I didn’t see anything that individually pointed out those moments. No way on earth should the Japan-Netherlands call get judged as incorrect or wrong. I believe most refs on the Ref forum here said that was an easy PK, and I still think Kumagai only started pulling back after the ball hit her, not before it did. Agree to disagree there. Maybe I missed something from that report though. Edit: Maybe the ref was wrong to change her initial call on the Australia-Norway handball shout, but I wouldn't call that a wrong final decision because many people also wouldn't have changed the call if she had originally said no handball. I also think the decision to disallow Gauvin's goal against Brazil was wrong. Edit: I think either the decision to not let Lloyd retake against Chile or the decision to let Renard retake against Nigeria was wrong.
I was also fine with the Lavelle call in US-Spain, but that's far more of a potentially dubious penalty than the Japan-Netherlands one.
There is nothing individually pointing toward it (like table with wrong calls - heh wonder why ) but the incident is on the list of Penalty Kicks Awarded without VAR (by ref decission), and isn't on the list of calls changed by VAR nor on the list of calls confirmed by VAR - although it clearly was under VAR review. I asked in there under occasion few times as well and was often given most popular call, which I found later on not always beeing necessarily the right one. In case of Kumagai handball you can check on your own: (from IFAB Law of the Game) Handling the ball It is an offence if a player: deliberately touches the ball with their hand/arm, including moving the hand/arm towards the ball (no - she clearly moves her arm away) gains possession/control of the ball after it has touched their hand/arm and then: (no) scores in the opponents’ goal (no) creates a goal-scoring opportunity (no) scores in the opponents’ goal directly from their hand/arm, even if accidental, including by the goalkeeper (no) It is usually an offence if a player: touches the ball with their hand/arm when: the hand/arm has made their body unnaturally bigger (interpretation based - you can argue that arm was a bit outstreched at first but at the moment of the hit it was nothing close to "vitruvian man" or "with the arms level/above the shoulders" (which both FIFA generally consider unnaturally bigger) and she was clearly moving her arm away plus the hit was above elbow joint almost at the height of the chest. Even would she hold her arms closer to the body the ball could've still hit the arm on the outside.) the hand/arm is above/beyond their shoulder level (unless the player deliberately plays the ball which then touches their hand/arm) (no) The above offences apply even if the ball touches a player’s hand/arm directly from the head or body (including the foot) of another player who is close. Except for the above offences, it is not usually an offence if the ball touches a player’s hand/arm: directly from the player’s own head or body (including the foot) (no) directly from the head or body (including the foot) of another player who is close (yes) if the hand/arm is close to the body and does not make the body unnaturally bigger (interpretation based as earlier above) when a player falls and the hand/arm is between the body and the ground to support the body, but not extended laterally or vertically away from the body (no) The goalkeeper has the same restrictions on handling the ball as any other player outside the penalty area. If the goalkeeper handles the ball inside their penalty area when not permitted to do so, an indirect free kick is awarded but there is no disciplinary sanction. Explanation: Greater clarity is needed for handball, especially on those occasions when ‘non-deliberate’ handball is an offence. The re-wording follows a number of principles: • football does not accept a goal being scored by a hand/arm (even if accidental) • football expects a player to be penalised for handball if they gain possession/control of the ball from their hand/arm and gain a major advantage e.g. score or create a goal-scoring opportunity • it is natural for a player to put their arm between their body and the ground for support when falling • having the hand/arm above shoulder height is rarely a ‘natural’ position and a player is ‘taking a risk’ by having the hand/arm in that position, including when sliding • if the ball comes off the player’s body, or off another player (of either team) who is close by, onto the hand/arm it is often impossible to avoid contact with the ball The most ironic thing is that in the same action, a 2 seconds earlier Sameshima in last moment pulled her leg from would be won sliding tackle challenge on Beerensteyn in order for not to give a reason for Dutch to dive or tumble and for ref to call PK. Most certainly Ther was far more cases of bad refeering in this WWC than those reviewed by VAR. In general the level of skills presented by the refs is rising but still some remain with little experience and skills below average. For example I guess this kind of behaviour (vid below) isn't often punished by refs in Honduran league. 1177611150382587904 is not a valid tweet id
That was bad from van de Sanden. I’m assuming hardly anyone caught that given this is the first mention I’ve seen of it. Yeah, that’s not solid enough reasoning for me to justify how certain you sound. Her arm was clearly out in a blocking stance, and the arm movement doesn’t exactly look like it’s for the purpose of tucking in to me. Why even have your arm that far out in a shot blocking stance in the first place if you’re tucking in a moment later? If refs at the WWC and refs here largely agreed on controversial calls in the public’s opinion (i.e. follow throughs, offsides), then that suggests to me that I’d trust the judgments of the refs here on calls more than non-refs here. They didn’t always agree though (i.e. Gauvin’s disallowed goal), which means it wasn’t just refs agreeing with refs. I also think the Netherlands-Japan penalty was clearer than the Canada-Sweden one; it certainly was far more warranted in the spirit of the game in my opinion since Miedema’s shot was the far more dangerous shot and likely going in without the arm intervention. (That’s admittedly not a rules argument though; it’s just me being confused about why a penalty for an arm stopping a shot that likely would have beaten the keeper got so much negative reaction.) The ref in Netherlands-Japan would have either changed her call without reviewing or would have reviewed the screen if VAR told her they thought she made the wrong call. Again, agree to disagree though.
After more thought, a few more plays could/should have been suggested as wrong before the Japan-Netherlands call. Both penalty shouts (Mewis and Horan) in US-Thailand (definite disagreement with the non-calls in the Ref forum), not sending off the Cameroon player on Groenen (I remember a red being seen as a fair call in the Ref forum), and the no-call on Kirby in England-Cameroon (maybe less clear but far more of a wrong call than Japan-Netherlands). Note: I actually realize that I argued against the last part of my last comment by bringing up the US-Thailand shouts. Those were still likely wrong calls while many probably unbiased people not biased by Japan’s fifteen minute period of extreme dominance thought the PK was the right call. I’ll try to drop this discussion though.