Match 24: POR : GER - TAYLOR (ENG)

Discussion in 'Euro 2020: Refereeing' started by code1390, Jun 17, 2021.

  1. code1390

    code1390 Moderator
    Staff Member

    Nov 25, 2007
    Club:
    Tottenham Hotspur FC
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    Match #24
    Portugal : Germany
    Saturday, 19 June 2021
    18:00 local time (12:00 EDT)
    Munich

    Referee: Anthony Taylor (ENG)
    AR1: Gary Beswick (ENG)
    AR2: Adam Nunn (ENG)
    Fourth Official: Srdjan Jovanović (SRB)

    Video Assistant Referee: Stuart Attwell (ENG)
    AVAR 1: Juan Martínez Munuera (ESP)
    AVAR 2: Iñigo Prieto (ESP)
    AVAR 3: Alejandro Hernández (ESP)
     
  2. USSF REF

    USSF REF Guest

    HAHA - these announcers.

    Anyway, a little bit of refereeing decision-making early to disallow that goal for interfering with the opponent. Good AR work. Not sure what took the AVAR so long to process that one out since the flag went up on the field.
     
  3. MassachusettsRef

    MassachusettsRef Moderator
    Staff Member

    Apr 30, 2001
    Washington, DC
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    Do you think that’s challenging or an action that makes an obvious impact?
     
  4. MassachusettsRef

    MassachusettsRef Moderator
    Staff Member

    Apr 30, 2001
    Washington, DC
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    Never mind. It’s the “newer” one.

    “clearly attempting to play a ball which is close when this action impacts on an opponent or…”
     
  5. mfw13

    mfw13 Member+

    Jul 19, 2003
    Seattle
    Club:
    Newcastle United FC
    Is it just me, or did CR7 look a little bit offside on the pass over the top to Jota that led to CR7 scoring Portugal's goal?
     
  6. USSF REF

    USSF REF Guest

    It looked OK. The only questionable offside position was a player who was not active until after a later touch of the ball.
     
  7. USSF REF

    USSF REF Guest

    A little studs to the top of the boot there... probably within referee discretion. Good management by Taylor on this...
     
  8. code1390

    code1390 Moderator
    Staff Member

    Nov 25, 2007
    Club:
    Tottenham Hotspur FC
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    It wasn't a handball offense, but I do think that would have been probably the most controversial moment of the group stage had that German goal been onside.
     
  9. sulfur

    sulfur Member+

    Oct 22, 2007
    Ontario, Canada
    And that player was CR7. Running down the middle of the field.

    So not relevant to that play, despite what @mfw13 might hope for.
     
  10. Pittsburgh Ref

    Pittsburgh Ref Member+

    Oct 7, 2014
    da 'Burgh
    His arm was down to the ground though, right? Passing the "validity" test?
     
  11. USSF REF

    USSF REF Guest

    I think the question SOME people would ask is what constitutes an immediate goal-scoring opportunity (which clearly that was not) but that would be where the controversy would lie.
     
  12. Pittsburgh Ref

    Pittsburgh Ref Member+

    Oct 7, 2014
    da 'Burgh
    Isn't that bit gone though, only consideration being if the shooter makes contact?
     
  13. USSF REF

    USSF REF Guest

    I've taken this and extrapolated:
    • immediately after the ball has touched their hand/arm, even if accidental

    Again, clearly, this was not that, but people will still try to argue what it means. And, I have to be more careful remembering the new language.
     
    Pittsburgh Ref repped this.
  14. code1390

    code1390 Moderator
    Staff Member

    Nov 25, 2007
    Club:
    Tottenham Hotspur FC
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    Of course the key change was that it only applies to that player if they score and not a teammate.
     
    USSF REF repped this.
  15. code1390

    code1390 Moderator
    Staff Member

    Nov 25, 2007
    Club:
    Tottenham Hotspur FC
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    We knew match day three of group f was going to be fun, but I think it turned out to be even more interesting than we expected.
     
  16. MassachusettsRef

    MassachusettsRef Moderator
    Staff Member

    Apr 30, 2001
    Washington, DC
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    Given goal difference, Portugal might need a draw just to advance now. All depends on what happens to a large extent with Turkey-Switzerland and Croatia-Scotland. But, in theory, it could be do or die. Huge assignment.

    Orsato? Ot Kuipers, of course.
     
  17. MassachusettsRef

    MassachusettsRef Moderator
    Staff Member

    Apr 30, 2001
    Washington, DC
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    Of course, another goal and all this could change. I realize I’m jumping to conclusions. But still think you’ll see a big name on France-Portugal. Though I guess that was always expected, huh.
     
  18. code1390

    code1390 Moderator
    Staff Member

    Nov 25, 2007
    Club:
    Tottenham Hotspur FC
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    That second goal could end up being massive for Portugal
     
    MassachusettsRef repped this.
  19. RedStar91

    RedStar91 Member+

    Sep 7, 2011
    Club:
    FK Crvena Zvezda Beograd
    How is that not a caution for dissent?
     
    Pittsburgh Ref repped this.
  20. USSF REF

    USSF REF Guest

    Wasn't Taylor's death stare enough for you? It sure scared me. LOL
     
  21. MassachusettsRef

    MassachusettsRef Moderator
    Staff Member

    Apr 30, 2001
    Washington, DC
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    Kroos was in Taylor’s face and he was able to ignore that. I think ignoring one blast of the ball with no accompanying verbals is entirely expected from Taylor there. Particularly because Taylor knows the Portuguese player played through two fouls only to be called for a soft one against himself. The frustration is understandable.

    If Sanches turns and says a single word to the AR, it’s an easy yellow. But he didn’t. And that’s how Taylor gets away with no action. It’s like one verbal outburst that you turn your back on.

    Of course, if he chose to caution it then that decision would be entirely defensible too. But given the match and how Taylor handled it (and really all his matches) no surprise he didn’t flinch.
     
  22. code1390

    code1390 Moderator
    Staff Member

    Nov 25, 2007
    Club:
    Tottenham Hotspur FC
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    Because it's not the Copa america?
     
  23. mfw13

    mfw13 Member+

    Jul 19, 2003
    Seattle
    Club:
    Newcastle United FC
    But wouldn't that logic also apply to Gnabry being offside on the German goal that was ruled out (especially since Gnabry didn't ever touch the ball)?

    The announcers didn't do much explaining, so I'm still unclear whether CR7 was not physically offside on Portgual's first goal, or whether he was physically offside but that was deemed irrelevant since the pass went to Jota.
     
  24. HoustonRef

    HoustonRef Member

    May 23, 2009
    It's irrelevant. The pass wasn't too him.
     
    USSF REF repped this.
  25. USSF REF

    USSF REF Guest

    No. CR7 was not:

    • interfering with an opponent by:

      • preventing an opponent from playing or being able to play the ball by clearly obstructing the opponent’s line of vision or

      • challenging an opponent for the ball or

      • clearly attempting to play a ball which is close when this action impacts on an opponent or

      • making an obvious action which clearly impacts on the ability of an opponent to play the ball
    BUT on the German goal the attacker was clearly attempting to play a ball which was close and that action had an impact on a defender and the goalkeeper for sure.
     
    mfw13 repped this.

Share This Page