Thank to Árbitro Internacional, we have the appointments for the competition.
Olympic Football - Tokyo 2020 - Women
Semifinals
2 August 2021
Referee: Kateryna Monzul (UKR)
Assistant Referee 1: Lucie Ratajova (CZE)
Assistant Referee 2: Maryna Striletska (UKR)
Fourth Official: Stephanie Frappart (FRA)
Reserve Assistant Referee: Manuela Nicolosi (FRA)
Video Assistant Referee: Pawel Raczkowski (POL)
Assistant Video Assistant Referee: Fu Ming (CHN)
Match Commissioner : SHAHRIYARI Paria (IRI )
General Coordinator : DUEHMERT Katharina (GER )
Australia vs Sweden
Referee: Melissa Borjas (HON)
Assistant Referee 1: Shirley Perello (HON)
Assistant Referee 2: Enedina Caudillo (MEX)
Fourth Official: Salima Mukansanga (RWA)
Reserve Assistant Referee: Mariana de Almeida (ARG)
Video Assistant Referee: Nicolas Gallo (COL)
Assistant Video Assistant Referee: Erick Miranda (MEX)
Match Commissioner : SAARINEN Outi (FIN )
General Coordinator : MONTERROSA Mario (GUA )
Olympic Football - Tokyo 2020 - Men
Semifinals
3 August 2021
Mexico - Brazil
Referee: Georgi Kabakov (BUL) Assistant Referee 1: Martin Margaritov (BUL)
Assistant Referee 2: Diyan Valkov (BUL)
Fourth Official: Bamlak Tessema (ETH)
Reserve Assistant Referee:: Mohammed Ibrahim (SDN)
VAR: Marco Guida (ITA)
AVAR: Benoit Millot (FRA)
Japan - Spain
Referee: JKevin Ortega (PER)
Assistant Referee 1: Michael Orue (PER)
Assistant Referee 2: Jesus Sanchez (PER)
Fourth Official: Matt Conger (NZL)
Reserve Assistant Referee: Mark Rule (NZL)
VAR: Mauro Vigliano (ARG)
AVAR: Andres Cunha (URU)
UEFA has posted appointments for 3rd round of qualifying for UCL, UEL and UECL.
ReplyDeleteMonzul with Frappart as 4th – they're not messing around. Correctly, I should add, given what happened in the SF in 2012.
ReplyDeleteWhat happened in 2012?
DeleteChristina Pedersen from Norway had one of the worst and visually one sided officiated Women's football matches that I have ever witnessed. Based on the entirety of her body of work, it truly felt as if she was biased on that evening.
DeleteStill might be the last six second call I've seen in a high profile game.
Delete@RefUSSF, there was a 6-second call (the Canada goalkeeper had held the ball for about 12 seconds when Pederson blew her whistle), indirect free kick given to the USA with about 15 minutes to go and down 3-2. From this indirect free kick, a handball is called for a PK which the US scores to equalize (I think the handball decision is debatable, there are points to support it, at least under modern laws). The US scored to equalize and then win the game on penalties, going on to win the gold medal.
Delete*correction, the US won with a goal in the 123rd minute, not on penalties
DeleteIf you want to watch the full game for yourself, it is available on YouTube (not geolocked anywhere) at this link: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jH7ZiJjVFqw&t=8102s
Deletemodern interpretation or old interpretation.
DeleteThe Canadian player clearly has her arm tucked into her body. Nothing about her arm enlarges her body. To say that call is supportable, you've got to be a "homer".
That whole incident is just as gross and unacceptable now as it was back then. This will for ever be Christina Pederson's Henning Ovrebo moment. Maybe it's a Norway thing.
I do remember the USA-Canada SF and it truly was the worst performance I have seen from a referee. Yes the 6" technically was correct but a referee should never call something after a suggestion from a team captain. That was the worst part of that call.
DeleteAlso as far as I can remember Pedersen gave an incorrect, IMO, penalty to USA and denied another one for Canada.
