced referees for two very close matches! i always tend to say: dont "overuse" kuipers. however i think with the less challenging matches in holland he can still keep up and the work he puts in every detail of the match is just fascinating me. he doesnt have to prove anything but he puts in so much training, etc and for me thats absolute maximum professional, even if he doesnt need it...on the other hand i catch myself asking me from time to time: how much longer can he do it? does someone here think like me? maybe he is on a farewell tour and thats why he gets so many appointments plus a potential euro final 2020/1?
ReplyDeleteI completely agree with you...this could be the most important reason that Kuipers, one of best referees in the world, is being "overuse" in CL. I would love to see him in euro final and wish him have a wonderful end in his potential farewell season.
DeleteNijhuis as fourth official isn't so common. I expect this means that we can expect more Dutch referees this week. I guess that we will see Makkelie and Gozobuyuk as well. Or at least Gozobuyuk.
ReplyDeleteEXCELLENT decision by Hernández Hernández in Atlético-Real Madrid. Completely natural position, movement of the arm towards the body and away from the ball. This is the spirit of the rule, not giving all handballs even when they are clearly undeliberate.
ReplyDeleteThank God Hernandez Hernandez didn’t give that PK. Best Spain referee
DeleteHow is that excellent? It's clearly never a handball. That's 100% natural and anybody who calls a handball there should read the laws of the game.
DeleteEasy: VAR (González González) thought it was a penalty, so he recommended an OFR. If he hadn't thought that there wouldn't have been an OFR.
DeleteAs I'm already reading somewhere, most of the Italian referees would describe this as a very clear penalty to be whistled, due to arm position and nothing more. It is not in a natural position, player jumping took a risk with the open arm. The fact that he was trying to remove it can't be an argument, because the touch existed. Factually, you have an open arm and a touch, if you make such further reasoning, we will never find consistency. I think this penalty should have been whistled, not calling it make just things complicated when you have to make assessments about handballs. This penalty should also be called by VARs in UEFA games. More generally, I see that there are absolutely many and many different ideas in all countries about handball. We will never solve this big issue, however I respect your opinion.
Delete@Chefren should all players jump up for headers with their arms by their side? Or once your arms are up are you not allowed to bring them back down again?
DeleteDoes the player jump with an outstretched or bent arm? Is the hand next to the body? Clear penalty.
DeleteIMO good decision by Hernández Hernández, no penalty
DeleteFor me no PK, good and brave decisision. If the arm is above shoulder hight and it touches the arm directly from the cross - PK. But this is the expected position of the arm when jumping IMO.
DeleteWell, my simpathies were on Atletico's side, but nevertheless I think the most appropriate word would be "supportable". Clearly the player does not expect the ball and does not want to play the ball, and furthermore he moves his arm towards the body. He fails to do so completely, but still at the moment of contact the arm is in the natural position for the movement. As long as we have terribly inconsistent rules which noone understands, it will be a mess. Its really a shame for IFAB to change the rules so often, and then national organisations are left on their own to interprate them, hence same thing isnt always punishable in Croatia, Spain or Italy. And the worst part is that there were some logical statements before that were removed and modified.
DeleteNot to play with the hand, which player plays with the ball? (in VAR)
DeleteIn German TV it was told that the offside rules will be different again next season. They come back to the defining question: Natural movement of arm/hand or not.
DeleteMakes much sense in my view. Sure there will be discussions again, but this rule is much bearer to the old point finding out if the handplay was intentional - and some of the handball penalties in this season are OK according to the actual rules, but for my view simply ridiculous.
Nearer to... Sry
DeleteClean penalty kick: hand away from the body and prevent a clean situation to the white player. It’s not chic because it’s a derby.
ReplyDeleteVideo with handball from Madrid derby: https://t.me/REF_EX/190
ReplyDeleteThis is never the natural position of the hand!
Delete2 incidents from Marciniak's match (PAOK-Aris). VAR is Gil.
ReplyDelete76' whistled penalty for PAOK. VAR intervenes and the ref gives a free-kick to Aris.
https://streamable.com/srknvl
90+3' Penalty whistled for PAOK.
https://streamable.com/ap5tio
76' Correct intervention, defender wins the ball in a fair manner and then is kicked. Not sure, what Marciniak perceived at first.
