You know....The House of Orange and our national team colour originates from the town L'Orange about 200 km south of Lyon... Mmmm....makes you think....Orange home match...home referee...mmm
The orange colour we have as our national symbol originated from a little town, about 200 km south of Lyon. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orange,_Vaucluse Prince Willem van Nassau inherited the title Prince of Orange, hence the link with the colour as a national colour.
Thankfully the assognors have stopped caring about stuff like this. It used to stop the better ref from getting a big game.
Not just soccer either, in Formula 1 there are amazing groups of orange clad supporters that follow and support a single top tier driver, Max Verstappen.
I’ve watched speed skating events where the Dutch have filled the arena. It’s amazing to witness. My college alma mater has orange as a color, so I’m definitely partial to the Dutch in a lot of cases.
I once had the misfortune of attending a gridiron football game at Clemson. My eyes bled for several days.
The second, I think. But the first one people believe it might have instead been a foul on the goalkeeper.
Egad. Another awfully, unnecessarily delayed OS flag. you know the delay is ridiculous when the striker slows because she knows she's off and then restarts because the flag isn't up.
I know what you're saying, but somehow I can't get past my teachings that the flag signal isn't intended for the player. It never was. Translated into coach [the language]: "Play the *&@(*&R# whistle!"
"Max Emilian Verstappen is a Belgian-Dutch racing driver who competes under the Dutch flag in Formula One with Red Bull Racing" "... his father, Jos Verstappen, is a Dutch former Formula One driver ..." "Although Verstappen resided in Bree, Belgium, he decided to compete with a Dutch racing licence because he "feels more Dutch"" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Max_Verstappen
And we will have to wait for Phil Neville's post match comments to find out if it was the correct call?
Before today's game, FIFA says there were 31 times (0.62 per game) VAR was used (including on-field and off-field), and the call was changed 27 times. To compare, about 54 percent of the way through the MLB season, Baseball-Reference says MLB had 599 challenges in 1,314 games, which is 0.456 per game. That does not include when the umpires chose to review a play.
Didn’t watch the game as I’m out of town. But reading the game day thread on SWE:ENG, people are complaining about the England goal being called back for handling. It looks pretty clear to me. What am I missing?
The key words being "England" and "handling". It's clear cut under the new laws. Even if Brits still don't like it.
It hit her arm and led to a goal. That’s now all it takes. Welcome to the new reality. The referee pantomimed intentional handling so that might have been the call, but intentionality isn’t required.
I honestly thought it was clear cut under the old laws, presuming the referee team catches it. The last angle from behind basically showed she propelled the ball forward with her running motion. She got stuck with the ball in a bad spot, but the only reason she was able to score was because a clear movement of her arm put the ball in the right spot. That’s a big step past “incidental contact” or whatever we are calling the non-deliberate attacking handling that is now an offence. It’s academic. But I think a UCL VAR would have called that in the spring.
If her arm wasnot there, she still would have the ball going into the right direction to score as it would have bounced from the Swedish player in the direction she was heading. I would like to see it extended to defenders too. Any handling is a penalty. No fuzzy anything anymore.
Oh, now I understand what White is gesturing about. She's not saying the ball touched her body instead of her arm; she's saying the ball bounced off the Swedish defender's (Sembrant's) stomach. Naturally (as I always do tee-hee!) I defer to the referees if this is handling regardless, under either the new laws or the old ones, but it does seem silly to me that this is absolutely, unconditionally, handling when it bounces off a defender like that. I have problems also about it being automatic handling when players are jostling for position like this, but the ball coming off the defender now makes this really seem contrary to common-sense Thanks for posting the clip
I would have nullified the goal anyway, while she wasnot handling the ball but handling the player. If you look closely you see she's pushing with her arm the Swedish player, the ball bounces up against the Swedish and she pulls her arm away from the ball. Because of her shoving she got the ball, so no goal.