The fourth game of the tournament for Dutch Elite Danny Makkelie, in charge of England - Denmark EURO 2020 semifinal at Wembley. Let's comment his performance here.
London, 7 July 2021 21:00 CET
ENGLAND - DENMARK
Referee: Danny Makkelie (NED)
Assistant Referee 1: Hessel Steegstra (NED)
Assistant Referee 2: Jan de Vries (NED)
Fourth Official: Ovidiu Haţegan (ROU)
Fifth Official: Sebastian Eugen Gheorghe (ROU)
Video Assistant Referee: Pol van Boekel (NED)
Assistant Video Assistant Referee 1: Kevin Blom (NED)
Assistant Video Assistant Referee 2: Christian Gittelmann (GER)
Assistant Video Assistant Referee 3: Pawel Gil (POL)
UEFA Referee Observer: Roberto Rosetti (ITA)
UEFA Delegate: Myrsini Psarropoulou (GRE)
Has a referee ever whistled a semi-final in his first tournament before Makkelie today?
ReplyDeleteYes, Cakir in 2012. I would like to ask does Uefa investigate Kuipers after City Psg.
DeleteAnd before that Merk (GER) in 2000.
DeleteInteresting, that since 1988 most EURO SF referee have participated in the previous World Cup.
So indeed something special for Makkelie today.
Exactly like Merk - Opener and SF
DeleteLannoy, Busacca, De Bleeckere...
Delete... were all at the previous World Cup. So it was their first EURO, but not their first big tournament.
DeleteAh, ok. I misanderstood it
DeleteKarasev sent home (he published a post about it in his Instagram)
ReplyDeleteBefore tournaments were expanded it was quite common for a referee's only appointment to be a SF, or a referee to be in charge of a SF in his first EURO
ReplyDeleteThis will be a very tricky game for Makkelie, good luck to him and his team!
ReplyDelete4 out of 4 matches in blue kit for Makkelie - although today would have been a good opportunity for the black one.
ReplyDeleteIntense start with three fouls. Now ENG asked for IDFK because of a possible back pass. Challenging start for Makkelie!
ReplyDeleteHard to find another intention in that back pass.
DeleteBut of course, normally only 100% back passes are punished, so there might have been some doubts.
I think it should have been an IDFK.
DeleteIntention of defender is clear and he is in complete control
Step on foot. Reckless but right decision considering timing
ReplyDeleteHow does everyone handle offensive player standing in front of keeper during corner kick? Allow them to stand but make sure they aren't obstructing keeper once ball is kicked?
ReplyDeleteI don't think Sunday's Brazil-Argentina match will be covered on this blog, right?
ReplyDeleteNow with EURO ending, maybe we can dedicate a discussion to that game, thanks for the remark.
DeleteLight free kick prior the goal
ReplyDeleteFor me, when Mount's arm going over the top of Dolberg on a mini breakaway approaching the English box and then hitting Dolberg in the head, playing the man and not the man, and then no YC issued, it hurts my notion of the spirit of fair play. Refereeing is about keeping the game safe and fair for the players, being very lenient in refereeing sometimes goes against my idea of fairness.
ReplyDeleteBut as sport is a form of entertainment, being lenient does make the match flow more and might make for a more entertaining match.
DeleteNot sure about free cick prior to goal
ReplyDeleteMakkelie appears to be following the approach taken by Brych yesterday... trying to avoid cards as long as he can.
ReplyDeleteThat’s always his approach to be fair, even in the Dutch league
DeleteShaw took a risk and got seen. The previous foul was for a careless shoulder/elbow
ReplyDeleteCommentators haven't seen that it was an own goal.
ReplyDeleteThose elbows are flying everywhere like it's a WWF match. This does not spark joy.
ReplyDeleteI enjoyed this fantastic first half of football, for me correct decision the free kick for 0-1, I would even praise the call. Foul was clear, but I agree that some referees wouldn't have whistled it.