Delete90+3': Well spotted, that the GK didn't get the ball.
IMO
Delete76' - Correct decision and intervention, but he could have spotted it himself.
90+3' - Good call, well spotted.
Belarusian Cup QF Highlights:
ReplyDeleteShakhtyor Soligorsk vs. Neman Grodno
Ref. Sergey Stetsurin (Non-FIFA)
BIG Penalty + RC Decision:
https://youtu.be/hTgDxdS3un8?t=193
Very gutsy and correct red card. Unfortunately I think the correct restart would have been DFK. Probably impossible to get right without VAR (at least without simply guessing--it was that close and impossible to see correctly when chasing from behind).
DeleteI slowed it down, and the correct decision is indeed free kick, but its millimetrically close. Impossible to get right without VAR. I agree with you
DeleteIMO
DeleteGood and brave Red Card.
It should have been a FK, but it is VERY difficult to detect.
The aggressive manner by the green team should have been punished, if you ask me.
The most controversial decision in the Netherlands this weekend. The point is the difference between miss by the referee and miss by the referee-team on the field.
ReplyDeleteEredivisie: RKC Waalwijk - FC Utrecht
Referee: Sander van der Eijk / VAR: Jannick van der Laan
https://youtu.be/BJoXvK48SEQ?t=680
Van der Eijk himself did not see this incident and decided on the advice of AR:
'I can always request a review myself and I could have done that here. The images do not show whether there is foot contact and if there is contact, the question is whether it is a foul. So I actually wanted to see for myself. The VAR does its job and I don't want to form an opinion about that. I am ultimately responsible, which is why I am here, but I would rather not have given this penalty.'
Dick van Egmond (KNVB refereeboss) admits to change the way in the Netherlands from now on:
'If you have not seen it yourself and give a penalty on the advice of an assistant, then watching it yourself is a really good option. I think that will also be a permanent appointment.'
Certainly it would be the best option for referee to be able to check the footage with his own eyes what referee couldn't see for himself. (In fact, I've heard that it operates that way in Germany.) But just as VAR couldn't be sure of a clear error in this case, you need to be sure of a clear error to correct the decision. Even if the referee decides on the advice of the AR without seeing it for himself, the protocol does not allow it to be re-judged by his own criteria, right?
Two controversial decisions from Israeli premier league:
ReplyDelete07/03/2021 Hapoel Beer-Sheva - Hapoel Tel-Aviv
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=APJ8KTu6low
4:01 - the ref awards throw-in, but after OFR changes his mind and gives a RC to HBS #28.
Right after that the ref disallows Beer-Sheva's goal due to offside.
Your opinion?
The RC seems a good and brave decision for me, but I don't know, if it is worth an OFR to be honest. The ball is definetly near (and played), but the player keeps his studs up and hits the opponent above the ankle.
Deletehttps://ibb.co/VJvccfK
The offside situation seems tricky, but it seems supportable.
Belarusian Super Cup Highlights:
ReplyDeleteBATE Borisov vs. Shakhtyor
Ref. Amin Kurgkheli (UEFA 3rd Category)
These saves were allowed (GK behind line after ref blows whistle?)
https://youtu.be/KpBVnloFAzg?t=447
https://youtu.be/KpBVnloFAzg?t=548
Belarusian Cup QF Highlights:
FC Minsk vs. Isloch
Ref. Dmitri Dolya (Non-FIFA)
Incorrect 2nd Yellow Card?:
https://youtu.be/edBVaJw7eCE?t=407
Torpedo-BelAZ vs. Arsenal Dzherzhinsk
Ref. Dmitri Dmitriev (UEFA 3rd Category)
Potential Penalty?
https://youtu.be/RRn3HAfJvqE?t=196
Kurgkheli: Difficult to come to a final conclusion, but I don't see big mistakes in allowing those saves.
DeleteDolya: Wrong 2ndYC, no contact at all. I would say, it's a YC for diving.
Dmitriev: It's difficult to assess. Without being able to come to a final coclusion, I think that play-on is a supportable decision, as there seems to be no foot contact.
Al-Jassim, one of the greatest referee in Asia, has been accused by the player on Twitter.
ReplyDeleteAccording to the player, Al-jassim said to him “ I'm gonna kill you”.