Expected appointment for Kabakov after a very good display in group stage. Excellent achievement for the Bulgarian, he has now to take again the right way in UEFA as well.
ReplyDeleteAs for the other name, I expected Barton, but it seems that he now can be candidate directly for a final, but Elfath is a stronger name from the same confederation. We will see.
I didn't see any Ortega's game, hope he did well.
Guida and Millot both together in Mexico - Brazil: this could mean that, as I was writing, they were already planned for at maximum this semifinal, having a game in Conference League second legs on 12 August. We will see.
I think that either Gold or Bronze medal matches will have a CONCACAF referee, depending on Mexico beating Brazil or not, both Barton and Elfath would deserve it. The non-CONCACAF spot seems more 'open' in terms of confederation. I think that Soares Dias is UEFA's only potential candidate for a medal game (Grinfeld given QF with a controversial PK, Kabakov given SF, Jovanovic out after his unfortunate performance in ARG-AUS)
DeleteIf there's a Hispanic Spain-Mexico duel for Gold or Bronze medal, González could be an option.
From CAF and AFC I think that Tessema and Beath are their best bets.
Ortega chosen over Gonzalez could mean that the latter is still considered for a medal match. 2016 shows, that 2 CONMEBOL referees in the last 4 matches is possible.
DeleteI agree that the UEFA candidate should be Soares Dias and the AFC candidate Beath. For CONCACAF it's not so clear, because I don't know whether already having done 3 matches counts for or against Elfath. In CAF, I would rather expect Gomes than Tessema, because of the Ethiopian's SF appointment.
And I mean all those considerations for both the referee and 4th official spots in the last 2 games.
How has Conger done? Has now been to a number of tournaments and never in the mix for the KO games - as confederation neutrality means an Oceania ref could do pretty much any game, I wonder if OFC need to push other referees? Or do FIFA just not give them enough chance - often pre-decided they will get one game / support role?
ReplyDeleteI believe that your last sentence describes what is keeping OFC referees from achieving more.
DeleteHauata wasn't a terrible referee, but he was never really given the opportunity to show it. The same can be said of Zitouni. The FIFA Committee has chosen him as the OFC representative to various competitions. But the Referee Committee then proceeds to primarily use him as a 4th Official.
Conger on the other hand has been given more opportunities. And IMO he's done well in what he's been given. But he's also been limited to group stage matches.
OT:
ReplyDeleteHow was Yigal Frid in French Supercup?
I watched only the 2H of the game, but in these 45 minutes he delivered a satisfactory performance.
DeleteNormal difficulty match, decent game management, used his cards efficiently when needed.
Only deficiencies to be found on dealing with time wasting offenses (lacking soft skills a bit) and whistle techniques (too much blasts, remind me of Faghani)
Nothing to report regarding KMIs, no controversy caused by his officiating, a good night for the refereeing crew overall .
In Ortega, Peru may finally have the top class and trusted referee who succeeds Victor Hugo Carrillo.
ReplyDeleteAt one point, Diego Haro had the opportunity to become Peru's number one. But he never managed to flourish into the deserving successor of Carrillo.
Full clips HL of the Romania vs. New Zealand game handled by Kevin Ortega:
ReplyDeletehttps://fromsmash.com/rounzlortega
VARs today
ReplyDeleteUSA-CAN: Raczkowski (POL) / Ming (CHN)
AUS-SWE: Gallo (COL) / Miranda (MEX)
Bad injury by the US GK at 20'. She stayed in the game, but got 5 minutes of treatments. Will be interesting to see how much added time is given (Naeher got subbed at 30').
ReplyDeleteBefore that, a tight non-PK on a tackle by the US. A very slight touch on the ball before the tackle, it seems.
Missed YC at 40th minute on very dangerous tackle on Morgan. No play on signal so no advantage called. No YC or foul call is very poor, unfortunately.
ReplyDeleteThere was an advantage signal.
DeleteIMO also not a mandatory card: Played the ball first and the leg contact was not too intense.
