Germany - US , WNT PK

Discussion in 'Referee' started by rcleopard, Oct 6, 2003.

  1. rcleopard

    rcleopard New Member

    Aug 26, 2003
    Okay, this is becoming an issue on other lists/forums/etc. Thanks Tony for your comments last night that are convincing people its a PK.

    So..

    Milbrett on the German GK involving the header.. what do you think?

    A PK for a push/strike?

    An IFK for Milbrett's Dangerous play?

    A no call because its a wash?

    Any cards/misconducts issued?


    Here's MY belief. I believe the no call was a good , safe wash. I believe that the GK almost had possession of the ball, and then the player put her head in danger to head it out. It could have been an IFK or a PK, but what I felt was proper was the "no foul" call that was given.

    Anyone else?

    Jarrod
     
  2. kevbrunton

    kevbrunton New Member

    Feb 27, 2001
    Edwardsburg, MI
    Club:
    Chicago Fire
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    Personally, I thought that the US should have gotten 2 PKs out of that game. In the situation you described, it seemed to me that the keeper was playing the player -- but I was able to watch it about 5 or 6 times on my TiVo. I still have it recorded, so I'll go back and watch it again.

    About 10 minutes earlier than that, a cross was played into the area from out near the corner flag and a German player initially stuck her arm out and THEN was trying to pull it back when the ball struck it. In my book, she put it out there to begin with and it should have been flagged as handling.


    Hats off to the Germans for playing a VERY tenacious and organized defense. I'm certainly not taking anything away from them. But it seemed to me that the US players had earned a PK or two and Ms. Denoncourt didn't have the guts to make the call (and/or her AR let her down -- particularly on the handling non-call).
     
  3. nsa

    nsa Member+

    New England Revolution; Boston Breakers
    United States
    Feb 22, 1999
    Notboston, MA
    Club:
    New England Revolution
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    Good non-call on the ball hitting the player's hand. Yes, her hand was away from her side as she balanced herself. Yes, the ball hit her hand as she pulled it back from the path of the ball - a ball struck hard from about 4 or 5 yards. Nothing there to call. (Furthermore, that ball was destined for nowhere as most of the US crosses were during this game.)

    The 'keeper's collision with Milbrett was a bit more problematic. I think that Sonia did not have a clear look and her AR did not make a call based upon her view. You don't make a call unless you see it.

    For that matter, I would not have called Nordby for the contact with Wambach in the q-final match.

    As a referee, I liked Sonia's game. :)

    As a fan of US national teams, I am unhappy with the result. :(
     
  4. IASocFan

    IASocFan Moderator
    Staff Member

    Aug 13, 2000
    IOWA
    Club:
    Sporting Kansas City
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    Exactly my thoughts. I didn't see anything in the collision that would warrant a PK - similar to my non-call in yesterday's match. ;)
     
  5. Malaga CF fan

    Malaga CF fan Member

    Apr 19, 2000
    Fairfax, VA
    Club:
    Colorado Rapids
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    (Milbrett vs. German keeper) I think it was just a debatable play. There are clear penalties and we all know them when we see them.

    This was not a clear penalty. If a PK had been called, would it have been a bad call? Probably not, there was certainly contact by the German keeper on Milbrett after Milbrett played the ball past her. We have all seen PK's called for less. Would Germany have felt cheated if it had been called? Probably.

    But the PK wasn't called. The linesman, who should have had a good view of it, gave no signal to assist the center. Not sure what the ref saw, but she didn't call the PK either. It was a 50/50 ball, and in real time, difficult to tell who got a touch and who didn't (although the replay clearly shows the German keeper didn't touch the ball). Does the US still feel cheated? Probably, but the game didn't hinge on that call. The US had plenty of chances and didn't finish.

    After all that, it was probably a good non-call although I was crying for a PK when I saw it and the fan in me still thinks we were robbed.
     
