Daniel Siebert and Facundo Tello on duties for Group H decisive games on MD3. Let's comment here about them.
GHANA - URUGUAY
Referee: Daniel Siebert (GER)
Assistant Referee 1: Jan Seidel (GER)
Assistant Referee 2: Rafael Foltyn (GER)
Fourth Official: Yoshimi Yamashita (JPN)
Reserve Assistant Referee:Vasile Marinescu (ROU)
Video Assistant Referee: Bastian Dankert (GER)
Assistant Video Assistant Referee: Pol van Boekel (NED)
Offside Video Assistant Referee: Ciro Carbone (ITA)
Support Video Assistant Referee: Paolo Valeri (ITA)
Standby Assistant Video Assistant Referee: Alessandro Giallatini (ITA)
Game 46 - Al-Rayyan (16:00 CET)
SOUTH KOREA - PORTUGAL
Referee: Facundo Tello (ARG)
Assistant Referee 1: Ezequiel Braislovsky (ARG)
Assistant Referee 2: Gabriel Chade (ARG)
Fourth Official: Maguette N'Diaye (SEN)
Reserve Assistant Referee: Djibril Camara (SEN)
Video Assistant Referee: Nicolas Gallo (COL)
Assistant Video Assistant Referee: Juan Soto (VEN)
Offside Video Assistant Referee: Bruno Boschilia (BRA)
Support Video Assistant Referee: Armando Villarreal (USA)
Standby Assistant Video Assistant Referee: Bruno Pires (BRA)
Daniel Siebert who is not known for imposing authority in fiesty games needs to be very careful and authoritative in this game as it could really turn fiesty due to the 2010 history attatched to this tie.
ReplyDeletePotential red card in first minute? Kudus?
ReplyDeleteRed? Should have been a YC. Also missed corner for URU in 2‘. However, good play on decision before the penalty area in 4‘. Tough start for Siebert.
Deletevery good play on in min 4 by Siebert.
ReplyDeleteSimply too much whistling by Siebert, it is always a sign that you have to compensate issues in personality on the pitch…
ReplyDeleteNo offside, should be an OFR for a foul.
ReplyDeleteIMO correct decision after OFR. Very challenging match for Siebert. Players from Uruguay do not stop to complain…
Delete16min OFR in Ghana game. For me, this should be O/S line of sight and stick with that. Penalty is wrong. VAR and referee are wrong
ReplyDeleteA. Ayew was onside though
DeleteIn theory yes, but the attacker was not in an offside position.
DeleteI mean it obviously wasn't offside then. Would be nice to see the SAOT animation.
DeleteThey have not shown the behind goal view that shows line of sight but on the side on, it clearly is.
DeleteSAOT animation was just shown. It was indeed onside :)
DeleteOnside :)
DeleteThe initial O/S offence contributes to the fumble which is why there is a next play which is a penalty. Its poor. The fumble does not happen without the O/S so the penalty is incorrect
DeleteHaving seen the graphic and he is on by 2 inches, I retract and take it all back. Correct decision. My apologies.
DeleteThat Guy - this is why we wait for confirmation. VAR won't make a simple offside mistake...
DeleteBig decision by Siebert!
ReplyDeleteFor me too. Clear penalty after onside decision
DeleteNot the best managment of that OFR decision...
ReplyDeleteOh my god, how is this penalty? The goalkeepers hands are on the ground Herr Siebert, was machen Sie da?
ReplyDeleteThis could get very heated
ReplyDeleteGood decision, clear and obvious penalty.
ReplyDeleteThe penalty decision IMO is a very difficult one to solve for Siebert. Is there enough of a contact to call it a foul? Does Kudus anticipate the contact? In any case Kudus clearly leaves his right foot trailing over the ground before any contact is made.
ReplyDeleteIt is 50-50. One of two decisions needed to be made. I think there is contact that was enough for the PK. But, if scored, would the penalty be repeated because Ayew stopped twice before he kicked the ball?!
DeleteFully agreed, it was more difficult than it seemed. What irritates me is the fall, one leg is stretched which is always an indicator that something is "wrong". However, the front angle showed that the attacker was hit by the goalkeeper‘s fist. This was the last angle that was shown to Siebert before he awarded the penalty. It is likely also the reason why the VAR check took quite a while.
DeleteAgree with every word, Ref_1707. Still enough to be deemed a penalty, therefore correct IMO.
DeleteIf this ends like this, we would have a BRA-URU, what do you prefer?