Ok, would have to see replay to confirm. I thought after that, why don't I just record the replay on my computer screen with my mobile and upload to sharing site. So hard to find replays after the match. Will try to do later in match if possible.
DeletePossible penalty at 73', OFR review. The Canadian just puts her leg in front of the American defender to play the ball, and the American kicks it away, just at the left edge of the penalty area. Monzul gives the penalty after OFR.
ReplyDelete1-0 Canada.
So far, good performance by Monzul.
Disagree with VAR no pk call reversal in 73rd minute. If a player has already started their kicking action towards the ball and another player sneaks in before the kicking action is completed and gets kicked in the leg, then that is not a foul in my opinion.
ReplyDeleteI think Cakir got lost many good appointments after not calling a similar foul on Messi in a 2019 Champions League game.
DeleteUpon further looks, I think the Canadian initiates the first contact on the left leg of the American which causes the path of her leg to change and led to her missing the back and kicking her opponent. I've gone from it was a borderline harsh intervention to it being completely wrong.
DeleteThough the opposite is the current interpretation, just as calling handling for non-intentional handling is current interpretation.
ReplyDeletehttps://streamable.com/fmoia0
ReplyDeleteI think we can partly analogise this decision with the penalty given by Kuipers after OFR in SVKESP.
This one is trickier though - does the attacker just win the position fairly here, or is her intention just to get herself kicked (-> win a penalty)?
Have to go out though will have a look later. Why do the streamable clips never work for me (rhetorical question)?
DeleteI had to slow down the behind goal angle since the referee only got it at full speed. This is the one to me that shows the Canadian player made significant contact with the defender in the upper leg/knee area and caused the USA defender to miss the ball.
Deletehttps://i.imgur.com/guBoftk.mp4
Thank you Mikael, I was desperately looking for a video, it is definitely a tragedy with this competition here... nothing can be found and all sites / videos are geoblocked.
DeleteComing into the argument, USA defender was already minded to kick the ball, then opponent came in her pattern by putting her leg there. Result? The most unfair penalty... and I'm not even sure this was VAR stuff because one can discuss about the "origin" of the foul. Was Monzul convinced about this decision? Of course no, due to the long time she needed before whistling, and what I want to say is that it is always the same story... VAR shouldn't be used in this way in my opinion. This would have been penalty only in case of whistle by referee on the pitch. No clear and obvious mistake because the foul is caused by attacker on herself.
I'm sorry CWY2190, I just don't see the significant contact you're referring to. The US player "misses" the ball because there's a leg in between that she kicks.
DeleteIn general, I am a bit uneasy with these 'kicks a leg placed in front of her foot' fouls, but they are absolutely within what is expected by current guidance, and there is nothing in the text of the Law to suggest it is wrong. The Canadian player absolutely had a right to play the ball, she attempted to play it, and her foot was kicked. That's an unambiguous penalty.
This is still a lot more of a penalty than those cases where attackers stick out their legs to ''protect the ball'' to create a contact and fool the referee that they got fouled.
DeleteChefren, have a look at video A2 of the 2021.1 RAP. It's the exact same situation (in reverse - attacker kicks defender), and UEFA states a DFK to the kicked player's team is the right decision.
DeleteI also think it is very similiar to the SVKESP situation with Koke. Both times the attacker comes from behind, and the kicker is not really aware of them. For me, this is Borderline and the decision on the field should stand. It should only be a clear PK, if the attacker acutally gets a clear touch to the ball first. I thought the VARintervention from Kuiper's team was wrong at the time. What differences do you see Mikael?
DeleteQuite similar indeed, therefore I repeat my argumentation from back then:
DeleteCarelessly kicking an opponent is a foul - there are no exemptions or further conditions in the LotG.
The kicking is obvious.
And I would argue, that it also is clearly careless, because the defender surely could have avoided it.
So the only reason for no penalty would be a previous offence by the attacker. And I don't see that here (and in SVKESP). Yes, there is some previous contact, but nothing more than a fair challenge IMO.