It could be a big scandal.
https://twitter.com/iamyuuki4424/status/1369016559503634434?s=21
How is that compared with Strombergsson and Coltescu cases? Would the fact that Al Jassim is from the next WC host country will make the difference in terms of consequences?
DeleteSeems to me that this could be caused by the language barrier. Qatari official talking with his native language to foreign player, I think that the player misunderstood
DeleteFIFA is not happy with AFC. If you wonder why names like Irmatov and Faghani didn't get WC final over the years, you have the answer: AFC provides big scandals in refereeing. That's the new one, after Al Mirdasi affair.
DeleteI have heard some rumors that Euro might be played entirely in England in order for the teams to avoid traveling internationally between countries. The final decision will be taken in April. Is this a possibility or just simple speculations?
ReplyDeleteA possibility.
DeleteI've seen an article saying that UEFA want to stick to a twelve nation format, but I don't really know. It is a possibility though
DeletePenalty whistled by Kuipers, it seems the attacker was looking for ir but surely a supportable call.
ReplyDeleteAgreed
DeleteAwful call. Never a penalty
ReplyDeleteAlways a penalty as the defender tripped the attacker not giving it would be a clear and obvious error.
DeleteAgree. Defender did nothing, the attacker moved the leg to prevent defender intervention
ReplyDeleteMy opinion is too little for a penalty by Kuipers.
ReplyDeleteNo VAR stuff IMO but play-on is indeed the safest and most logical decision.
DeletePlay-on would be a clear and obvious error as there was quite clear contact
DeleteNot a good start of Kuipers. Soft free kicks given for Juventus and a wrong PK awarded after the attacker initiates the contact himself. VAR should have intervened.
ReplyDeleteActually quite a good start from Kuipers all free kicks have been correct as was the penalty. VAR is never getting involved their as it's not a clear and obvious error.
DeleteThere is already a big discussion about this penalty call by Kuipers for Porto, in my opinion very soft, but of course not wrong. Very difficult game now for the Dutch.
ReplyDeleteHonestly I even see more arguments in favour of a foul from the Porto attacker rather than a penalty, if you look at the replays. Very soft penalty, but VAR cannot intervene here.
DeleteIn my opinion soft penalty by Kuipers
ReplyDeleteI am watching both matches tonight.
ReplyDeleteIt seems that the penalty is supportable: from the pitch IMO is always a penalty. At the replay maybe is softer than the Dutch thought.
No VAR stuff for sure, but I agree with Kuipers .
In Germany: Cakir is doing well like his standards. A pair of YC and some warnings . No problem in foul detention and he is well accepted by both players and teams.
Hi! Unfortunately I'll only be able to follow the second half. Some friends told me that there was a potentially yellow card foul for a tackle on a Juventus player and another for a foul in the air committed by a Juventus player. What do you think about it? In particular regarding the management of the cards between Çakır (you talked about "a pair of YC") and Kuipers (I think only a YC in the first half)!
DeleteAll cards were correct and each referee correctly cautioned the players when necessary.
DeleteRegarding the foul made by Frabotta against Pepe, for me correct no cards. Simple mid-air collision with no imprudence.
Thanks so much for your clarification :)
DeleteExcellent 1H from Mr Cakir.
ReplyDeleteI am afraid that the Italian media will put more pressure on Rosetti after this soft/wrong penalty.
ReplyDeleteRosetti is unlikely to be interested in the opinion of Italian TV. I have heard Italian TV (SKY) call Stieler's work in Atalanta-Liverpool scandalous and shameful (Capello also said he had some doubts... I think he was referring to the bad faith of the referees and appointments). Personally, I wouldn't pay too much attention to these comments. Italian TV is used to attack referees even during Serie A and on the newspapers I often read on the front page "Scandalous and incapable referee" but no one can report to the authorities since without the permission of the association it isn't possible to do so. With the new presidency of Trentalange I hope that the media will reconnect with the world of arbitration and stop insulting Referees.
DeleteP.S. Alessandro Del Piero on Italian TV has just said that he has no doubt that it was a penalty and Kuipers was right!
First half was like a real UCL game in BVB-SEV. Çakır is making use of his experience effectively.