ReplyDeleteThat Rapallini whistle it (he is the only CONMEBOL referee capable of whistling this match) or a European referee?
I personally prefer to see Rapallini
Impossible Rapallini, Argentinian....
DeleteIn WC18 Pitana whistled the URU-FRA Impossible?
DeleteI don't think so, it's also a South American duel
This comment has been removed by the author.
DeleteRamos or Mateu Lahoz to avoid possible complains
DeleteIn this case I choose Ramos
DeleteI choose Howard Webb :)
DeleteOnly one realistic option: Lahoz
DeleteMarko is right, no South Americans have the level for such a game this time (Rapallini but he was too weak in MARCRO, we will see tonight). Pitana is no more. Even Orsato might be in trouble... I wrote explicitly about a who should referee a 'repeat' of Agnolin's R16 game at WC1986, and IF the results hold then probably it will occur :).
DeleteVery poor decision to award a YC for South Korea player on 36', barely even a foul
ReplyDeleteDisagree. Supportable yc for me
DeleteOhhhh for me clear RC for Uruguay no 10! What a foul that was and Siebert and his AR1 completely missed it! But what were they watching in VAR room???
ReplyDeleteTime
Delete100% VC. This is a carbon copy of what happened in Mexico v Argentina. It continues to amaze me that European referees don't see this stuff or assume it's an accident. It's not. Just because YOU can't rationalize the motivation doesn't mean a player might not have it.
DeleteOf course, if VAR intervened there and Siebert gave a red, the roof would have been blown of this match.
42'. Player from Ghana was screaming a lot. On replay it is obvious that this was intentional. For me VC. And AR1 was watching that, it was several meters from him. Incredible.
DeleteNole, minute?
DeleteMinute 42.
DeleteThis time I have to agree with you, usaref: this does seem like a deliberate, premeditated act, look at the intensity of that stamp/kick. It was executed very cunningly, but play on is still a pretty bad miss.
DeleteSorry but that's VC.
DeleteOf course @usaref is entitled to his opinion, but the condescending tone towards European referees I think is out of place. IMO intention should be taken into account when assessing VC situations.
DeleteHaving said that I see an important difference between the Mexico vs Argentina situation and his one. In Mexico vs Argentina there was no additional force applied in the step on the leg. Here clearly the Ghanaian player put extra force/intensity in putting his leg down, which suggests intent as well as excessive force.
@Unknown +1
DeleteI remember the first match I have watched Daniel Siebert and it was Champions league match back in 2018.
ReplyDeleteIn this particular match, his body language, facial expression and self presentation were, let's say, at least weak. I told to myself ok, he is young perspective referee, maybe it's not his day, he has time to develop as a referee...
After that, I have watched his performances in Bundes liga, last two years, I've carefuly watched at least 6 matches of Daniel Siebert out of Bundes liga:
Milan-Chelsea, Estonia-Malta, Austria-Fenerbahce ,Atletico M-Man City, Portugal-Turkey...
What all these games have in common is:
The referee doesn't lead the game, he runs around the field and blows his whistle. Also,minimal progress in the aforementioned areas that were problematic for this young German back in 2018.
Precisely because of all the above, I was not surprised by his performances in 2022. With all due respect, if this is the best and most promising that a great soccer nation like Germany has to offer... then Germany has a problem
There was a better German, but he was foolishly discarded after one bad match in Catalonia...
DeleteDeniz Aytekin vs PSG?
DeleteThat German had way better body language and wqs better as a leader on the pitch.
DeleteThat match was not good for him,but overall,way better than Siebert to handle hot clashes.
It doesn't give me any pleasure at all to say this, but I agree with every single word in your comment, although I was very satisfied with his performance at EURO 2020. However, those were matches of a different style, style that probably suits him way better than matches like the one we're watching right now.
DeleteVery bad "nil" YC management by Siebert till now. Hard fouls by both teams and no intervention
ReplyDeleteURU player. Yes, that was the situation I mentioned above. Very cruel.
DeleteArgentina are not playing
DeleteRochet should get a slight touch on the ball if you look verrrryyy closely (I'll do a frame-by-frame in 4K for the report) - I wonder whether a corner was option at the OFR? 42' will be reckless only for FIFA - like Kudus at 1'. Anyway, Siebert clings onto match control but only pretty grimly...
ReplyDeleteSiebert can be lucky that game is 0-2 and that result favors him,that the game is going to peaceful water.