  6. MPJ334

    MPJ334 New Member

    Dec 19, 2001
    Chelsea,New York, NY
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    exactly, in my op. i know the exact feeling (except not on that high a level game) you look to the AR to see if they've got nething (a possible offside, etc) something happens right in front of you and your head is turned. tony is an idiot. if not for the need to hear the whistle i would've kept the game muted.
     
  7. Motterman

    Motterman Member

    Jul 8, 2002
    Orlando, FL
    Club:
    Manchester United FC
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    But less than a minute later she calls an unintentional handball. No consistency.

    I can't really sit here and complain about no PK's being called after the softy calls we got leading up to the semi's, personally.
     
  8. Statesman

    Statesman New Member

    Sep 16, 2001
    The name says it all
    I had a feeling going into this match that Germany would oust the United States, thus was not surprised by the result. I like to see the US teams win but I do not feel allegiance to any one team. As a result I believe my viewpoint is relatively unbiased. That being said...

    I did not feel this was one of Sonia's better games. Unfortunately she had little help from the assistant referees, who had terrible games. There were a total of 4 confirmed missed offside calls, 3 of which were very clear. At times they also made no effort to remain in the proper position, such as not following the ball to the goalline and not keeping up with the defenders as play moved away from them. In the case of handling, this was a missed call. German players are notorious for "accidently" leaving an arm in a position that the ball has a good chance of deflecting off it. I felt this was one of those cases -- yes the arm originally was there from a natural movement, but then it was deliberately left there until after the ball was kicked thus drawing contact. The assistant referee missed the call as Sonia did not have the angle to view the contact.

    Whether or not the goalkeeper intentionally collided with Milbrett is not important. The fact is, Milbrett played the ball forward and was subsequently taken down by the goalkeeper. This is late contact and a foul. The ball was not 50-50, and the keeper was not even looking at the ball -- she initiated the run to get to the ball but did not pull up after it was clear Milbrett would beat her. Sonia missed this call because her assistant on the far side distracted her and as a result she was a great distance away from the play with her head turned. A German player had dropped to the ground without Sonia being aware and the assistant was getting her attention. The play developed extremely quick and that slight break in concentration led to the call being missed.

    Perhaps Kari Seitz will receive the nod to referee the Final now?
     
  9. Quaker

    Quaker Member+

    FC Dallas
    Apr 19, 2000
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    I don't mean to imply anything untoward about Sonia Denoncourt's performance yesterday, but I don't ever remember seeing a referee from a country with a vested interest in the match (i.e. playing in the other semi-final) as the center ref. Though I haven't looked it up, I really doubt we'd see that at the men's World Cup. Anyone know?
     
  10. IASocFan

    IASocFan Moderator
    Staff Member

    Aug 13, 2000
    IOWA
    Club:
    Sporting Kansas City
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    She may have had an interest, but since her game was first; she had no idea how the other semifinal was going to end. About the only thing she could have done to affect Canada's next game would be through a red card or yellow card accumulation. I thought she did a good job. It was a fast paced game with few management issues.
     
  11. Ref Flunkie

    Ref Flunkie Member

    Oct 3, 2003
    New Hudson, MI
    In my humble little referee and soccer fan opinion, I thought the center did a fine job while I agree the assistants had much to be desired. And to be honest, I do not even remember this alleged PK that everyone is talking about, so it must not have stood out to me when it happend. Of course, I may have been in the bathroom at the time, who knows :). I did see the ball that hit the arm of the German defender in the box, and I definitely would not have called it. However, since I do not typically referee German WNT matches, I have not had the chance to research their methods of play, and if I had seen similar acts of leaving an arm out there in previous matches, I may have a different opinion. Here is a comment on that play, I did not think her arm was in an "abnormal" position. I thought it pretty much was hanging there close to her body. I guess my question/point is I do not think it is the defenders job to move her arm out of a "normal" position if the ball is coming toward it, especailly at such a speed and distance that it was there. Now granted, if it was 50 yd pass and it hit her arm just hanging there, it would be different, but I did not think there was sufficent time for her to react to the ball, which again means I would not call it.

    Oh and I too hated the announcers...
     
