DFB Pokal Semifinals Bayer Leverkusen 2-6 Bayern Munich: Daniel Siebert, Lasse Koslowski, Markus Häcker, Harm Osmers, Dr. Jochen Drees, Daniel Schlager Schalke - Eintracht Frankfurt: Robert Hartmann, Christian Leicher, Markus Schüller, Dr. Robert Kampka, Günter Perl, Florian Badstübner I'd guess Zwayer for the final.
Matchday 31 Friday, 8:30pm Mönchengladbach - Wolfsburg Tobias Stieler (SR) Christian Gittelmann (SR-A. 1) Markus Häcker (SR-A. 2) Sven Jablonski (4. Offizieller) Benjamin Brand (VA) Thorben Siewer (VA-A)
Gotta find the video but there was a fun "quick restart" goal in this one. Nothing controversial except a lesson learned for the Wolfsburg folks, and it tells you how much players take for granted a free kick from 20-25 yards will be automatically ceremonial.
https://streamable.com/ymj76 My only problem I have for the ref is he put his whistle to his mouth while he's backing away. He's made no sign otherwise that it's ceremonial so the goal is good. However, he should keep the whistle at his side.
Two VAR moments from the Final: 1) 82nd minute: Goal for Frankfurt. Zwayer went to the monitor to check something before eventually awarding the goal. Not sure what was there to check though. (Apparently the news says it was for a potential handball in the build-up.) 2) 94th minute. Bayern, trailing 1-2, claimed a penalty. It seems like something that could have been missed in real time but looked a definite penalty in replay. Zwayer went to the monitor but didn't give a penalty. Even the Frankfurt manager Nico Kovacs and the fouling player Kevin-Prince Boateng admitted afterwards that it was a penalty. Maybe Zwayer leaned toward not making a game-changing call (like Oliver did and bore the consequences; in Germany there is of course an opinion popular among fans of almost all other teams that referees favor Bayern), but with VAR this decision is hardly understandable.
A VAR should only be sending down a review he feels is clearly wrong. Every once in a while, it’s understandable when a referee rightly disagrees (see both Penso and Sibiga in MLS last weekend). But two VAR referrals in the same cup final when the referee disagrees? That’s a huge problem. It shouldn’t be understated. You had one qualified referee saying Frankfurt should have been denied a goal and have conceded a penalty, while the other says the exact opposite. That’s not good. The fact that Zwayer is one of the top qualified VARs in the world and will be at the WC only adds to the mystery.
I tend to agree with Zwayer that, based on that angle alone, that wasn’t enough to send down. The interesting thing here is that the VAR, Dankert, is also going to the World Cup. So not only did two referees disagree on these calls, but two World Cup VARs from the same country, with the exact same training, disagreed. One other thought. Watch the Frankfurt third goal. Look how many Frankfurt substitutes are on the field when the goal was scored. VR is supposed to check to see if there are any clear infringements in the lead-up to a goal. Now, we all know that the field encroachment is trifling in this case (at least, we should). But when will we see VR used to annul a goal for something like this? It will happen. The door is open and when video shows clear infringements, the line for what is trifling may start to shift. If a VAR told the referee that multiple substitutes entered the field of play and he should annul the goal, what justification other than “no, I don’t want to call that,” will the CR have at that point?
By the way, at this point Cup Finals in Germany, England, France and Australia have been more controversial because of VR so far this year. Admittedly, you can’t say VR affected the result in England, but you can claim—at minimum—it influenced the result in the other three. Given the small number of competitions using VARs right now, that’s pretty jarring. And, to keep playing the broken record, that doesn’t bode well for July 15th.
One interesting point about the 2nd VAR referral is that Zwayer first got to see the scene in super slowmo, then on repeat in real time (at 1:44 on streamable). I feel on slowmo he called it a light touch at best, and then the real time repeat makes Martinez' hit reaction look delayed (no direct movement on impact). The German TV commentator called both scenes as possible going both ways thus subjective to the referee. Very interesting situation with VAR and on field referee disagreeing this much though.
PRO has already had internal discussions and issued guidance about encroachment at the kickoff that leads directly to a goal being scored. If a player already in the other half of the field at kickoff affects a goal or goal-scoring play directly off the kickoff, the VAR should flag the encroachment and the referee should disallow the goal. And that’s despite the edict that VR can’t look at restarts—the argument appears to be that being in the wrong half early is akin to encroachment on a penalty. So, not really. The slope is already happening. Any infringement in the lead up to a goal is reviewable. Any VAR and CR would be within their rights to disallow a goal for a team having too many players on the field via illegal entry. The question is whether or not any would feel compelled to do so.
I think the time of the match of when this occurs is what makes it so controversial. If this was in the 30th minute instead of literally the last kick of the match, no one would care and it wouldn't be a talking point. Such is the life of the referee. I tend to agree that it is not enough to be sent down for review by the VAR. BUT, once it is sent down I don't see how you don't award the penalty kick. It's a pretty clear kick and there is sufficient contact there. It looks like a penalty. It's a foul. To me it is kind of similar to the Geiger offside play in Atlanta in the sense, that there is probably enough subjectivity in the decision to not get sent down for review. Once it is sent down, though, there is really no option, but to reverse the decision. I think the same applies to the play in the Bayern match. It's a foul and a penalty kick. PRO has the philosophy that the bar for intervention for violent conduct is much lower than the bar for intervention for serious foul play, because it is a lot easier to identify. For the most part, violent conduct is almost always violent conduct, and there really is no grey area. I think that is the same way it will go in regards to penalty kicks. At least on leg to leg and lower body fouls. A foul is a foul. You obviously can't see it in real time and life, but on replay it just looks like a foul.
According to some pedantic referees in a Facebook group to which I belong, the crew should have disallowed the goal and cautioned all of the substitutes on the field. This is the classic example of refereeing strictly by the book as opposed to having a shred of common sense.
Agreed completely. But VAR does make things tricky. If we aren’t going to enforce a clear provision of the Law when it is clearly and egregiously violated and we have the video to prove it, then why have the Law provision at all?
No doubt that’s going to be an issue, but I still think common sense should prevail. Frankfurt was up 2-1 in a cup final, and it’s clear in this video that there’s no conceivable way the subs barely on the field impacted the play. This would be like calling a technical foul on a basketball sub for jumping off the bench and putting a foot on the court after his team hits a big shot. Are we going to call a technical foul on that player because he is now the sixth player on the court? Of course not, and no basketball referee would even think of it. It’s a spontaneous celebration, not premeditated.