ReplyDeleteBut if,Ghana scores,oh boy.
Letting too much rough fouls,he does not have to book players but atleast give them warning,show them who is in charge.
Uru players,especially Suarez with his gesture and his talking is having his own match with ref.
He knows Siebert wont do and so far he has not done anything to stop that complaining and it's just funny to watch Suarez with his gestures,his screaming and complaining and nothing has been done about that.
Fully agree, M. Let me just emphasize the situation with Suarez in 39': after a good play on decision (IMO), absolutely no reaction against Suarez's prolonged protesting and then a blatant dissent gesture with the hand. I'm very sorry to say this, but a very weak image by the referee here: if you're not willing to caution Suarez, at least confront his behaviour with a strong warning. Now, maybe Siebert realises that he is not capable to "win" an "argument" with Suarez, but that is a problem in itself.
DeleteAll in all, not a good performance for my taste so far, I just don't feel he controls the proceedings here, but barely "survives".
Watch out for the spark, so that it doesn't start a fire... No reaction and intervention, classic Siebert.
DeleteThe OFR especially didn't look too good unfortunately with Suarez yelling and gesticulating next to referee as the penalty was awarded.
DeleteIf Korea score another goal they qualify.
ReplyDeleteThat PK after OFR by Faghani/Al Marri in injury time of PORURU might be decisive after all!
So, only World cup referees can comment on this blog?
ReplyDeleteOnly their opinion is important?
PS you would be amazed how many FIFA referees comment on the blog.
Cheers
What do you mean DrMr?
Deletesomeone wrote a comment saying that this blog has become disgusting and wondered why we are not at the World Cup but sitting on the couch in front of the TV. And then didn't delete the comment (or admin did it)
DeleteHe was replying to an angry poster who thinks this blog is too critical of the referees.
DeleteLet me say this: we all know these are all world class refs and that it is extremely difficult to see everything in live play. Pointing out points for improvement here benefits referees from all around the world who learn from these situations. I think that's the distinction between just complaining for the sake of it, like the poster accused this blog of doing.
Clear, thank you for the explanation. I missed the comment and was a bit confused.
Delete@Larry
DeleteWith few exceptions, these are the best referees in the world.
Yet, when FIFA selects referees for the WC, the influence of politics is much greater than when playing EURO, Copa America and so on.
I've always been a bigger fan of continental championships than world championships, in the context of refereeing and referee selection
The potential VC incident in GHAvURU:
ReplyDeletehttps://streamable.com/qy5v0t
Unfortunately, we are watching this in slow motion. The player's actions do not look natural, but is this a clear and obvious error?
DeleteIf the referee (VAR) believes the player could have avoided the contact, the case for a RC is very strong. If unsure, we have to go YC at best.
First of all, very challenging match for Siebert from the beginning. He was far from faultless in foul detection, but there were also some very good play on decisions (4', 45+5‘). It is not the foul detection that is the biggest issue. It is that Siebert has no natural authority on the pitch. I cite what DrMr wrote above, which is also what I observe: "The referee doesn't lead the game, he runs around the field and blows his whistle". Siebert is a good referee for matches in which players focus on playing football. He has major issues if the players do not want to play, if the discuss every decisions, because Siebert does not have the instruments to act effectively against such a behaviour (yet). Some referees could whistle almost everything and would not have issues in terms of players‘ acceptance. Siebert has to work hard to achieve that. Having said that, the priority for the second half should be to avoid crucial mistakes influencing the outcome of the match…
ReplyDeleteSiebert is a good referee for matches in which players focus on playing football.
DeleteAnd yet, he is very often appointed in hot matches...
Which is committee mistake.
Match like this one is match for more proactive referee with stronger personality and body language.
I mean... Is anyone really surprised how things are going for Siebert right now? This match had "tough/challenging/drama" written all over it and needed a referee with natural authority who can show who's the boss. Siebert just isn't that type of referee and there's nothing wrong with that (!). Siebert's strongest point is his technical accuracy and knowing when to slow things down but even if that would be at a 100% today, it just wouldn't work.
ReplyDeleteIt just seemed soooo predictable and definitely avoidable, kind of reminds me of Atletico-Man City in April...
Brave and correct decision by Siebert.
ReplyDeleteBravo!
Sometimes he can surprise you positively.
+1 well done by Siebert - must now get ready for the URU backlash
DeleteFinally we have a referee not giving a penalty after an OFR!