ReplyDeleteYes, especially after the penalty not given for CR last week which was more clear than this one.
ReplyDeleteIMO you can't call this penalty "soft"; it is either right or wrong.
ReplyDeletePersonally, I am strongly in favour of a defensive freekick, as the attacker actually prevents the defenders from reaching the ball (not the other way round).
If you argue that the attacker has the 'right' to do this, then the penalty is simply correct. I hope UEFA instruct their referees CLEARLY on these such situations.
Depending on that instruction, VAR should either support the call, or intervene because it's wrong. There was a small delay in Kuipers blowing - I don't think he was absolutely convinced.
Excellent first half from Cakir in BVB-SEV.
ReplyDeleteTwo correct cautions (BVB for a reckless stamp on foot and SEV for unsporting behaviour).
Good additional time of 2'.
Correct no penalty at 45+2'> no handball from Dortmund player
Excellent physical condition,very fast play and hard to follow.
Good first half by Cakir, this is the Semi Final referee we all got accustomed to, hope he keeps it up...
ReplyDeleteAfter the penalty not awarded to Juventus in the dying seconds of the 1st leg, and this penalty (which is way softer than the penalty situation in Porto), Italian pressure on Rosetti for sure will increase big time. This will not be accepted easily I can imagine.
ReplyDeleteIn general - Kuipers risks A LOT with his very passive (not just lenient) approach. Optimal time to open the cards with Tehrami's foul on Demirel (22'?), no big reaction. Then a revenge-ish foul follows a few minutes later (26'?), a bit chaotic (but good) advantage, it is A CLEAR YC, has to be given when play next stops.
ReplyDeleteHead injury time-out played in his favour, everybody could calm down. Then deliberate / SPA-ish fouls at 39', 45' - again normal whistle, no reaction at all. And finally he had to act with this SPA charge at +47' with a YC; IMO too late, but halftime allows everybody to reset.
Let's see if Kuipers can keep a hold on the match in the 2H, and whether he will change his tactic.
Here in the UK where the pundits have bo stake in this match, so arguably provide a neutral perspective, they believe it was a penalty. Unnecessary chsllenge from the defender in the penalty area, softish but definitely supportable.
ReplyDeleteWow, two VAR corrections for Çakir in the same review: disallowed goal for a foul, but a penalty that he had missed before.
ReplyDeleteAnd a third intervention because the goalkeeper didn't have a foot on the line.
DeleteDo they have to overrule the goal because there was a penalty before? Honestly I don't understand why the VAR had to intervene for the goal Haaland scored?
DeleteNo, it wasn't like that: VAR though Halland commited a foul on the defender when he scored (illegal charge from behind). But before that, Koundé held Halland inside the penalty area and Çakir missed that, so the final outcome was correct.
DeleteOk, I'm rather surprised that VAR considered this scene as a obvious mistake...
DeleteBig chaos in Dortmund...
ReplyDeletePK given by Kuipers:
ReplyDeletehttps://streamable.com/opyw48
Thanks! I think the decision is fully supportable!
DeleteAgree, supportable.
DeleteCompletely disagree. Obvious offensive foul. Never a penalty...IMO.
DeleteAnd this is what happens if you determine your disciplinary control on player's reactions...
ReplyDeleteAgreed! And I’m curious about the first YC. Kuipers didn’t show the advantage sign but still he explained to the Iranian that he played the advantage before issuing the delayed YC. Remarkable.
DeleteThis is what happens when a player is so stupid to clearly shoot the ball away out of frustration whilst already being on a YC. Stupid from the player. Nothing more nothing less...
DeleteSure, but you can't seriously say that if there were zero complaints from Juventus players that a SYC would have been issued.
DeleteTotally reactive tonight, it's not enough to be the name 'Kuipers' to succeed at the highest UEFA level, sorry.
I can and I do :). I think that reaction from the porto player is enough. Altough I would have liked to see a YC for a JUV player for complaining as well.
DeleteCome on Mikael, what is bothering you tonight? It is a correct YC. Kuipers has full control over this difficult match. He's not quick with his cards, but that has been his style for years. He is constantly interacting with players, so I don't agree with your statement of passive approach.
DeleteOverall, i have much doubts about the penalty but acceptable. Full control, correct RC but I would have preferred a card for Juventus for protesting as well. Great offside calls of AR2.