ReplyDeleteRegarding backpass earlier, supportable, I repeat what I often write on the blog when we saw such situations in past games: there aren't clear criteria, a referee is therefore allowed to apply his discretion, passing ball backwards isn't enough to say 100% backpass to keeper.
Yes, the energy is cracking. Both teams really want this one. There was foul call against Mount on Dolberg and then second foul call right after that. What was the call for?
DeleteFor holding by Luke Shaw on a Denmark player, and the first foul whistled wasn’t even against mount but the Prior challenge that came in before mount came in with his Elbow which Makkelie told the players.
DeleteI have serious doubts that Shaw was still holding his opponent when the free kick was taken. If you freeze the image at the moment the first free kick was taken, his opponent is already on or near the ground.
DeleteIt's a difficult thing to be sure of either way, but I believe the correct decision would have been to caution Shaw and then order the re-take of the first free kick. Moving the kick up to the second location and avoiding the caution was probably easier, but it doesn't make it correct.
Excellent first half and beautiful game to watch which Makkelie has contributed too, I now see why UEFA trust this types of referees!!! They are really not by the books and try to avoid yellow cards as much as possible and that is certainly what UEFA likes and sometimes it help make a fantastic Football match, Their motto would be as long as it’s not mandatory avoid the card!!!!
ReplyDeleteWhy does a card make a match worse?
DeleteLike, what makes a game with 2 cards better than one with 6 cards?
This line of reasoning has always baffled me.
Well, cards slow down a match since it must be stopped to have the cards administered, and a carded player must play more cautiously afterwards to prevent another card, and less cards also probably mean that it will be a more physical game.
DeleteThe interesting question on the 0-1 free kick is, whether that foul happened before or after the free kick execution. There seems to be a good chance, that the holding was already finished at the moment of the kick, but one can't be sure from the pictures shown so far.
ReplyDeleteAnd it's probably a point, that doesn't matter for most viewers...
Easier match than yesterday, teams focused on football. Makkelie did what he had to do, avoided some possible YCs and did well in foul recognition - supportable FK prior to 0-1. Overall, expected level performance so far in my book.
ReplyDeleteCorrect first yc
ReplyDeletePredictable outcome giving the leniency around the use of arms in 1h. It had to escalate.
DeleteIt's not really an escalation, though - one reckless foul does not create an overheating match. It was a reasonable intervention at this time.
DeleteThe use of arms was becoming increasingly reckless, largely due to leniency. That's what I meant.
DeleteMakklie sorting out always both cards before showing it to players, creates a very particular wait :D
ReplyDeleteCorrect decision with the yellow, for me reckless.
and you always see the red one first. not really optimal for the audience who could always think briefly that a sending off will follow
DeleteYeah, like yesterday, he had to show a card. Getting scrappy out there now. So much at stake.
ReplyDeleteSteegstra's mistake. The ball hasn't fully crossed the line, when goal kick was awarded
ReplyDeleteYep.
DeleteInteresting to think about the politics of refereeing: calling by the book or being more lenient, the latter perhaps being one's personal preference but perhaps also influenced by what one thinks committees, coaches, players, and fans like to see. Just thinking about Cakir looking so sharp but still being sent home...
ReplyDeleteWonderful video of Grealish's skills that came out this week: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r7rADGSrLYE&t=145s. He looks like Messi or Neymar in it.
ReplyDeleteIt's funny, lots of players expecting fouls that never come, stopping play for a second before continuing. They don't seem used to Makkelie's fluid approach.
ReplyDeleteNo YC for luke shaw at 70 but YC for Wass at 72. Interesting usage of cards.
ReplyDeleteYe shocking few minutes there
DeleteI don't think it was very clear SPA but more of an expected decision.
DeleteNow previous foul whistled by Makkelie against attacker, otherwise possible penalty. VAR checked the call.
ReplyDeleteMissed Kane's foul before incident in box.