However I agree with others here, that this is not clear and obvious as there are different opinions on how to assess such tacklings.
I think that based on UEFA's reasoning, there is nothing unclear about it. They don't assess it as borderline, they assess it as a clear foul in the RAP.
DeleteVery difficult scene IMO.
DeleteMy main questions are: Is the defender already in an unstoppable kicking movement when the attacker puts her leg across? And does the attacker put her leg there on purpose to initiate the contact or does she mainly protect the ball in a fair manner?
This still implies that answering these question is quite difficult as their movements start rather simultaneously: https://ibb.co/TrtyFjM
I would conclude that (1) the defender is not in an unstoppable movement as her leg still swings back, when the attacker already puts her leg across - she therefore takes a big risk when finishing this movement and that (2) the attacker puts her leg across to reach/protect the ball (she is in the better position; one cannot blame her for that) and not to create a contact.
Based on that, IMO penalty is the correct(er) outcome; I wouldn't blame the referee for not whistling it live, but with the replays available I understand Monzul's decision.
About the VAR intervention, I agree with Chefren - those close situations should be assessed on the pitch - when intervening here, we could intervene ten times a match and the 'clear and obvious-rule' wouldn't count anymore.
Hello Emil! In my oppinion, A2 from RAP 2021.1 is not comparable to this (Rice vs. De Bruyne). Rice does not put his body inbetween and more importantly, he plays the ball (In both examples from above, the attacker does not play the ball, but trying to shiled it). Would Rice not play the ball and get kicked before DeBruyne can kick the ball, it would be a foul from Rice.
DeleteDavid, I don't see why whether the kicked player has already touched the ball when they get kicked is relevant. In both cases, they clearly attempt to play the ball and get kicked. I don't think that's a relevant consideration here.
DeleteIMO no penalty. Play-on !
DeleteWatching in real time I thought "no foul by either player". Watching the replay, both in real time & in slow motion, it's possible to argue (1) Canada foul (2) USA foul (3) no foul by either player. Instinctively, in such cases, with nothing clear-cut and obvious, the referee's initial on-field decision should have stood. Monzul should have stuck with her original decision. It was a disappointing game from the start, neither team looked able to score & the deciding penalty was not clear-cut.
ReplyDeleteWhat would make you argue 'Canadian foul'?
DeleteAt very slow speed I reckon the first contact is by the Canadian attacker on the American defender, which is just sufficient to cause the American defender to adjust and consequently mis-time her attempt to play the ball and she ended up kicking the Canadian attacker's foot. In real time, it looked like genuine attempts by both players to reach the ball running at speed. With the ball and the players heading away from goal, a PK seemed an unlikely outcome & I thought Monzul's original decision was correct.
DeleteHmm.. In SWE-AUS, the referee whistles at 42' while an AUS FK is being taken, denying a goal. A bit unclear what she whistled. It seems it concerned two offside players holding a pair of Swedish defenders, preventing them from dropping back. As they were not involved in play, it would have to be a direct free kick for holding the opponent. At any rate, the whistle was blown before the ball entered goal, so VAR could not intervene either way.
ReplyDeleteIf that is indeed the decision, it is quite harsh given it had no incidence on play, and whistling before the ball entered the goal was certainly poor procedure. Waiting 2 seconds more would have allowed VAR to review the play.
I also don't see an offence there.
DeleteProves crucial in the end as the game ends 1-0.
DeleteNone of the camera angles provided showed us any remotely decent look at the two Australian players who Borjas was likely focused on. She had a far better view than any of the replays we were showed, so I can totally believe there was a very real foul there.
DeleteAs for delaying the whistle, isn't this supposed to only be used in cases of offside? I thought referees weren't supposed to change the way they officiated dur to VAR other than that one offside tweak?
"Delaying the flag/whistle for an offence is only permissible in a very clear attacking situation when a player is about to score a goal or has a clear run into/towards the opponents’ penalty area."