Completely agree with anonymous, sometimes Mikael you have a tendency to "see what you want to see" i.e. your comments on a match become a self-fulfilling prophecy. A pity because your analysis is always on a high level, if a little ideological in its vision.
DeleteAgree with Anonymous here
DeleteAnd now I look like a muppet because the game has been verrry calm since the SYC :D
DeleteTo clarify what I meant - it's not enough to simply use your experience at the highest UEFA level. Kuipers isn't an arrogant man (at all).
Thanks for the comment / constructive criticism :)
To me (anon 22:38), this reflective response shows exactly the reason why your analysis is at such a high level generally - chapeau!
DeleteInterested 2nd YC given by Kuipers
ReplyDeleteProtests unacceptable ... A shameful scene!
DeleteConsequent, but rather surprising considering the interpretation we had in the past season on uefa level
DeleteI know correct, but No often situation :)
DeleteCan I say that the sanctions on these episodes are often inconsistent? The problem is this! Sometimes the card is not showed and a reminder is preferred. The Laws of the game says that it's YC therefore or you change the regulation or you always start to sanction (if you consider an automatic yellow like others, surely the players will stop doing it). Otherwise there will always be those who think they can do it and will protest seeing a card, especially if it's the second one!
DeleteMaybe I don't remember right, but the last referee I spontaneously remember for such a consequent line was Busacca in Barca-Arsenal.
DeleteAfterwards I can't hardly recall a 2nd Yellow in such a game for kicking the ball after the whistle
Big correct call by Zeinstra: another a very good one. Kuipers' assistant referees are the best so far: In Benfica-Arsenal had almost 3 calls each well judged.
ReplyDeleteIn Germany:
The goal of BVB comes after a foul by Haaland. Cakir is called to OFR by Irrati and he judges foul by the attacker. So goal is disallowed.
A few seconds before there was a clear grab which means penalty in favour of BVB. Penalty is conceded.
Bono saves the penalty and the actions goes on but Irrati recalls Cakir who let Borussia Dortmund repeats the penalty of 2-0.
Very very very good job by Irrati: best VAR in the world so far.
Cakir could have seen both penalty and foul live: he was well positioned. AR2 could have helped in the case of repeated penalty: but in this case is not easy and VAR can clarify doubful situations.
Max has incredible accuracy as VAR! This is one of the reasons why he is continuously appointed by UEFA as well! Too bad that in this way he comes out less often as a referee as he is also an excellent referee :D
DeleteClear penalty by Cakir. Last 20 mins will be more difficult IMO.
DeleteVery bad intervention from Irrati.
DeleteThere were a number of elements to support the ref and No clear penalty and no clear foul before the goal. So, it was an unnecessary intervention.
IMO play on was the best decison for the goal situation.
After the intervention, there were a lot of problems in the field of play.
Irrati made a big mistake. Now, how can you say that he is best VAR in the world?
Same here I don't see any arguments for taking back the original call.
DeleteCorrect 2nd YC for Porto. I would also like to see a yellow card for the reaction of Ronaldo, among others.
ReplyDeleteUnfortenately not the Kuipers as we know him for years. No feeling for the game, no tactical approach. A wrong penalty, easy free kicks, disciplinary inconsistentcy and now a cheap second YC, I think due pressure of several Juventus players.
ReplyDeleteNot a cheap yc but fully correct one. And a referee of Kuipers statue is not prone for this kind of pressure
DeleteCheap isn't probably the right word, I would say rsther unusual. As I wrote in another comment the last comparable call was Busacca in Barca-Arsenal for RvP
DeleteAnd again a great call of AR2 Zeinstra when Juventus scored the 2-1.
ReplyDeleteReally impressive decisions! Well done!
DeleteFully correct PK whistled by Cakir. Very busy night for the Turkish.
ReplyDeleteSevilla penalty is a very soft call, I am against such penalties. But I guess as soon as Cakir gave it VAR couldn't intervene, it wasn't an obvious mistake.
DeleteDortmund player is clearly pushing his opponent. I think if Cakir didn’t whistle VAR would have intervened.