DeleteNeed to see replay again but did look like Kane touched the ball first so possible PK call.
ReplyDeleteThat is NEVER a YC for Wass
ReplyDeleteNot enough for PK. Immediate decision by Makkelie absolutely correct.
ReplyDeleteBut the foul he whistled before... There I am not so sure...
ReplyDeleteOof my hunch was that this was a clear penalty at 74' - I'm not convinced the defender plays the ball (and therefore I'd treat it as a trip by the Danish, not a kick by the English). I would think that the FK was a mistake, but that with the bar for VAR intervention being very high, Makkelie's interpretation is plausible, if not particularly convincing.
ReplyDelete73’ clear PK for me, after 3 times watching. But : if England finally wins, Danny will again get away with it. What does Roberto, official observer, think about this ? I know the answer : no problem Danny ; your ‘feeling’ given the context was right. Blablabla
ReplyDeleteWhy it isn't a penalty?
ReplyDeletebecause it wasn’t a foul
DeleteNever a penalty. There is no discussion for me, Kane fouled the defeder. But if you are english, it could look different.
ReplyDeleteVery clear penalty but it makes no different since they called the foul that happened prior to Kane getting the ball. Seems many missed that.
ReplyDeleteI agree. No pk.
ReplyDeleteOne commentator said, "He knows what's coming" after shirt pull, the other said, "I'm surprised he hasn't been yellow carded for that." But they don't know Makkelie/Brych style yet...
ReplyDeleteYe the commentators are ridiculously bias
DeleteClear YC missed against Poulsen (SPA/LoR).
ReplyDeleteCommentator just said that England hasn't reached final of major competition in two long generations. Was '66 cup victory their last final?
ReplyDeleteThey've actually never reached a EURO final.
DeleteI talked to an English friend today and said that England has more talent than I can remember in a long time and that they could win against Italy should they play them in the final, and he said that Italy have a habit of finding a way to win, so I think he didn't want to get his hopes up.
DeletePersonally though the no penalty call was excellent. A very difficult situation to interpret though and I doubt it would have been overturned if given.
ReplyDeletePoulsen for me was a yc though
What was just going on?
ReplyDeleteSomeone in the crowd, judging by the hand gestures maybe a laser pen or something?
DeleteRegarding the possilbe penalty, I think that Makkelie's decision is spot on. The DEN defender is (despite not playing the ball) earlier and actually steps in front of Kane. The English kicks the DEN player in the calf. I also think that Makkelie whistled this as a foul, not the scene prior to that.
ReplyDeleteAbout possible PK /Jane. Even without the (IMO doubtful) offensive foul Makkelie whistled the little contact for me never enough for foulPK/Kane!
ReplyDeleteBut now... Looks like clear PK
ReplyDeleteSaw it again. Not sure anymore... Very hard one.
DeleteNo penalty,
ReplyDeleteShocking penalty!
ReplyDeleteVery soft penalty
ReplyDeleteSupportable penalty call but not entirely clear.
ReplyDeleteWhat is supportable, he just dives.
DeleteJoke of a penalty.
ReplyDeleteDive deciding a SF, why, why, why.
ReplyDeleteThis will be a scandal after the match, sorry to say it that clear.
DeleteSorry but this isn’t enough for a PK on semi-finals extra time. Too soft…
ReplyDeleteAWFUL DECISION
ReplyDeleteSimulation
ReplyDeleteNever a PK.
ReplyDeleteToo soft...
ReplyDeleteOmg. Very very soft penalty. Too less for me. Ref deciding this SF. Pity
ReplyDeleteSoft? There was no contact at all!
DeleteSorry, there is minimal contact, but this is one awful mistake.
DeleteNo penalty for me. Wrong decision by Makkelie
ReplyDeleteScandalous decision by the Dutch!