DeleteVar Protocol section 4, "Procedures"
So no, it's not only for offsides, and the situation here certainly warrants it. We're talking delaying 2 seconds, not 30.
At 48', good no-flag by AR2. AUS attacker is in an offside position but does not intervene in play (the ball is centred towards her, but she clearly moves out of the way). The second attacker takes the ball, and then accidentally kicks the GK's hand. Borjas gives a DFK for the kick on the GK.
ReplyDeleteAnd a DOGSO red at 90+6. Clear foul, no hesitation.
ReplyDeleteShortly before, a Swedish goal denied on a correct delayed offside by AR1.
For the U.S.-Canada VAR intervention (another clip is at https://youtu.be/DSB13goSugs?t=258), here is my new argument: if a player dives on the ground to head the ball and then gets kicked in the head, they wouldn't get the foul called against them because they caused the dangerous situation. So if a player sees another player kicking the ball and then steps in front of the kick, with no chance for the kicking player to stop the action or sometimes even know the other player is there, how can that quite natural action of kicking the ball with no intent to foul another player be called as a foul? What I'm saying is that even if the current interpretation is black and white and the LoTG are clear that kicking another player's leg or foot is normally a foul, then that interpretation should be revisited. Refereeing should be about fairness, and a natural action like kicking the ball shouldn't be penalized, in my opinion.
ReplyDeleteI don't see the parallel. There are many situations in which "kicking a ball" is disallowed (for an extreme example, think Danielson in the Euros). And, if we're doing parallels, if Davidson had done a sliding tackle instead of a kick, the answer would be obvious and uncontroversial.
DeleteI think it's important to disaggregate two questions here:
1- Under current laws and interpretations, was the decision correct? For me, absolutely.
2- Should that interpretation change? That goes beyond the referee's role, and is a different question. To me, it's a difficult question. I don't see how you could rewrite the interpretation of the law without making it impractical, or preventing players from challenging for the ball. More broadly, it's a question of intention, foreseeable effects, and speed. There are plenty of times when a situation changes between when the player begins and ends an action. I'm not sure what makes this one different, and how you separate it from all others. Very rarely do players deliberately commit fouls; the consequences of a tackle etc. are very often not what the player intended when they started an action.
This comment has been removed by the author.
DeleteThe denied goal in Australia vs Sweden for no apparent block identifiable evidence and then not allowing VAR is a travesty
ReplyDeleteWe can debate the merits of the foul (I don't see one) but the whistle went before the ball entered the goal so there is no way for VAR to get involved.
DeleteIndeed - VAR cannot intervene, and as i wrote above, the referee should have waited before whistling. Honestly, I'm not sure what exactly she whistled. I assume it was for 'holding' opponents. If that's the case, it seems harsh as it's way off the ball, but we don't necessarily have an angle to clearly see the actions of the Australians. Obviously, if she whistled an offside, that would be very clearly incorrect.
DeleteAll that to say, if it was a very blatant foul we can't see from our angle, then I'd support the referee (it happens all the time on corner kicks - attacker drags down defender while the ball is in air, and referee gives a defensive foul). If it's minor jostling, I'd certainly have preferred to see the goal stand.
Medal match predictions:
ReplyDeleteAUS-USA: Fortunato (ARG) - Alves (BRA) - Vigliano (ARG), Cuadra (ESP)
SWE-CAN: Jacewicz (AUS) - Yamashita (JPN) - Al Marri (QAT), Bin Jahari (SGP)
Fortunato over Alves? I think difficult to happen, the Brazilian seems already planned for something big. FIFA has the chance to appoint her for a final, we know she is liked by committee.
DeleteI would be surprised to read Fortunato in a final and not her.
I just think, it's a bit strange that Alves wasn't used after MD2. Of course, they could have planned her for a medal match already at that point and wanted to keep her safe. But it gave me some doubts and therefore I went with the other CONMEBOL referee.
DeleteI think not calling a penalty kick on the potential foul on Kerr hurt her.
