Danny Makkelie is in charge of Germany - Hungary, the second game of the host national team at EURO 2024.
GERMANY - HUNGARY
Referee: Danny Makkelie NED
Assistant Referee 1: Hessel Steegstra NED
Assistant Referee 2: Jan de Vries NED
Fourth Official: Serdar Gözübüyük
Reserve Assistant Referee: Johan Balder NED
Video Assistant Referee: Rob Dieperink NED
Assistant Video Assistant Referee 1: Pol van Boekel NED
Assistant Video Assistant Referee 2: Stuart Attwell ENG
UEFA Referee Observer: Tomasz Mikulski POL
UEFA Delegate: Per Svärd SWE
Referee: Danny Makkelie NED
Assistant Referee 1: Hessel Steegstra NED
Assistant Referee 2: Jan de Vries NED
Fourth Official: Serdar Gözübüyük
Reserve Assistant Referee: Johan Balder NED
Video Assistant Referee: Rob Dieperink NED
Assistant Video Assistant Referee 1: Pol van Boekel NED
Assistant Video Assistant Referee 2: Stuart Attwell ENG
UEFA Referee Observer: Tomasz Mikulski POL
UEFA Delegate: Per Svärd SWE
Good no-call before 1-0. For me just normal contact and not enough for a foul.
ReplyDeleteCorrect decision - NO foul on Orban before Germany goal
ReplyDeleteHungary protested for a possible foul before 1-0 by Germany, very chaotic action. Regular goal, I would say. Whistling foul for that contact would have been rather wrong.
ReplyDeleteAgreed, it was the Hungarian defender who initiated a perfectly normal football contact and fell too easily. As you said, a foul would have actually been wrong.
Delete99.99% of times when a defender is going back to goal and gets charged in the back, we call a foul. I will bite my tongue here, but I kind of can't believe people initially want to defend this decision. Maybe the VAR felt he was in a tough place to recommend a review, but live this is such an easy foul call to make. No one would have protested.
DeleteRudiger cautioned for re-entering without permission, why no FK for Hungary?
ReplyDeleteShould be dissent, I think?
DeleteYes IMO
DeleteChefren I don’t think so? 4th official was pointing him out when he touched the ball
DeleteThe 4O something showed on player, when he entering, probably miscommunication between 4O and R at the time
DeleteThis was incredibly poor and we shouldn't sweep it under the rug.
DeleteMakkelie misses the SPA card to Rudiger because he feigns injury. Then Rudiger illegally reenters and immediately touches the ball. Makkelie inexplicably allows play to go on, to Germany's benefit and only stops play later for a Germany DFK and THEN gives the yellow to Rudiger.
Just incoherent and in conflict with the LOTG. This is a terrible passage from Makkelie.
I agree usaref. But all Makkelie’s errors get swept under the carpet. He’s shown in the last euro he doesn’t know the LOTG. He’s too arrogant for someone who is consistently wrong
DeleteGood YC for HUN19 for dissent, not first time in the match
ReplyDeleteLooks like the game is turning into a challenging one now.
ReplyDeleteRudiger should have been given a yellow card in advance for downing an opponent. ( SPA )
ReplyDelete38' potential PK GER, Orban steps on Musialas foot/ankle
ReplyDeleteIf Musiala fell down, we would have to discuss that for sure. Makkelie was lucky here.
DeleteQuestion: Should VAR intervene, as Makkelie decided wrongly foul by Musiala?
DeleteHaha come on! Never, ever a foul by Orban. He has successfully cleared the ball and then a normal footballing contact occured.
DeleteCleared the ball and put his foot down. For me that's no foul from either side.
Deleteimo both play on and PK would have been supportable. The onlz "never, ever" outcome is FK for Orban.
DeleteDo not like comments that start with blaming like Ha Ha.., come on.... ( Thanks for your respectful behavior)
DeleteWrong foul which possibly led to goal by makkelie. Good Offside by AR. English commentators not happy with foul as is the german management. SAO very quick and effective so far this tournament.
ReplyDeleteFully agree, no foul before the incident. Good offside decision. Makkelie will be thankful as there could have been big discussion about the free kick.
DeleteYC to HUN bench, I´m not sure what happened, but strong body language and gesture "STOP IT, CALM DOWN" from 4O
ReplyDeleteExcellent performance from Makkelie in the first half, imo. He improved his body language and doesn't look like a robot without emotions ;) Very strict in punishing the dissenting behaviour. Big calls (play-on prior to the goal and disallowed goal) correct. Good alertness by Gözübüyük, too. If he continues like that, we'll have the best performance of the tournament.
ReplyDeleteI would not call it an "excellent performance" as there were two incidents in which he was lucky that they did not have an influence on the outcome. No foul prior the possible 1-1, no foul by Musiala in the penalty area, could have led to a penalty if he fell down.
DeleteAgree
DeleteVery good performance, I agree. Finally an offside decision without VAR. All good regarding crucial incidents. Full control of the game.
ReplyDeleteFor what my view is worth, I'm completely with usaref - it surprises me how many people lurch into 'pundit talking points' (such as 'overprotected goalkeepers') rather than analysing the situations on their merits. The foul should have been given. Orban has successfully controlled the ball and is running diagonally rightwards, before Gundogan moves into his path and there is a clear contact at least at the hips, if not at the feet too. VAR acted correctly with regards how he dealt with the on-field decision (no c/o error), but in my view it was a rather clear offence to be blown up for. I didn't find especially convincing the minutes after the goal, either.
ReplyDeleteCan't believe the number of people saying that there was no foul by Gundogan, it's a clear foul for me. He takes a heavy touch and then his eyes latch directly on to Orban who only has eyes for the ball, and clearly barges him out of the way, very surprised it wasn't disallowed.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteSome scenes not caught by broadcaster:
ReplyDelete22' YC 19HUN for dissent
https://streambug.org/cv/ae3584
26' YC 2GER for re-entering without permission, it seems Makkelie didn't hear or get what Gözübüyük was saying to him at first
https://streambug.org/cv/22c195
45+1' YC teammember HUN
https://streambug.org/cv/27cf67
45+2' No sanction teammember GER
https://streambug.org/cv/1f9fca
pretty interesting situation that Makkelie doesn't stop the game when GER#2 re-enters the field because HUN has a clear advantage in the moment of re-entering, ending up in GER#2 almost starting a deadly counter-attack seconds later.
Deletethe footage also shows that HUN#11 should have been booked for the same reason.
The #11 question is a very interesting one. Per the LOTG, yes, absolutely. But practically, given it was in response to Rudiger's clear misconduct... it becomes a very tough sell. I genuinely don't know how I feel about it now, looking at the whole scene. In the moment, though, I am sure I'd only book Rudiger.
DeleteThe advantage question is also quite interesting.
DeleteWhen Rüdiger entered the field, Makkelie couldn't stop the game, because Hungary still had a big chance. So technically, he had to give advantage there. So at what point exactly should he have stopped the game? When Rüdiger played the ball? But that's not what the LotG say.
Practically, it probably was just a communication problem though.
LotG 2024/25. Law 13.2.al.3: free kicks for offences involving a player entering, re-entering or leaving the field of play without permission are taken from the position of the ball when play was stopped.
DeleteRegarding the 26' incident, I'll copy the text from the LotG for further analysis:
Delete"If a player who requires the referee’s permission to re-enter the field of play re-enters without the referee’s permission, the referee must:
• stop play (not immediately if the player does not interfere with play or a match official or if the advantage can be applied)
• caution the player for entering the field of play without permission
If the referee stops play, it must be restarted:
• with a direct free kick from the position of the interference
• with an indirect free kick from the position of the ball when play was stopped if there was no interference"
If I read this situation correctly, Makkelie had every opportunity to stop play immediately when Rüdiger interfered with play, at the exact moment he touched the ball upon re-entering. Hungary's promising attack had already finished, and Germany continued their attack, thus benefitting from Rüdiger's illegal action. According to the LotG passage from above, it should have definitely been a DFK for Hungary. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think usaref has been spot on in his comments and this mistake has to be highlighted in analysing this performance.
Compliments with this fact-based analysis, More of it!!
Delete@Dukat: Yes, great explanation, thank you.
DeleteAlso to add to this, had a goal been scored, you would have a situation where there is an extra player on the field of play.
DeletePer the LOTG:
If, after a goal is scored, the referee realises, before play restarts, that an extra person was on the field of play when the goal was scored, and that person interfered with play: • the referee must disallow the goal if the extra person was: • a player, substitute, substituted player, sent-off player or team official of the team that scored the goal; play is restarted with a direct free kick from the position of the extra person
Even if the players had not interfered, both entered the field of play without permission, committing an offence. Neither team can score a goal:
A goal is scored when the whole of the ball passes over the goal line, between the goalposts and under the crossbar, provided that no offence has been committed by the team scoring the goal.
It was critical that the 4th official insist on the match being stopped to deal with the offence, at risk of a goal being illegally scored here, sparking controversy.
Is that not handball by Can in 90’? Probably not clear and obvious error but (based off the one replay) better decision would be penalty
ReplyDeleteA clear foul play befors germans First Goal decided the Game. In doubt Makkelie decides only for Germany.
ReplyDeleteYC for kicking the ball away, correct but not really needed is it? Frustration more than anything, not wasting anyone's but their own time.
ReplyDeleteIt wasn’t a foul either - 8.0 would be my mark
DeleteVery poor refereeing from Danny Makkelie a lot of bad calls imaginary faults always in favor of germany bad yellow card in 93 minute it was cleary a 2 players play and a very poor coordination with var referee Rob Dieperink it was a clear penalty for hungary emre can and a debating fault before germany first goal
ReplyDelete26' 2GER for re-entering without permission.
ReplyDeletePlease refer to IFAB LotG (2024/25):
- Law 12.3 Cautionable offences, indent 3
- Law 13.2.al.3: Free kicks for offences involving a player entering, re-entering or leaving the FoP without permissision.
IMO: IFK had to be awarded to Hungary.
Player interfered play, so it should be DFK + YC
DeleteFor me the problem with Danny Makkelie and Szymon Marciniak Orsato and anthony taylor is that they always try to be the star of the game with a lot of arrogance attitude and that's why i prefer to see a michael oliver type of referee like letexier ......
ReplyDeleteIn a normal match with an overpowering Germany, Hungary had at no time a chance. After scoring 2-0 in min 67’ the match was in fact over.
ReplyDeleteSome say very good performance, top referee, best performance till now, but in my view an at max. normal/average performance
Next to the also good aspects imo certain areas of attention e.g:
• Problems in distinguishing between real and unreal foul play.
• Very/too sensitive about dissent and in some cases wrong foul detection (a.o. Musiala 38’min, eventually leading to a PK for Germany
• Confusing communication with fourth official e.g. in 29’min. Resulting in delayed YC for Rüdiger.
• Lenient disciplinary management concerning foul-play and also in Min. 87’ Kroos kicked the ball away after a game stoppage and no punishment. Later on, he gives a YC for Hungary for similar action. (balanced approach ?)
Overall a satisfactory performance but " too many" areas of attention.
Good analysis, but I like to add the allowed first goal as a big plus, the contact was not at all enough for calling it a foul imo!
DeleteCurious about the opinions/viewpoints of our German blog friends. Too silent for the moment!?
ReplyDeleteBetter to stay silent instead of being accused of not being neutral. ;)
DeleteBut in short, my opinions are very similar to Dukat's below.
Very interesting though how much the opinions differ among us referee experts here, especially for 22'.
In German TV, 22' was assessed as borderline, in 38' and 90' no penalty was seen as correct.
Indeed, always difficult to comment if your own team is involved…
DeleteFor me, strongly (!) no foul before 1-0 for Germany, normal challenge for the ball, no push, no excessive body check.
Then, no penalty for Germany, wrong free kick given to Hungary. Yes, there was a step on Musiala‘s foot, still it had no impact. Nobody expected a penalty here. Sometimes you have to "feel" what is right.
Last but not least, no handball and therefore no penalty for Hungary. Hand was close to the body, movement was natural, short distance. Don‘t get tricked by slow motions, if you have to evaluate whether a punishable handball occurred, it‘s always better to watch normal speed.
So, overall, solid or good performance by Makkelie. He got all the important decisions right on the pitch.
Key Match Incidents:
ReplyDelete22' - possible foul in APP; sorry but I can't understand how you can complain about a foul being committed here - defender leans towards the attacker, is ready for challenge, the contact is made by side, no way it's a foul - if whistled it would've been extremely harsh
https://streambug.org/cv/002949
38' - PAI follow-through step on foot; to be honest, according to pre-tournament instructions by Rosetti (if the ball is played but significant contact occurs afterwards, a YC should be issued), it's a penalty and YC - the step on foot was significant; the defensive FK was clearly wrong and I wouldn't be surprised at all seeing an intervention by Dieperink
https://streambug.org/cv/244e5b
90' - PAI handball; an arm is close to the body but we have a clear movement towards the ball; again an OFR wouldn't have been wrong, imo!
https://streambug.org/cv/54dfb7
22': I agree with your view and stay with my original opinion: it was just a normal football contact. I just cannot see a foul there, and I've rewatched the incident a couple of times.
Delete38': Instructions or not, I still lean towards no penalty: the defender cleared the ball and his foot had to land down somewhere. However, there indeed was a step on foot, although its significance is something of a grey area if we look at Musiala's reaction after. Therefore, I'd accept both opinions here, but I strongly prefer no penalty. Unfortunately, Makkelie's final decision was completely wrong: foul by Musiala.
90': It looks more like a mistake every time I review it. Yes, the arm was close to the body, however we cannot deny the fact that Can made a clear movement towards the ball, which is actually the cause for this hand-to-ball contact. At least I see it that way, maybe I'm wrong. My final conclusion would be a missed penalty and VAR intervention.
Generally speaking, it was a satisfactory performance for me, but nothing more than that. Although Makkelie tried to let the game flow with a higher bar in foul detection, somehow it ended being somewhat inconsistent and even clearly wrong at times (wrong foul by Musiala in 38', wrong foul for Hungary in 45+1', maybe even in 90+3' for Germany). He was very strict in punishing dissent, which is generally a positive aspect of the performance. The mistake with Rüdiger's illegal re-entering in 26' has to be highlighted, as the final decision went completely against the LotG. Whether it was caused by communication problems with the 4O or not cannot change the fact that a clear mistake has been committed. Unfortunately, I think the whole crew missed a handball penalty for Hungary in 90', which casts a big shadow on the whole performance and the work by VAR crew as well.
38' before the step on foot he whistled the foul. So it is not important what happened after that. BUT: If we are watching what he didnt whistled in 22' at the first goal, and what he whistled here...so interesting.Extremly inconsistent. And and other example for that in the last period Kroos kicked the ball after the whistle, only warning. 90+3 Szoboszlai kicked the ball yellow card. This happened also with the bench too. What is yellow for the hungarians only warning for germans. Inconsistent.
DeleteCan someone put a link to all the video clips of this match please.
Delete@marko, I've rewatched the 38' situation again and the foul seems to have indeed been given as an attacking foul by Musiala, not before. However, I agree with you about some inconsistencies observed in Makkelie's management, you are right about that.
Delete38' is a very interesting one, thank you for highlighting it.
DeleteUltimately I think we can be ok with no foul since the defender clearly wins the ball first. But it really makes you wonder how the perception might have been different if the attacker had thrown himself to the floor instead of the defender. Makkelie got fooled by the reaction - would he have given a penalty if the reaction was the other way around?