DeleteI didn't see a push, a slight touch yes but was it enough for a penalty? I doubt it
Deletehttps://ibb.co/0Ms06SN
DeleteClear pushing from his back, best decision is penalty kick. If defender pushes his opponent in his penalty area, that is not our problem as a referee..
DeleteIMO it was very difficult to see holding Haaland (first penalty) live.
ReplyDeleteviolent conduct by porto gk after 2:1 for juve? kick against morata...more frustration but if rc is shown, i would support it...
ReplyDeletePossible VC by Porto goalkeeper after the 2-1 goal?
ReplyDeleteMaybe YC is more expected on UEFA level, but at least that card was missing.
I agree. For me never VC. A YC is the most appropriate decision.
Delete75 min Diego Carlos against Haaland, borderline to Violent Conduct?
ReplyDeleteThere are arguments for VC, definitely. One can argue the arm was way too high and that Diego Carlos willingly hits his opponent this way. On UEFA level, YC is the expected outcome though. Correct support from VAR.
DeleteNot more than yellow card.
DeleteOT: How much episodes are we assisting to, tonight?
ReplyDeleteDeliberate elbow/arm with excessive force in the face. Nothing else but a straight red card for violent conduct.
ReplyDeleteThe Haaland situation...
DeleteOnce again Zeinstra with a spot-on offside call. Kuipers is lucky to have such talented assistants.
ReplyDeleteReally!!
DeleteI couldn't understand why Irrati recommended OFR for BVB's goal. His intervention made things more complicated rather than clarifying. A doubtful foul before the goal and not clear holding for PK. IMO there was no VAR stuff.
ReplyDeleteI agree . In this situation goal was the Best option becouse Halands foul wasnt obvious mistake. IMO the Defender made a contact
Delete+1 Anonymous
DeleteHere we go with Extra Time and possibly a penalty shootout
ReplyDeleteBrutal game for Cakir here in Dortmund!
ReplyDeleteHard and challenging UCL game and a HUGE test for 4th offical Arda Kardesler.
What's your opinion about his performance?
I am absolutely curious how UEFA will evaluate Cakir's performance tonight!!!!
For me quite good. I don't like expressing marks, but I think that a clear mistake was made (not allowing penalty or allowing goal) and a crucial decision was correctly made (pk, soft but correct). I also am curious :)..
DeleteIt was a standard game for him. He did not affect that result.
DeleteI was mainly focused on what was happening in Kuipers' game but from what I saw Cakir did well in a very challenging game. A few crucial decisions to be taken:
Delete-The foul previous to Dortmund disallowed goal was a tricky one; I would personally have supported the referee, but VAR Irrati made his choice and call Cakir.
-The penalty called for the foul made in the previous action was quite justified, and I have the feeling that it fulfills the missed incident case: Cakir was following the action and couldn't spot what happened in his back.
-The penalty to Sevilla was a spot-on call.
-I personally think that the situation with Diego Carlos was a RC for VC after seeing the replays. Arm is used as a tool and dangerously hit the head of the opponent, even looking intentional. Crucial mistake IMHO, VAR has to intervene.
KMI apart, I saw a great 1H from the Turkish, great personality and feeling for the game, correct cards.
The 2H was way more challenging and Cakir hang on, all cards justified (maybe one missed for a Dortmund player but I don't remember well). My mark would be 7.9(5)
Kuipers still with the smile on his lips: very good images.
ReplyDeleteControversial night at both placed so far
ReplyDeleteDortmund - Sevilla
Unnecessary VAR intervention from my point of view to take back the 2:0. Leading into quite an emotional situation afterwards.
Juventus - Porto
Very soft penalty awarded to Porto in first half.
Rather unusual 2nd Yellow against Porto in 2nd half
On Kuipers' SYC:
ReplyDeleteDutchman did quite well here to give the RC, having not done so straight away (especially re. the bigger picture). Everyone can accept this call, even if without being mobbed I don't bet this sanction would have happened...
Actually, IMO the bigger problem for us in refereeing is the 1st YC a few minutes earlier. OF COURSE referees should sense tension in a game and use cards in a not totally uniform way to act against this, but the delay showed that Kuipers was too (visibly) influenced by this IMO.