DeleteDoes the USA player make contact(kick) with the Canadian player? Yes
ReplyDeleteDoes the USA player at any point make contact with the ball? No
Does this play occur inside the penalty area? Yes
PENALTY
Please excuse me, Arbiter.
DeleteYour comments are very, very cheap.
What about 99,90% during corner kicks?
Does the defender makes contact with the attacker? Yes, most of the time holding by the defender.
Does the defender makes contact with the ball? No, ball is underway from corner spot.
Does this action occurs inside the penalty area at the time the ball is in play? Yes
According to your reasoning, the referee should whistle every time PENALTY,
Come on ??!!
My comment is my opinion about THIS and only THIS incident. I am not speaking in general. But thank you for assuming.
DeleteIn regards to the insufferable amount of wrestling that is allowed. My solution is quite simple. If referees or VAR's (if in use) would call more fouls against the defending teams. I am almost certain that defending players would begin to think twice about defending in that manner.
The current manner of not calling anything at all or simply taking the easy way out and calling a foul against the attacking team. Only serves to encourage defenders to continue with these tactics.
But again, that's just my opinion.
Have a Blessed Day.
Cheers!
Why Borjas why?
ReplyDeleteWhy calling a foul like that? This isn't your local Honduran league where a call like that is normal, expected and accepted.
Unfortunately in Latin American countries it's quite common to see referees make that type of call. The match commentators will simply say that the referee whistled "amontonamiento".
amontonamiento = crowding
Of course the call always benefits the defending team.
Where can I find UEFA RAP’s
ReplyDeleteon the right side of this site. If you want, you can discuss the clips with me, I have a few on my drive. :)
DeletePenalty revoked after VAR intervention in Kabakov game. Do you know more?
ReplyDeleteBasically the Brasilian player ran infront of the Mexican player stopped and thrusted his backside into the Mexican player and went down. Blatantly and obviously instigating the contact and going down.
DeleteWhat a joke PK Kabakov was fooled into calling. Thank God that VAR is being used in the non Euro way at these Olympics.
ReplyDeleteHe rectified his obvious mistake based on the images provided by VAR. However IMO he should have cautioned the Brasilian player for Unsporting Behavior (blatant and obvious dive).
BRA-MEX '28: Incorrect penalty for BRA corrected after OFR. Contact was initiated by BRA, good VAR intervention by Guida (lower bar than EUROS but expected decision was taken). Kabakov slowing the game down well at times with his warnings, although his natural presence is not very strong so far. Now correct first YC of the game for BRA #3 (SPA).
ReplyDeleteThank you, waiting for a video (found some clips, but still geoblocked...), it looks like this penalty would have been confirmed at EURO but not in a FIFA tournament.
ReplyDeleteGood on FIFA!
DeleteKabakov seems to be making calls based on player reactions. As long as he erroneously tries to handle these teams as of they're prim, proper, and unpassionate Euro teams. He's going to have a long and arduous day.
ReplyDeleteFinally, I found a video:
ReplyDeletehttps://dood.la/e/jztb6u3qsqiz8j8ivnov2pt3rq0rxyj
Minute 01:08.
This should have been foul by attacker. This was not looking for position, but deliberately going against opponent to make a contact and then jumping for a penalty. Absolutely unfair attitude by Brazilian player. The VAR intervention has my full liking, but I indeed think that at EURO this would have been a big trouble for the VAR inolved, with UEFA guidelines. To add, in the replay from behind and opposite angle, this action by Brazilian is not so clear. So easy for referee from the field to think that it was penalty...
https://streamja.com/059da
ReplyDeleteThe discussed situation from AUS - SWE.
Early whistle and unknown reasons.
I guess a push by an attacker... in these situations is better to play on unless a very clear incident happens. However, unlucky circumstance that a goal was scored immediately after. VAR can do nothing.
Thanks for the video Chefren.
DeleteBut I am still unable to find anything worth blowing a foul for. All the Swedish players seem to have been able to move in a mostly unimpeded manner.