ReplyDeleteI hate to be rude to the officials but after watching Felix Brych yesterday i’ve never seen such an awful refereeing performance in a semi final
ReplyDeleteYou must be blind then
DeleteTerrible pen decision!
ReplyDeleteDid the guys in Nyon leave After Full-time?
ReplyDeleteThat's awful. My word.
ReplyDeleteWhat is VAR?
ReplyDeleteFor me no penalty and more a dive by Sterling.
ReplyDeleteFor me penalty, soft contact, but enough for penalty, becouse he obviously stop him and stop his movement.
ReplyDeleteClear dive
DeleteI can’t believe my eyes. I think this was even softer than Turpin’s and Lahoz’s penalties.
ReplyDeleteYou are probably right, but even those PK's were not changed by VAR. Maybe a a point for improvement in the future, I think VAR could intervene in those situations.
DeleteAnd maybe also time for VAR OUT? Because I actually don't see how it is helpful to the game in this form now. Just takes the raw emotions of the game and slows it down. What is the difference if the referee on the field will make a mistake or the referee in the VAR room?
DeleteAgain a shameful penalty.
ReplyDeleteHow VAR didn’t intervene, unbelievable!
ReplyDeleteIn my view this is even a scene for VAR. Sterling was deceiving the referee. I am very curious about the final appointment. Van Boekel as VAR?
ReplyDeleteHow can you whistle such a penalty in the ET of a semi final? Sterling was looking only for that!
ReplyDeleteVERY soft PK, I would tend to call it wrong. The attacker realizes that he cannot come to a promising opportunity anymore and goes down on his own accord. The light contact is not enough to justify
ReplyDeletethe falling of the attacker IMO. Due to the contact, not enough for the VAR I think.
I disagree; Sterling was looking for the contact, he did not fall for that, he clearly dived.
DeleteReferees should be prepared when you deal with a player that usually dives, look what he did also in the own goal
Thats why they didnt want cakir on the SF
ReplyDeleteWho will be VAR for the final now...?
ReplyDeleteWhy didn‘t VAR intervene? This must never be a penalty, and definetly not in a SF of a European Championship. I‘m shocked that this probably will decide who goes through to the final. Exactly for such situations VAR was introduced.
ReplyDeleteI was expecting an OFR and a YC for simulation actually...
DeleteSaw it again. How it’s possible to Van Poekel to confirm this DIVE and not invited ref to OFR ? Unbelievable decision.
ReplyDeleteSorry, but this penalty just decides EURO semifinal match. Unacceptable. Too soft, can't believe there was not VAR intervention!
ReplyDeleteNo clear error so no VAR intervention. But imo way too soft, not the way this match should be decided. Maybe Makkelie is a bit impressed by pressure from the crowd?
ReplyDeleteNot a penalty, and likely simulation. Poor decision but even poorer no intervention
ReplyDeleteThis is karma for terrible treatment of Cakir!
ReplyDeleteWhy the hell... in such an important stage of the match... not go to review area and rewatch it...?
ReplyDeleteThis was so soft. VAR was terrible.
ReplyDeleteNo PK for me, Plus 2 balls on the pitch at the time too? Nightmare for Makkellie & team tonight imo.
ReplyDeleteThis is not even close to being supportable, scandalous that VAR didn’t intervene
ReplyDeleteVan Boekel should not appointed as VAR in the final
ReplyDeleteAnd don’t tell me to support Makkelie and VAR here because this PK is softer than Turpin and Lahoz decisions !
ReplyDeleteSterling dive 100%. UEFA is pushing England to the final. Shameful decision by VAR.
ReplyDeleteAfter VAR output shown on the TV, it's really a huge mistake to give a penalty. Can't really understand the VAR not calling him to review the decision...
ReplyDeleteThere’s contact knee on knee, the angle from behind shows this clearly. It’s a clear trip IMO I don’t understand how someone can say this ain’t a penalty after seeing that angle.