  12. Geoduck

    Geoduck Member

    Sep 24, 1999
    Denoncourt did well I thought, but I was disappointed to find out that a Canadian was selected to ref. In the Canada-China quarterfinal, Kari Seitz failed to call 2 penalties when the Canadians brought Chinese attackers down, missed another foul against Sun Wen just outside the box, and whistled a nonexistent foul against Pu Wei in the dying moments just as a Chinese player in the penalty area was lining up a shot.

    This situation could have been a repeat to the 1966 World Cup, where an English ref handled the Germany-Uruguay QF and a German ref handled the England-Argentina QF. In each game a South American was ejected, and both European teams ended up in the final. I was wondering how many favors the US were going to receive.
     
  13. AndyMead

    AndyMead Homo Sapien

    Nov 2, 1999
    Seat 12A
    Club:
    Sporting Kansas City
    The keeper got all-ball in the Millbrett situation. You'll have to wait until I post my photos to see why I say that.

    EDIT: Ah this is the referee forum, here's a sneak peak

    [​IMG]
     
  14. IASocFan

    IASocFan Moderator
    Staff Member

    Aug 13, 2000
    IOWA
    Club:
    Sporting Kansas City
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    Great picture, Andy. Was this a single shot, or do you have more?
     
  15. Malaga CF fan

    Malaga CF fan Member

    Apr 19, 2000
    Fairfax, VA
    Club:
    Colorado Rapids
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    Fantastic photo. It looks like the keeper and Milbrett met at the ball at the exact same time. You can see Milbrett's toe just about to contact the ball.

    I think the reason it looked like only Milbrett touched it was because she got more of the ball and was able to direct the ball past the German keeper, even though she handled it as well.

    Amazing shot though.
     
  16. billf

    billf Member+

    May 22, 2001
    Club:
    Philadelphia Union
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    That is an awesome photo!!!! Wow!!! I always love your pics btw!
     
  17. nsa

    nsa Member+

    New England Revolution; Boston Breakers
    United States
    Feb 22, 1999
    Notboston, MA
    Club:
    New England Revolution
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    Being referees, we need the Braile version. ;)
     
  18. MPJ334

    MPJ334 New Member

    Dec 19, 2001
    Chelsea,New York, NY
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    beautiful shot.
     
  19. kevbrunton

    kevbrunton New Member

    Feb 27, 2001
    Edwardsburg, MI
    Club:
    Chicago Fire
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    I went back and reviewed the game again last night. First of all, related to the handling non-call...

    The German player very clearly left her arm hanging out wide and deflected the ball. She was 10 to 12 yards from the cross, not 4 to 5 as someone else stated. Here's the big problem that I have with this non-call. Twice in the following 10 minutes, Sonia called handling on plays that were much closer and much more bang-bang plays. In one case, it was a BLASTED ball from less than 2 yards away. If you are going to call it in the midfield then call it in the penalty area.

    As far as the Millbrett / GK collision, I looked at that a number of times. If I remember correctly, the GK completely missed the ball because as Statesman asserted, she took her eyes off the ball and looked at Millbrett. What I don't think you can tell from Andy's picture is whether the Keeper's hands are on the ball or between the ball and the camera. I'll take a look at the video again because that angle would show that aspect of things much closer.

    Having said that, even if she did get some ball, she failed to control it to the point of preventing the scoring opportunity. Then she subsequently took the player down denying the scoring opportunity. This happens frequently where you'll see the keeper make a very slight touch that very slightly deflects the ball, but doesn't prevent the scoring opportunity. But then they take the attacker down before the attacker can finish it off and they are whistled for a PK (and frequently as in the case of the Birmingham v. ManU game this past weekend) are red-carded for it.

    One other thing regarding consistency -- if you are not going to call the keeper for a foul in this collision with Millbrett, then you shouldn't be calling Wambach for a foul when she collided with the keeper. She got her head to the ball and played the ball. Again, she calls a foul "outside" the penalty area that she didn't call inside.