Game has been really calm after that incident! Penalty call + this SYC sits well with 'big picture refereeing'. But Kuipers should have had clearer ideas from the start in my eyes, even if he will avoid bigger controversy in the end (waiting for ET).
Kuipers is a joy to watch, honestly. Takes no sh** from players and practically gets every single decision correct
ReplyDeleteTake your pills and watch a movie because you are so far away from football...
DeleteVery poor Kuipers, missed twice YC to Alex Sandro! Unpredictable card management.
ReplyDeleteThat’s a subjective decision, he clearly had a contrasting opinion to you. But his overall game management has been superb as always. Second YC for Taremi was right, I’m not sure how anyone can even argue that?
DeleteAlex Sandro should have been already booked if not for SPA for persistent infringement.
ReplyDeleteVAR interventions by Irrati IMO was wrong tonight. Both decisions (foul on goal and penalty) were not clear and obvious error.
ReplyDeletePossible penalty, IMO correct to play on. What a hard match to referee is this one..
ReplyDeleteCakir imo wuth good performance tonight.
ReplyDeleteIf we have to compare it Kuipers, far better than him.
Great no penalty decision there by kuipers. Ronaldo just about rolled out the stadium...
ReplyDeleteExcellent Kuipers! SPOT ON no penalty. Fair challenge by GK.
ReplyDeleteWell, supportable maybe... But clean challenge? Yes, he touches the ball, but the way GK challenges... on the edge
DeleteCome on man are you serious? The best tackle I’ve seen in years 😂
Deletehectic game in Turin
ReplyDeleteKuipers is ready for EURO's final.
ReplyDeleteYou must be watching another game than I do...
DeleteI'm not saying Kuipers is doing bad tonight, but he definitely had better performances in the past. Concluding the finsl because of tonight seems rather strange to me.
Delete... And he has named himself REF PAUL... Glorious if he is really a referee and can say this after this horror in Torino...
DeleteWhat did he do wrong today?
DeleteUNBELIEVABLE how challenging that 1ET was for Kuipers! So, so many incidents in terms of foul recognition and (especially) disciplinary control.
ReplyDeleteI think Kuipers has lost control.
DeleteWe can say a lot of his performance, but even in this extra time he has full control; no doubt about that.
DeleteAtlético vs Barça 2014 Webb? :)
DeleteOnce you feel like you have lost control you start issuing cards. That’s when the game calms down. That’s why so far in 2ET there has been no incidents so far.
DeleteI don’t underatand Kuipers fans on this blog. Everyone knows he is one of the best referees in the world but tonight is not in his best day. It’s not difficult to admit it.
ReplyDeleteFully agree.
DeleteYes the game is challenging, but still he can do better
Actually the usual idiotic performance of Kuipers in every a little bit more challenging game. In fact this match became so furious because of his refereeing especially in the first half.
DeleteI’m confused what did he do wrong?
DeleteI prefer PK on the challenge by the Porto GK on Ronaldo, but no foul is a supportable decision, and certainly consistent with the rest of the game.
ReplyDeleteI think so. The goalkeeper was very uncontrolled.
DeleteAhaha, consistent with the ghost penalty awarded to Porto in the first half ;p But I agree, supportable call here
Delete@Anonymous, I should clarify, I only started watching in the second half, this was what I was comparing it to. I agree that this is more of a penalty than the one in the first half.
DeleteKuipers is facing an erupting ET, so many complains. I can't believe he stay that calm, especially from the benches who are acting like animals, sorry for my harsh words, but they are very far from educated. This game looks like it can boil over at any moment. Maybe he needs to be more strict to restore a strong grip on the game.
ReplyDeleteSorry but how can we deem the challenge of the GK as acceptable? He did not play the ball, maybe a little little touch but for sure full contact on the legs of Ronaldo. This is even a reckless tackle and a clear PK. If we compare this action with the PK for Porto.. where is the balance?
ReplyDeleteI won't say that Kuipers is having his best day, but in such a challenging ET it could have been much worse in terms of acceptance/control.
ReplyDeleteI agree, from what I’ve seen, the performance hasn’t been *awful*, but it’s a far cry from Kuipers’s usual self.
DeleteDue to the high number of comments, we can continue here:
ReplyDeletehttp://law5-theref.blogspot.com/2021/03/champions-league-202021-discussion.html
Thank you!