ReplyDeleteBecause the dive is before…
DeleteBy the contact Sterling had already started falling and looking for a penalty
DeleteThere is no trip he puts his leg out put Sterling dives over the leg CHEATING!! is the correct term
DeleteThe touch (if any) comes after the dive
DeleteSorry but Sterling is clearly diving before this very soft contact. Had to be OFR and no penalty. Makkelie is overestimated about himself as AR’s Portugal affair showed it.
DeleteWatching the replay, CLEAR PK!
DeleteGod save the referee
ReplyDeleteJoke penalty. Cant believe it.
ReplyDeleteIf I was the referee and there was any doubt about a massive decision like this I would want to see it for myself again.
ReplyDeleteThe bar for penalty intervention has been set ludicrously high
Im shocked by the comments on this blog this evening (and this EURO actually).
ReplyDeleteThere was some contact, so never VAR stuff! Do I like the penalty given? No, it is not in line with the decisions in this tournament. Clear mistake? Mwa.
Absolutely clear mistake.
DeleteI can see your point. But for me it can also be a clear and obvious mistake when there is a contact which never can cause a player‘s fall. Football is a contact sport and not every touch is a foul so therefore VAR could and should intervene as well in such situations IMO
DeleteFor me pk decision is correct.
ReplyDeleteAm I wrong or there were 2 balls on The pitch before penalty? Anyway, never a penalty.
ReplyDeleteYes, 2 balls were on the pitch. Joke penalty
DeleteWatching football since 2006, absolutely never seen a Match which hasn't been stopped with 2 balls and a chance created in that area. Which are The rules in this kind of situations?
DeleteEven after VAR output I can't see any contact. Makkelie not well prepared (maybe he didn't watch ENG-SCO) because Sterling likes diving and exaggerating contacts.
ReplyDeleteVAR exists exactly for this situations. He didn’t use it, unbelievable. If you one rookie the semifinal, its obvious that he is gonna effected from crowd at some stage,
ReplyDeleteWe saw the VAR output now. They actually just showed one of the smallest contact I've seen in recent time to justify that call - that CANNOT be a penalty, ENG player wanted to manipulate Makkelie and succeeded.
ReplyDeleteRosetti has a problem now, when chosing the VAR team for the final.
Realy it is penalty? Funny XD
ReplyDeleteOn the other angle looks minimal contact,but not sure its enough for penalty
ReplyDeleteAt the beginning of the tournament I thought, the high bar for VAR-intervention was pretty nice compared to interventions in my domestic league, but not making Makkelie re-watch his decision here ins such an important match is a pity for sportsmanship.
ReplyDeleteI am absolutely livid at this decision and even more so by the VAR. Absolutely disgraceful
ReplyDeleteLet’s see English “objective” journals now! They criticized everyone for simulation - let us see whether they will do the same for this Sterling’s diving. I will tek you right now: NO!!!
ReplyDeleteRoberto Rosetti (June 2021): "We don't want to give soft penalties at EURO 2020, we want clear penalties."
ReplyDeleteThis is really embarrassing, UEFA.
ReplyDeleteIn an extratime of EURO HF the referee is not told to have a look at that again???? Unbelievable and... SAD!
ReplyDelete+1
DeleteAccording to the referee is mentioned a lot of times in the LOTG. This a textbook example of that phrase.
ReplyDeleteThere is contact. Therefore it makes it almost impossible for the VAR to call it a crucial mistake and invite Makkelie for a OFR.
The contact is soft, the dive is beautiful and makes it look like diving. Personally to little for me to whistle a penalty. But I can understand why Makkelie gives it.
Also wandering if there are other angles from where we get the view of Makkelie and maybe get a total different view on the situation. Like in CZE-DEN with corner leading to the first danish goal.
Poor poor performance from the whole refereeing team in OT specially Dannie og Pol
ReplyDeleteMakellie pulls a Codesal '90 PK.