Follow-up: do you have any clips about those pre-tournament instructions? I am interesting in if there are any other clips where the defender wins the ball this significantly but a foul (and perhaps a YC) is still preferred for similar contact.
DeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
DeleteDanny Makkelie, uncharacteristically, allows Musiala's goal to stand despite a clear offensive foul committed by Gundogan seconds earlier. That was not a shoulder to shoulder challenge. A strange decision by the Dutchman in such a big game
ReplyDeleteHungary should have been awarded a penalty, as Emre Can touched the ball with the palm of his hand in a way that made his body unnaturally bigger. Another strange big decision tonight.
Solid Danny, good criteria in foul calls, calm, lenient what is his main caracteristic. At the end,wait what will be his second game.
ReplyDeleteInteresting management of the dissent after the 1-0, where we had the rare occasion of several protesting players running towards the referee.
ReplyDeleteMakkelie moved ca. 10 metres away (towards the center circle) and then booked the player, who approached him the most.
The moving away seemed like he wanted to give the players a chance to stop and avoid the YC. Not sure yet, whether that's a good idea or not.
Video clips:
ReplyDeletehttps://files.fm/u/auqzte7c5h
Great work and really excellent supportive material. Compliments and Thanks Euro Soccer Ref.
ReplyDeleteIn many leagues the goal by Musiala would have been disallowed. It was allowed as giving and awarding an infringement would not have gone down well with UEFA.
ReplyDeleteThe goal from Germany (1-0) was not a foul (IMO) and its correct that in football we cannot allow such goals to be disallowed. What I am saying is that in many domestic leagues that WOULD have been disallowed. Moreover, I can guarantee that if a 'foul' like this occurs in a critical match and Spain, Germany, France is on the end of it - disallowed.
ReplyDeleteIt depends who (Ceferin) who is watching on.
It is really funny, that nobody mentioned, that there are two yellow cards are missing in min. 26.
ReplyDelete1. YC for Ruediger - unauthorized entry onto the pitch
2. YC for Kerkez - unauthorized entry onto the pitch
DFK for Croatia because of Ruediger entered first and played the ball.
Just tu be very clear for those who praise Makkelie for his performance. This scene alone is enough to ruin the season for any referee in a lower league in terms of the marks for the observation.
No it's not. It's pretty irrelevant for the outcome of the match, no football fan is complaining about this situation. Everyone is completely fine by how it is handled.
DeleteTwo notes:
Delete- This incident wás mentioned earlier in the thread and also the fact that I were two players entered without permission. So I don’t know what your intentions are with bringing the incident up again.
- It’s an incident of secondary importance. It’s sloppy of course! Probably due to a lack of focus or communication issues. Should be addressed, evaluated and… move on. If this scene alone is reason for a ruined season in your lower level leagues I pity for the poor management of your refereeing department.
In the LotG you do not find wordings like " incident of secondary importance". Fact is that the way it was handled by the team certainly was and is not line and per the LoTG.
DeleteSee the contribution in this blog:
Dukat19219 June 2024 at 20:22
Dukat explains very well and as you could have read I said that it should be addressed and evaluated. But of course it’s only of secondary importance in the entirety of the match. Has nothing to do with LotG.
DeleteIf an incorrect throw-in is not retaken it’s a mistake, but of secondary importance in the assessment. If a goalkeeper keeping the ball in possession for 10 seconds is not punished it’s a mistake, but of secondary importance in the assessment.
All depends on the cause-effect relation. Rüdiger was playing the ball and that could have had serious consequences. The fact that it was not leading to serious consequences should not play role in the assessment. In this case it was simply luck.
DeleteWhat would have been the comments if out of Rüdigers interference, a goal was scored?
If my mother had wheels she would have been a bike
DeleteYou did not answer the question and are trying to make it ridiculous. It's a pity, but that's apparently you.
DeleteHighlights:
ReplyDeletehttps://files.fm/u/af5yntfyna