I am also confused as to Borjas' gesture after calling the foul. What is she pointing at?
Overall just an unfortunate and messy situation the Honduran put herself in. A decision that sadly directly affected to the final outcome of the match.
Australia in this case would be justified to feel wronged.
I think Grinfeld will be the final referee!!!
ReplyDeleteGrinfeld will be the ref in Ludogorets-Olympiakos on August 10th
DeleteKabakov was good today. After ARGPAR at the last U17 WC, the Bulgarian again showed his worth in delicate FIFA matches.
ReplyDeleteIt was interesting that Thomas remarked on his presence - I agree he lacks the natural authority of say Kassai, the charisma of Frisk, but he is an excellent manager, and his tactical choices and player interactions were very satisfying.
Sure there are some areas for consideration (penalty call chiefly, also missed OtB striking which resulted in a confrontation), but overall the picture is really positive for the Bulgarian - well done.
Yes, I thought Kabakov did very well. His line was very high, letting play get very physical, especially in the penalty box (seeing through all the antics), but also very clear. I found it an attractive contrast to the style of some Euros refereeing, as he brought out two warranted YCs in the first half and VAR being used judiciously to overturn a pk given for a dive. His whistle (looked like a Valkeen, no?) and hand signals were particularly crisp, but the one point where the game got away from him a little was around the 70th minute with what looked like a missed foul for going through the back of Richarlison at the top of the Mexican penalty box and then then subsequent retributions, with three YCs coming in the next five minutes. Other than a handling and trip called possibly missed, his foul detection looked very good.
Delete"letting play get very physical, especially in the penalty box (seeing through all the antics)": except, of course, for the pk call.
DeleteGood performance by Kabakov, except the wrong penalty and some deficiencies in foul detection.
DeleteI agree with you that he compensated his lack of presence skills (or natural authority/charisma) by doing other things really well. I remarked on his slowing the match down with warnings in the first half, and he also smartly dealt with the players in a non-confrontational way, draining the tension. No Kuipers-Neymar tête-a-têtes today :-).
I am looking forward to seeing Kabakov in European competitions this season!
Another PK call canceled after OFR in these semifinals. This one was really unfortunate because Ortega blew for a wrong PK when ESP was about to shoot and score a goal.
ReplyDeleteHad he delayed the whistle I think there still would have been an OFR for a foul on Japan.
DeletePenalty for Spain cancelled by Ortega after OFR. I think correct, clean tackle from Japan's number 5, clearly took the ball. Good VAR intervention from Vigliano
ReplyDeleteCould someone post a direct link to a page with UEFA's Referee Assistance Programme (RAP) downloads (preferably a page with multiple downloads)? I can't find them on the UEFA site.
ReplyDeletehttps://www.dutchreferee.com/refereeing-assistance-programme/
Delete👏👌👍
ReplyDeleteMy prediction:
ReplyDeleteGold medal match (ESP-BRA): Barton (SLV)
Bronze medal match (MEX-JPN): González (URU)
Seems like Barton or Elfath are the most likely candidates
DeleteI agree with Barton. He seems like a natural fit considering his style of refereeing and the teams style and mannerisms.
DeleteReports that Salima Mukansanga (RWA) has been appointed as fourth official for Canada - Sweden.
ReplyDeleteChefren in your opinion who will referee the final and bronze in men ?
ReplyDeleteElfath and Soares Dias.
DeleteGonzalez in bronze
DeleteOlympic Football Finals - Tokyo 2020 - Women
ReplyDeleteBronze Medal
Australia vs United States
Referee: Laura Fortunato (ARG)
Assistant Referee 1: Mariana de Almeida (ARG)
Assistant Referee 2: Mary Blanco (COL)
Fourth Official: Stephanie Frappart (FRA)
Reserve Assistant Referee: Bernadettar Kwimbira (MWI)
Video Assistant Referee:
Assistant Video Assistant Referee: