Ivan Kružliak appointed for Netherlands - Austria, second game at EURO.
Game 31, Group D
Berlin, 25 June 2024 18:00 CET
Berlin, 25 June 2024 18:00 CET
NETHERLANDS - AUSTRIA
Referee: Ivan Kružliak SVK
Assistant Referee 1: Branislav Hancko SVK
Assistant Referee 2: Jan Pozor SVK
Fourth Official: Irfan Peljto BIH
Assistant Referee 2: Jan Pozor SVK
Fourth Official: Irfan Peljto BIH
Reserve Assistant Referee: Senad Ibrišimbegović BIH
Video Assistant Referee: Marco Fritz GER
Assistant Video Assistant Referee 1: Christian Dingert GER
Assistant Video Assistant Referee 2: Nejc Kajtazović SVN
Assistant Video Assistant Referee 2: Nejc Kajtazović SVN
UEFA Referee Observer: Lutz Michael Fröhlich GER
UEFA Delegate: Filip Popovski MKD
Maurizio Mariani in USA - Bolivia.
ReplyDeleteRather a normal difficulty game for the Italian, one could say even easy, given the standard of this competition. One should notice that this was a CONCACAF - CONMEBOL tie. USA showed to be favorite team for winning, from the beginning. Score was never in doubt. Nevertheless, there were some minutes in which the referee had challenging moments due to some rough fouls occurred. This was very isolated in the game and I would still say that the degree of difficulty was not high.
At the end I could say expected level performance with some very minor point for improvements, in UEFA scale this can be 8.3 rather than 8.4 but still OK. Correctly disallowed goal by AR1, a minor penalty area incident impossible to evaluate.
2' Corner before 1-0
https://streambug.org/cv/6f88c5
USA started very strong in the game. The corner kick leading to 1-0 wasn't a 100% clear decision, as one can't be sure whether, after Bolivian touch, USA player did the same. Impossible to say, no replay at all, situation not in focus. Referee must be trusted.
14' Possible YC reckless challenge
https://streambug.org/cv/89f26d
I think that in this case Mariani was not aware of the severity of the challenge, and he realized rather later what had happened. To me, one can still accept NO CARD, but I think referee didn't have exact perception of the incident. Kind of late reaction by him.
26' Management before corner kick, warning to Bolivia player
https://streambug.org/cv/8e9a01
27' Mandatory YC for reckless challenge
https://streambug.org/cv/aaf1fa
Very rough foul, and reaction after that. This was maybe the most nervous momen in the game. I think RC wouldn't have been questioned by VAR. The referee calmed down players, but I can connect this moment to the previous foul, I would have liked to see a more proactive referee.
31' YC - SPA
https://streambug.org/cv/2124c2
49' Reckless challenge, YC shown
https://streambug.org/cv/612450
53' Disallowed Goal AR1, Crucial decision
https://streambug.org/cv/6c379b
Correct decision by AR1, then USA player immediately with VAR gesture, twice, should have been booked. Not even the time to signal for offside that player was already asking for that, unacceptable.
60' VAR Check - Possible penalty
https://streambug.org/cv/aa6ac8
After a big chance for USA, possible careless / reckless charging by defender who hit attacker (but rather not that clear how), impossible to say more, incident was not in focus by broadcaster, they didn't notice that, but you can see, VAR check before resume of game, so in case they would have intervened.
90'2 YC for a very cynical foul - cooperation AR1
https://streambug.org/cv/e6b758
Mandatory booking. After a very calm second half, this was the only "heated" moment before final whistle.
With a bit of severity one could say that Mariani took afterwards decisions (all correct) but he didn't work so much on preventing, however the match remained on track and there is little else to add.
Italian referee to be checked in a more challenging context.
Hope the best for Kruzliak, after first game that not so stable in foul detection.
ReplyDelete30´ good play on, appeal for possible handball in NED penalty area
ReplyDeletePossible rc minute 32?
ReplyDeleteIMO not enough intestity. Yes, slow-mo looked quite bad, however clearly going for the ball and just missing it justifies a YC only. Definitely not VAR stuff tho.
DeleteRather dark yellow, but I think YC is better decision (more stamp on foot than studs above ankles). Would have been interesting if VAR had intervened in case of RC by Kruzliak.
DeleteBorderline, no VAR intervention even if RC, IMO
Delete32´ and 33´ good YC for AUT players (both reckless), potential RC for AUT23, but I´m OK with yellow, borderline foul
ReplyDelete37´ potential penalty on AUT7 by NED GK?
ReplyDeleteDefinitely ball first, without going through the player, the attecker was tripped after the ball was played. Excellent play on IMO.
DeleteBit of holding. But I written before replay
DeleteAlso an interesting looking play on in 37' after the ball had hit the referee. Yes, the team in possession didn't change, however I'd say a dropped ball due to a developing promising attack could have been justified. However a solid 1st half IMO.
ReplyDeleteInteresting decision less than a minute before Austria second goal - step on foot foul by Wimmer, already booked, enough for 2YC?
ReplyDeleteIt would be very harsh 2YC, IMO
DeleteWell Peltjo can book his ticket to go home
ReplyDeleteSimply shouldn't have let them initiate the substitution if they weren't ready 🤦🏼♂️
DeletePoor AUT substitution managment by FO (Peljto)
ReplyDeletePoor substitution management by FO (Peljto)
ReplyDeletePoor substitution management by FO (Peljto)
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteAUT8
Delete71´ Potential YC for AUT8, lack of respect
ReplyDeleteKruzliak dreadful decision to disallow the goal correct OFR
ReplyDeleteWhy correct OFR? Is this not a factual decision?
DeleteCalling it "dreadful" is insane beyond belief. Even in the first couple of reviews it looked like a handball due to the movement of the player's hand. Difficult decision to make, this is exactly why we have VAR.
DeleteReally, @MT? I saw nothing that made it look like a handball. And Kruzliak was anything but confident when he made it. Terrible body languge and VERY late whistle (not just a "delay until it's in the net" whistle). No one seemed to think this was a handball and Kruzliak only looked about 60% sure at best.
DeleteGiven even an accidental handball would disallow a goal anyway there, why not just award the goal and put the onus on the VAR?
And @Daniel Bailey, it's an interesting question given affirmative "accidental handball" is considered objective and therefore doesn't require an OFR to disallow a goal. But I think that awarding a goal just feels different. Also, what if Kruzliak is calling an intentional handball (which he like was)? Even though the result is the same, I think selling things to the crowd and Austria is important.
Deadly serious. If you watch the replays from the referees POV, it looked 100% like accidental handball after the thigh touch from the goal scorer. Absolutely understandable, even though wrong decision.
Delete76´ brave disallowed NED goal for handball, but from replay doesn't look like that
ReplyDeleteCorrectly overturned
DeleteBad error from Kruzliak unfortunately, no handball. Correctly overruled on VAR
ReplyDeleteI'm a little puzzled as to why that required an OFR? It's a factual no-handball, regular goal
ReplyDeleteIn addition to what I wrote above, a foul was called. This is overturning a foul decision and not just notifying the referee of an otherwise undetectable accidental handball.
DeleteThe protocols might be hazy on whether or not an OFR is absolutely required here. But I think it's pretty obvious that it's wise to conduct one. The referee saw something that didn't exist. Having him go look himself so that he sees what really happened and can communicate to the teams that he was wrong is important. VAR overturning this without an OFR is not a good approach.
I kinda understand the 'selling' argument, but I don't think this is wanted by Uefa or any European league. A word with the captains to say factually, no touch on hand, goal, would have been enough. I think in Europe it's clear enough that no OFR is expected/wanted, it's just seen as a waste of time
DeleteGreat eye from AR1, correct disallowed goal for offside
ReplyDeleteGreat eye from AR1, correct disallowed goal for offside
ReplyDeleteAbsolutely amazing. A human who can see invisible things.
ReplyDelete90´+ Good YC for AUT14 refuse to leave pitch
ReplyDeleteafter i look this performance, i think Kruzliak easily out after group stage. Sorry bit harsh, but the performnace tell eveything, maybe @chefren agree with me.
ReplyDelete*performance
DeleteHe would have been out anyway as he’s one of the least experienced referees. For me, he had a really good game but the handball call significantly lowers his mark
DeleteI think that his EURO was about to end after this game in all cases, as expected the Slovakian referee and Guida no more than Group Stage. They were planned for that. In particular for me the handball OFR was a pity, could have ended better the tournament..
Deleteagree 100%
DeleteNumber of VAR interventions really too high now.