ReplyDeleteI am not mistaken, this is second time in this WC.
DeleteNot a VAR STUFF. Big mistake from VAR refs!
ReplyDeleteIMO very good rejected PK after OFR by Siebert.
ReplyDeleteNow yc to Suarez absolutely spot on.
ReplyDeleteI'm shocked that he didn't give a PK there.
ReplyDeleteBut what a game for Siebert, so many difficult incidents to evaluate…
ReplyDeleteMaybe best call of the championship so far by Siebert
ReplyDelete+1
DeleteBoth PK decisions are correct.
What is clear is that the defender touches the opponent before touching the ball. Consider whether it is punishable enough.
DeleteNow the match will become heated again... Uruguay needs a goal.
ReplyDeleteExcellent onside by AR2 in Korea goal!!!
ReplyDeleteWe will definitely have to discuss the penalty incident in 90+3‘…
ReplyDeleteDifficult, Cavani wants nothing else to get hit by the defender but he was hit. For Manuel Gräfe and the German commentator, it was a penalty.
DeleteIn any case all 50/50 decisions this World Cup went the other way for Uruguay. I could imagine some frustration on their side.
DeleteTotally nonsense comment. They have to behave like anyone else. Disgraceful behavior.
DeleteObviously I was not talking about showing the kind of frustration like they did after the match. I was talking about the feeling of frustration which I can understand after many, if not all 50/50 situations going the other side(s) this tournament.
DeleteUnbelievable Scene after the game between Siebert und Uruguay Player
ReplyDeleteWhat a shame, Siebert attacked by players from Uruguay, no protection at all. He will have heavy weeks, I hope he will be safe.
ReplyDeleteSiebert must run for his life..
ReplyDeleteAnybody with a clip of 90+3 potential PK?
ReplyDeletehttps://streamja.com/leJzz
DeleteI wouldn't give a PK there. There's some normal contact and then the attacker puts their feet into the ground and falls dramatically.
DeleteIn fact, the defender played the ball (as indicated by Siebert after OFR) and upon close examination of the video - ball is played by toe of defender before any contact.
DeleteDisgraceful behaviour by Uruguay towards officials
ReplyDeleteGreat decision to not award the penalty in 90+3. I watched the second half and a bit of the first half, but I found that Siebert did a good job and deserves to progress to a KO match. Ridiculous how Uruguay behaved towards him after the final whistle. I saw a good performance from Siebert. I exclude from that the missed incident in the first half. I think a YC or even a RC would certainly have fitted there, but I think AR1 was mostly responsible there.
ReplyDeleteI find the decision after VAR excellent.
One can find it barely acceptable, but calling it "great" is an absolute misunderstanding of the LOTG and common sense
DeleteJust to add... If you wanna call something "great" yes, not awarding the PK after the OFR, THAT was a great and brave call...
DeleteJesus, all the best to Siebert...
ReplyDeleteDisgusting scenes by the Uruguay players in the end of the game. Muslera especially he should have been sent off for sure, but basically you could pick any other players...Not an easy day for Siebert.
ReplyDeleteIt is very clear (before they leave) that the AR was pointing to the substitute goalkeeper (who was clearly the worst here) and likely telling someone that they would be reported. I know I wouldn't want the referee to re-enter the fray after this to show cards.
DeleteI GUARANTEE that there will be further discipline.
Unacceptable scenes after final whistle..
ReplyDeletePost match scenes:
ReplyDeletehttps://streamable.com/t5cud3
Other angle
Deletehttps://streamable.com/mg6cz3
There should be security for such insidents. Disgraceful from both Uruguay and the organizers.
ReplyDeleteCunha already called the police in 'that' Libertadores semifinal before the final whistle and Siebert would have been wise to do the same today...
DeleteBut you would expect, that there are stewards available for that scenario at a World Cup.
DeleteI mean, this is a requirement in grassroot games in some areas.
Many, many things to say about this game but here is one: FIFA simply HAVE to stop appointing the token officials as reserves in HOT CLASHES. I don't blame her at all but Ms Yamashita's work as fourth official would deserve sth like 6,9 mark (at best) today, prevention work was (understandably for her!!!) absolutely at ZERO...
ReplyDeleteAs I've written a pretty strong comment about Bento a few days ago, I'll have to do it again:
DeleteThe behaviour by Uruguayan players is simply and utterly unacceptable. I can fully understand their frustration and we will spend many comments analysing Siebert's performance and specific situations in this match, however there is absolutely no excuse to behave like that, IMO. Also, unlike Taylor, Siebert failed to issue at least one RC which was mandatory for me (a few more YCs also), however I cannot say I don't understand him: this was a very volatile situation in which the best you can do is walk out from the FoP. Who knows what could have happened if he insisted on applying a strict disciplinary line. Also, those scenes are probably ugly to most people, but I cannot say I don't feel more secure watching Brazilian military police marching onto the FoP to protect the referees in such situations.
It is not necessary for the referee to remain on the field to show cards. Reports (denoting cards) can be dealt with in the changing room and then communicated to the teams.
DeleteA further remark: TUNFRA was a great match for Faghani. This afternoon's matches (as excellently observed by Quilava) were not good at all for him...
ReplyDeleteSub Goalie Muslera should be red carded for pushing one of the ARs and screaming in his face
ReplyDeleteHaving been unable to be sanctioned by the refereeing corps on the pitch for his unacceptable behavior, I believe that it is up to FIFA to take its responsibilities now, to open a disciplinary procedure against the reserve goalkeeper Muslera, to prosecute him on the basis of TV images (and perhaps also, I hope, on the basis of a report from the FIFA delegate and/or the AR), and in the long term to sanction him.
DeleteRPC - the referee team clearly took note of this substitute. They can be reported post-match. No need to throw fuel on the fire trying to show cards here.
DeleteThe lack of punishment by the referees for match officials being ASSAULTED on the field the past three days is absolutely inexcusable. This is the second such incident we’ve seen on MD3. Completely irresponsible on the part of FIFA.
DeleteURU penalty area incident:
ReplyDeletehttps://streamable.com/42tyte
Sorry to say but Siebert is not good enough for this level, clear penalty in 90+3' not awarded, Cavani clearly kicked in the back of the leg. Doesn't have the personality to handle intense battles like this (Atletico vs Man City) too.
ReplyDeleteI should add, the scenes at the end are unacceptable but Uruguay have been on the end of some terrible decisions at this WC.
DeleteRoss, defender played/touched ball as clearly indicated by referee after OFR. Correct not to give a PK.
DeleteThere are many better referees in Germany, I would have chosen Zwayer.
ReplyDeleteSiebert is not a bad referee, but games get out of hand very easily and he does not have the control required for a "hot" match in WC
Aahh, good to know
DeleteIn my opinion, if we compare Siebert and Zwayer to see who has more "WC capabilities" I think Zwayer would win
DeleteSiebert was promoted in the middle of 2019 to become the next Brych (and don't deny it to me, because it's true), the boy gained a lot of experience and became a referee to take into account but I don't think he is the one for a WC
Zwayer was always considered the "German No.2" (he was shortlisted for QAT22 but Siebert showed up) and with some controversial performances, Siebert earned him the ticket
With this I do not want to say that Siebert did not deserve it, of course he deserves it BUT not for this WC it would have been perfect for USA-MEX-CAN26
Zwayer had to be in Qatar
For his disreputable behaviour in the past, Zwayer should have never been promoted but kicked out of the German Football Federation. If there is one who has been discriminated against for too many years (till he decided to call an end to his stalled international carriere), it is Deniz Aytekin, who is reckoned to be the best Bundesliga referee, and deservedly gets the most important and contentious matches to handle there.
DeleteDisreputable behavior? Kicked out of the DFB?
DeleteHe suffered death threats, stayed away for the pitch. Felix did amazing last german season and should have been awarded the best German referee. Felix grew up and pass confidence, Siebert has still a lot to improve.
Since 17 years Felix is discriminated by the whole media and haters. Aytekin is soon praised by the media so isn't him discriminated.
DeleteThere could have been a penalty if the player in blue had been a defender.
ReplyDeleteI was VERY sceptical about Siebert's appointment for such a hot match (see my previous post).
ReplyDeleteAnd I must say, until the final whistle, he surprised me positively.
IMHO, all the penalty decisions by him were correct.
The one in 90+3' is a 50/50. Yes, there is contact, but Cavani only wants the contact. He extends his leg and slows down just a little bit in order to be touched and go down. See here: https://imgur.com/a/0dJjBDD
If he calls it on the pitch, it will not be overruled by VAR. But if he doesn't I don't think VAR should intervene either.
The only thing I would have wished for would be 2-3 red cards on the pitch for the Uruguayans after the match.
Based on the performance today, I would consider appointing him for Brazil - South Korea.
Cards will come. It was not worth staying on field to issue them.
DeleteI don't think the game really went out of Siebert's hands today. He used his usual calm and firm but unobtrusive style and it worked quite well, in my opinion. Slowing down the things is his recipe for success in such hot games and it was as such today.
ReplyDeleteLet's be fair, it's simply impossible to have URU players under FULL CONTROL. I only imagined Mateu Lahoz and maybe Orsato to be able to cope with their exaggerated falls, mobbing, dissenting and other antics in a better (or rather: in a more visible) way.
See, how many penalty area incidents he had to cope with. And I think he assessed everything accurately (even if after OFR in two cases). He didn't fall for ANY(!!!) exagerrated reaction by Uruguayans -> his tactical preparation was excellent!
Siebert knew that issuing cards too early will most likely lead to another "Battle of Nuremberg" given the style of playing of, especially, Uruguayans. He skillfully used the 'slowing things down' tactics in order to prevent escalations and bigger conflicts. And he lost the plot only once in 42' when possible violent conduct and two late (reckless?) challenges from both sides occurred in one action. It's harsh to blame him for that, tbf.
The only criticism from my side is about allowing dissenting behaviour from Luis Suárez. Not that he should've cautioned him immediately but he chose to ignore his behaviour on several occasions what only led to another outbursts. He most likely realised this in the half-time as he booked him early in the second half for DtR / dissenting behaviour. What a surprise (not!) that any unsporting behaviours disappeared when Suárez had been substituted!
The players confronting the referee crew after the final whistle was only an act of frustration and looking for someone to blame. It didn't surprise me taking into account how they behaved during the game (and in PORURU as well).
FIFA (Referees Committee) and all referees should be very happy to see (most likely) BRAKOR instead of potential BRAURU that nobody would be able to (fully) control.
OMG
Delete"He used his usual calm and firm but unobtrusive style and it worked quite well, in my opinion. Slowing down the things is his recipe for success in such hot games and it was as such today."
DeleteThis is good recipe for some fair match and fair teams.
Tonight, he wasn't slow and calm, he was passive and sluggish.
When players move into dissent, the referee MUST be seen to draw a line. The first choice is personality. When that fails, a card MUST be issued. Failure to draw the line ALLOWS the behaviour.
DeleteI know many calm referees who want to give players a chance. However, the ones I know can clearly (even if calmly) communicate their expectations. The calm referee who doesn't want to send messages with strong body language or loud talking needs wisdom (often a sharp phrase or two) to set the standard for the players.
I know the scenes at the end were unacceptable, but that could have all been avoided if Siebert had actually awarded the most obvious penalty all game at 90+3. Far more of a penalty than the previous two (one awarded, one rejected), in my opinion. You can clearly see the kick on the back of Cavani's foot/leg. Can't help but think Dankert spectacularly threw Siebert under the bus with the final penalty; having already wrongly brought him to the camera earlier and was too afraid to do the same thing.
ReplyDeleteI've just watched the entire scene of the penalty. After communicating no PK, Siebert indicated that the ball had been played by the defender. Careful examination of the video (mine wasn't the clearest) shows that the defender did indeed touch the ball with their toe.
DeleteNo PK is the right decision.
Not necessarily. I don't refer to this particular incident but a slight touch on the ball is sometimes not enough if there is tripping and the ball remains reachable for the attacking player.
DeleteDid any of you saw Valverde's reaction after Ghana missed their PK ?
ReplyDeleteClear celebration and mocking Siebert,how he escaped talking or booking is beyond me...
I confirm.
DeleteUnacceptable behavior...
Deletehttps://streamable.com/7orjdl
90+3 is clearly no penalty lol, Cavani throws himself into the defender.
ReplyDeleteThe more I watch the Ghanaian penalty, the more I tend to no penalty because of the attacker anticipating the contact, only looking for the penalty. I understand Siebert’s decision, but IMO VMO’s should have stayed away here as well.
ReplyDeleteHere a sidewise angle, pay attention to the attacker’s right foot:
https://files.fm/u/fkmz73u85
This is a clear penalty. Play this at full speed. The attacker short steps to avoid stepping on the flailing keeper. The keeper CLEARLY initiates contact. Anyone moving at this speed will be tripped.
DeleteAnd the attacker CLEARLY trailing his right foot, which is DEFINITELY something different than short stepping, and then DIVING over the goalkeeper stretching both legs.
DeleteOnce in front of the screen I can certainly understand the penalty decision, IMO it shouldn’t have come to the Ofr.
This is 100% PENALTY. If he never jumped and stayed he would defenetely taken out by the goalkeeper by far. Attacker played the ball clear and goalkeeper no. Please understand that VAR and slowmotion are not to make excuses.
DeleteFaghani- Uruguay 1-0 !!!!!
ReplyDeleteWell, well it ended as I predicted (see the very first comment in this blog post). Daniel Siebert not doing much wrong in terms of decision making but leaving a lot to be desired in terms of control and authority for this type of match.
ReplyDelete+1
DeleteBut the missed PK at 90'+3' was the start fact for uruguayans anger against Siebert. Someone can consider as not PK, others as PK (my opinion seeing the replay), but Siebert adopted the wrong posture on crucial moment (he didnt make any mention to go VAR check) that with sure It would control the fire of final match minutes.
A lot to unpack today and I think the comments today are a bit harsh on some occasions.
ReplyDeleteFirst of all: Daniel Siebert is not a referee gifted with an extraordinary natural authority. He succeeds with technical accuracy and tactical interventions to guide the match.
A team like Uruguay is EXTREMELY difficult to handle and to be honest, I think it's actually impossible to completely calm them with Siebert's type (and that's okay!!).
Therefore, I don't really think we should criticise Siebert for 'lost of control' or sth - he really only had problems with some disciplinary measures in some scenes in 1H in my book, including mandatory YCs for reckless challenges in 1' and shorty before the halftime (ca. 42').
And Siebert really allowed too much dissent by URU (actually a few warnings or bookings were mandatory in this regard IMO).
On the other hand, he faced numerous tricky PAI, and I think he solved them pretty impressively:
1) correct penalty after OFR (no offside) - The GK is simply too late and unfairly impedes the attacker; infringement and penalty given, simply the right call for me.
2) no penalty decision upheld after OFR - To be honest, I don't understand Dankert's intervention here. Siebert indicated he assessed the duel live as "ball played" - and rightly so in my view. I don't know which essential facet of the duel the OFR should show him to change his mind.
3) no penalty in injury time - simply EXCELLENT; the attacker only wants to win a penalty and therefore slows down significantly AND moves his right leg awkwardly. I'm really wondering how this can be assessed as careless action by the defender?
IMO, Siebert brilliantly saw through that and both him and Dankert had the guts to reject the penalty appeal of URU.
This was a satisfactory display by Siebert IMO that surely also showed the German's limits and deficiencies. But nothing to be too unhappy about if you ask me.
Agree with this.
DeleteI would only add the potential VC stamp incident that was missed. It looked ugly on replay.
Also the crowding of players and the abuse toward the officials at the end could have warranted sanctions as well.
@Flip: Absolutely agree. I have problem only with some missing yellow cards in this game, anyway: the important situations Siebert solved correctly. He maybe doesn't have natural authority like some other referees, but his technicals and tactical skills are very solid.
DeleteAnalysis of KORPOR
ReplyDeleteClips:
53' step-on-opponent, no sanction https://streamable.com/25n0xx
60' Tackle assessment https://streamable.com/2jw2uc
70' penalty appeal https://streamable.com/f7xc2p
Overview:
The Argentine handled the 46th game of the WC, opposing South Korea to Portugal (much less discussed here than Game 45 :p), witnessing a late Korean goal allowing them to qualify in RO16.
The match was fairly played by both sides, focused on playing football. It was a rather easy game to officiate, and the officials did their job fairly well.
Tello allowed a decent amount of physicality, maybe a little too much at times (60', 80', 84'), however it was an acceptable choice given the behaviour of the players: match control was ensured throughout the game. I'd say it was a wise tactical approach, and a good amount of game-reading as well.
His opening card in 36' for a SPA-ish foul was a decent choice (one can imagine a few referees making a warning instead), and besides a mandatory YC in 90+2' for a shirt removal (goal celebration), there was not much disciplinary measures to take: the possible discussion regarding this aspect being the 60' situation clipped above.
The point of improvement I'd like to highlight is his dissent management. I have a moment in mind in 73' where he simply whistled quite a few times to wave away players protesting a FK decision. It seems his ability to connect with players is rather limited depending of the context of the potential interactions.
Nothing serious for sure, but it might give him some trouble in a more demanding game: selling his calls is something very valuable to gain acceptance and credit in the FoP.
AR2 played a sound onside before 2-1, and got his calls right (including another great onside in 35'). AR1 had a good evening as well and remained focused (17',47',52')
Marks:
Facundo Tello - 7
Ezequiel Braislovsky - 7
Gabriel Chade - 8
Nicolas Gallo - III
53' step on appears accidental
ReplyDelete60' missed YC - that was clearly reckless
70' ball struck player in side, not arm - even if arm, that part of arm was near/against body
And the one not called by Siebert after OFR today...
ReplyDeleteUnacceptable behavior by Cavani knocking off my VAR TV screen as he walks by :(
ReplyDeletehttps://streamable.com/xiufxo
I don't understand why so many people did nothing after the action by Cavani and the screen was left on the ground? Weren't they FIFA officials and local authorities?
DeleteInteresting analysis on 2 Serbian televisions about potential penalties for Uruguay. On one TV Siebert was supported. But, on the other, where we have referee authority and 2 ex players, the all thought that both penalties for Uruguay should be whistled! About first potential penalty I disagree, but that one on Cavani... Please, watch again! There is no penalty with the body, but he was tripped on his right leg! VAR should see that, it was much more penalty than one before. And that is minute 93, very very crucial decision! If we remember that Uruguay received second goal in stoppage time against Portugal from unjustified and very wrong penalty - we can say that VAR cost them to go through. And that's truth and nothing but the truth! So for them VAR is a disaster.
ReplyDeleteHonestly, I think that to say that a referee is excellent, he must be able to manage and adapt himself to any match, from the easiest and most fluid ones to the most difficult and tense ones.
ReplyDeleteThus Siebert has shown today that he still lacks that excellence, for he has lost his authority by not adequately controlling the disciplinary aspect.
When I talk about the difference between refereeing a UEFA and Conmebol match, I am heavily criticized, but it is precisely because of this culture that in South America players have to take the emotional side to the extreme in a football match and that's what we saw today. I do not criticize or say that it is right or wrong. Just different.
In my point of view, Siebert sinned when trying to take the game in UEFA mode, and had two controversial moves where the first I thought went well, but in the second he forgot the PK in 90+3', which was the trigger of the Uruguayans' anger against him. Some might consider it no PK, others consider it PK (my opinion after watching the replay), but Siebert took the wrong stance at a crucial moment in the match. He didnt make any mention of going to check the VAR, a fact that could cool the game down a bit, stopping it, in addition to instilling in the players a greater sense of humility and respect for them when checking an important and defining move. He didnt think smartly
Unluckily it is clear to me that Siebert was not the best choice for this game, yes, you could answer it is easy to say that only after the game, and not before, even more after a good performance in the first appearance. But all is about the teams involved and also the famous story between them at previous WCs. Once again, we have the evidence that most of German referees of current times can't handle very hot games involving teams from Latin countries, both in Europe and South America. They are simply in a different world in Bundesliga. A paramount example in my opinion is the reaction by player from URU after missed penalty by Ghana, he celebrated it in front of Siebert by mocking him, no reaction by referee also because he didn't expect that and he wasn't ready. This allowed players to do even more what they wanted, later, without recognizing his authority. It was an extremely challenging game for sure with many penalty area incidents and a faultless performance was impossible, we all agree. But surely one should have done better. Siebert was not among the referees who could do that. It is not important to say that an incident was penalty or not, the overall imagine of referee is fully destroyed, and this leads to discussions, exactly what FIFA wants to avoid. I saw many German referees acting in this way, they try always to solve everything with a too passive approach and they don't show the needed authority against players. Felix Brych was very clever in his career, he noticed that for handling some teams he should have changed his style and indeed he changed it, nevertheless we saw some controversial situations in his games as well (please remember Belgium - Portugal) and his WC were always missing in something, but at least he was the big name of Germany in last years. The rest is still below. To end my analysis, I also think that Zwayer would have made better in this game, but I think technically he is worse than Siebert (other aspects would have helped him in this game, though).
ReplyDeleteAgree with this. I think he got all three penalty calls spot on. Especially the one in 90+3, that was maybe the easiest call, because Cavani so clearly and cleverly put his leg in the way of the defender. But he didn't do anything to manage that situation with Uruguayan players, as he didn't do earlier on in the game. Itś not that he makes bad decisions. He just lacks management skills in these games.
DeleteWhat is more important, getting the calls right or managing the emotions of the players?
DeleteTechnically Siebert is better than Zwayer? Come on...
Delete