    Overall, I didn't have a problem with Denoncourt's calling of the game. For the most part it was fairly well called. But there were a couple things I did have a complaint about. Obviously missing the two penalties were huge. But the other one is throughout the entire second half, any time one of the US players had any possession time in the middle third, they were taken down -- deliberatly and firmly. The only time they got through the midfield untouched was when the ball was played in the air or with quick one-touch passing so that the German players couldn't get to them. This was a fairly clear tactic to me and I would have liked to see a couple yellow cards to try to get it stopped. If they fail to stop it, then someone's going to get ejected and/or wind up missing the final due to suspension.
     
  20. Gary V

    Gary V Member+

    Feb 4, 2003
    SE Mich.
    Unfortunately, the WWC doesn't have enough depth in the ref corps. There are fewer first round games and venues, and fewer referees overall, than at the Men's. In the Men's Cup, they typically send home any ref from a country in the quarters.

    In the WWC, after they thank and dismiss the women who performed marginally in the first round, they are left with refs from the same country as some of the remaining teams.

    Another factor might be the R/AR/AR team concept. This is the first time it's used in a WC.

    I haven't seen any announcements about who will get the final - has anyone? My guess - Seitz or Petignat.
     
  21. uniteo

    uniteo Member+

    Sep 2, 2000
    Rockville, MD
    Club:
    DC United
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    I don't think you can separate the initial play on the ball from the 'subsequent' takedown. It seemed to me to be a follow through on the play of the ball.
     
  22. AndyMead

    AndyMead Homo Sapien

    Nov 2, 1999
    Seat 12A
    Club:
    Sporting Kansas City
    I hope it isn't Seitz. She's been fine, but her American lineswomen have been atrocious.

    I was cursing myself in Foxboro. I had just put my camera away and as Petignat came off the field she threw her yellow and red cards into the cheering crowd. How cool is that? I wish I'd gotten some photos of that.
     
  23. Statesman

    Statesman New Member

    Sep 16, 2001
    The name says it all
    There was no play on the ball, that is why the act was a foul. I'm not sure Andy's photograph is of the correct incident, but it certainly is misleading. Most of the time I just allow my experience to determine when something is a foul by sight, whether I can pinpoint the precise action that creates the foul or not. There are just certain components to a challenge you look for subconsciously over time that when they are either present or not determine whether it was fair or not. Then it's just a matter of looking at the outcome. At the moment the collision occured, my reaction was "foul, penalty, possible card." Something about the challenge was unfair to me at the time.

    When looking at the video, the reason I had this reaction is very clear. There never was a chance for a play on the ball by the keeper. Milbrett had her beat and was going to get past. Instead of allowing Milbrett to continue playing fairly, the goalkeeper knocked her down. A goalkeeper with this skill level knows exactly when she has been beat, and whether she can pull up or not. The keeper panicked and should not have gone at the ball with the speed in which she did. She knew she was coming in too fast for a ball that wasn't hers, which is why she turned her attention towards Milbrett and the upcoming impact. If she truly felt the ball was hers, Milbrett wouldn't have even been a concern. It is not enough to simply look at a photograph, and I am not really convinced that photo is of the same play.
     
  24. kevbrunton

    kevbrunton New Member

    Feb 27, 2001
    Edwardsburg, MI
    Club:
    Chicago Fire
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    I agree that it is not enough to just look at a photo, but the photo has to be of the same play. There was nothing else similar that happened in the game -- and I trust that Andy wouldn't post a photo from a different game.
     
  25. kevbrunton

    kevbrunton New Member

    Feb 27, 2001
    Edwardsburg, MI
    Club:
    Chicago Fire
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    Sure you can separate them. If you make a challenge on the ball and it is a fair challenge, then there is no foul. But if in the follow through from said fair challenge, you completely wipe out an opponent due to your momentum, then that becomes a foul. Mind you that this is NOT the same as when the defender makes a fair challenge on the ball and then the attacker's momentum causes the contact and causes them to be "taken down".
     

Share This Page