ReplyDeleteIt can become even the double of EURO 2020. Rosetti will not be happy, although in some cases it was an offside impossible to see for AR live.
i agree only for tight offside. Another that, must be spotted from referee on field.
DeleteI'd say it was generally a good performance by Kružliak in this match, but again tarnished by one wrong decision in a crucial situation, unfortunately.
ReplyDeleteHis foul detection was overall OK, with maybe one or two misses, but nothing major IMO. The match can probably be considered easy, but Kružliak remained in full control during the whole match, with no actual challenges to his authority by well-behaved players. In terms of disciplinary management, after starting with a good warning to AUT5 for an "undercutting" foul in 25', I think all YCs he issued were correct in the end: 32' (AUT5, reckless tackle), 33' (AUT23, step on foot/ankle), 90+4' (AUT14, UB). The 33' one was especially interesting as a potential RC, although I think the final decision was correct as it was more of a step on foot, but I don't think VAR would have intervened in case Kružliak had given a RC there. It can be said he correctly felt the right time to start cautioning players, in order to avoid the somewhat heated period of 30' - 35' escalating into anything further for the rest of the match. It should be noted there were 2 more YCs possible: 59' (AUT23, it would have been his second, but I think Kružliak can be supported as it was not a 100% full step on foot) and 62' (NED18, but I don't think it's expected to caution for a potential LoR literally on the opposite goal line).
In terms of KMIs, I'd argue Kružliak correctly rejected three possible penalty appeals: 30' (definitely no handball by a NED player), 38' (I don't think there was anything wrong in the actions of the NED GK against Arnautović) and 86' (the existence of a holding by AUT player cannot be denied, however Weghorst was actually able to head the ball rather freely and I don't think anyone expected a penalty there (NED players certainly didn't)). Unfortunately, the handball decision to cancel a 2 - 2 goal of NED was simply wrong, and I think Kružliak could/should have avoided it. He was very unsure of the decision himself, so it remains a mystery what exactly did he think he saw in that situation. VAR crew did their job well. Lastly, it is worth to mention a good offside decision to cancel a goal of AUT in 83' by AR1.
Fully agree and not much to add.
ReplyDeleteExcellent game feeling by not giving Aut 23 in 59' and second yellow. It would have been too harsh.
Would like to add the insufficient communication regarding the substitution management, that was creating unnecessary irritation. You saw the angry face of Kruzlick, but nothing to blame for him.
- Very bad decision by Kruzliak to disallow the goal! Why very bad? a) it was really unconvincingly delivered for the reasons raised by @usaref, and; b) look at Pozor, who while far away had the perfect insight angle to detect the (lack of) handling offence, running back to the halfway line, content to give the goal. One can appreciate the optical illusion that the referee himself had but I'm not sure I can remember a worse decision (Turpin missed the SFP penalty for positioning remember), at the Euro than this?
ReplyDelete- With that in mind, I would classify this as the second performance at the tournament which should be given a rejected grade (lower-6 level refereeing + bad OFR needed). There was never a clear line for what a YC was (opening booking was a careless foul assessed as reckless; then there was apparently a carte blanche on tactical fouls), the exaggerated/chaotic gestures more than really being in control of the players actions, and a very poor 'communication channel' with Ned captain Van Dijk, which consisted mostly of him showing disrespect to Kruzliak's decisions.
- My opinion was that the Slovakian's call-up (as main referee) to this tournament was a bit questionable, and I'm not really sure that Kruzliak managed to disabuse this idea. Remember that he was one of three referees not to conduct a Champions League match after Christmas, but unlike the other two, he didn’t show a level of refereeing ahead of Eskas, Peljto and so on. I would highlight the Bosnian in particular: it was right, in my view, to 'cancel' his trajectory to the Euro after a too sloppy performance in Leipzig-R.Madrid; but if Kruzliak also had so many 'hoops to jump through' as Mr Peljto, perhaps he would have faced the same fate.
- I don't want to 'pile on' here but, still having France-Poland to watch this afternoon, I would classify Kruzliak as the weakest of the 19 referees at this Euro. However he has still done very well to 'turn around' his career in the Elite category and his performances in the tournament were way better than (respectively) Batista-Plautz-Velasco-Moen-Ekberg and he can look back with general satisfaction at his Euro 2024, which now for the Slovakian has surely come to an end.
Can we get all the video clips of the games please?
ReplyDelete