ReplyDeleteVAR has to be allowed to intervene here. I can understand the location of the incident is maybe a tough angle for Makkelie, so I can understand his reason to whistle. But NO REASON, especially in Euro SF, to not allow VAR to intervene and save both the crew and the match. That’s the real scandal here IMO.
ReplyDeleteManuel Gräfe said something like: "I think he was still a bit impressed by the no penalty call against Kane." Gräfe supported the incident with Kane, saying it was not enough (and I agree with that) but did not agree with the penalty given.
ReplyDeleteI don't want to exaggerate but I think UEFA (Rosetti) and Makkelie have a problem now.
Lahoz had similar situation and he handled the pressure well.
ReplyDeleteMakkelie.. I dont know what to say.
Poor performance by Makkelie today.
ReplyDeleteRosetti made a risky choice and lost. Will someone talk about good refereeing in this euro after today's incident?
ReplyDeleteNo wonder why players still try to simulate a penalty. It worked in the EURO semifinal.
ReplyDeleteTotally agree. If the VAR protocol does not change, players will keep looking for soft contacts, mostly causing them or just diving. The protocol can be Crystal clear: “did the player fall because of the contact?”. In this case is extremely easy: of course not!
DeleteNo penalty for me, really bad decision
ReplyDeleteI agree with everyone.
ReplyDeleteOn another note, did no one see the second ball? Sterling was almost colliding with that ball... at one point there wasn't even a meter between them.
Oh look more messages deleted, i don’t know who is deleting it but I would love to know why
ReplyDeleteI can understand a mistake by Makkelie (even though giving PK is still a quite poor decision)
ReplyDeleteI can't understand the non-intervention. At this point there's no way that a referee is getting called to review a PK decision because of 'contact'. It's a clear mistake, period.
Spain's penalty was not awarded yesterday. They were eliminated.
ReplyDeleteToday, Comedy PK.
UEFA designed the final.
So. Van Boekel VAR for the final???
ReplyDeleteWatching the replay from behind Sterling, it's a clear PK from Maehle!
ReplyDeleteMakkelie haters are looking rather foolish.
I told Makkelie is very poor referee and He is overrated.
ReplyDeleteMakkelie is a very good ref. The overrated one is Brych.
DeleteI watched it 3 times i still cant the the foul.
ReplyDeleteKane scored assist Makkelie
According to some sources England didnt want Cakir. poor denmark ll eliminate by this funny penalty
ReplyDeleteIf makkeile watched any match of Sterling, he would/should never gave it. He is one of the most divers in the world. But VAR could save him but they didn’t, this is the problem.
ReplyDeleteRegarding penalties VAR has been unacceptable the whole tournament.
DeleteMaybe UEFA will be happy with no intervention from VAR team, but I don't agree. You must referee in spirit of the game, not 100% strictly by the rules.
ReplyDeleteIf they invited Makkelie for OFR and if he changed his decision absolutely no one would talk about that after match.
For neutral fans no penalty is absolutely acceptable or for most of them correct decision.
I wonder how Rosetti feels in the stadium now. I am sorry for Makkelie, there will be a lot coming on and he will get the information by Roberto Rosetti himself...
ReplyDeleteSomeone said UEFA designed the final yet I can’t state that Makkelie has had a poor game
ReplyDeleteCongratulations to Rosetti for making VAR useless! NOONE can convince me that any contact is enough to not intervene. This is completely against what Rosetti wants, so it is paradoxal situation. At least they could use it to sell the decision in these situations. The situation with Cakir (and Orsato yelling at him) in Russia that we could see as an example recently is a perfect example. Look at it, decide, and it will be more credible.
ReplyDeleteSterling was contacted twice before the penalty was called on the third touch. Maybe no single contact justified a penalty, but if each one caused him to become a little more off balance, I can easily justify they penalty.
ReplyDeleteCakir wouldn't have whistled that scandolous of a pen. This is on you UEFA.
ReplyDelete