Match #35 Portugal : France Wednesday, 23 June 2021 21:00 local time (15:00 EDT) Budapest Referee: Antonio Mateu Lahoz (ESP) AR1: Pau Cebrián Devís (ESP) AR2: Roberto del Palomar (ESP) Fourth Official: Ovidiu Haţegan (ROU) Video Assistant Referee: Alejandro Hernández (ESP) AVAR 1: José María Sánchez (ESP) AVAR 2: Iñigo Prieto (ESP) AVAR 3: Juan Martínez Munuera (ESP)
Rationale could be that the strike was an attempt to play the ball and not itself rising to SFP or VC. But yeah that thought occurs... This one coming soon to a recert near you.
I think we saw this during the European season a few times as a point of emphasis from UEFA. Let's face it the keeper gets the benefit by not getting a red there. Shouldn't also get away with no foul.
The GK union doesn't like that call . . . it is unusual to see that called on GK who gets a hand on the ball, but I don't disagree with the call. But I wasn't a fan of the caution process--seemed very confusing and chaotic, with no reason to rush the caution.
I'm a member of both the GK and ref unions. I'm very conflicted. And agreed, the rush to get the card seemed a bit silly. This wasn't one of those situations when the pushing and shoving was going to break out unless the card came out quickly.
Also hold the flags with keeper gloves Lots to think about. I think the hurry on the card was part managing POR reaction and part incidental to getting medical out there.
The card doesn't have to be shown before medical gets out there, and all he needs to do to help POR relax is get it out of his pocket. IMHO, he looked frantic and out of control the way he handled it.
Was on the other game and just came over to watch this. First, yes, I've been saying this for about 2 years now and have posted a few examples over that time of this exact decision being given. UEFA has been, rightly, trying to shift things on this. My only question was whether or not they were goign to backdown at a major tournament. They aren't. Good. It's a foul. It's a penalty. That said, it's not a red card. We debated this on the Referee forum the last time it came up, I think. The goalkeeper is not using excessive force. He's using the force necessary to punch the ball away. He just doesn't get it. The goalkeeper is different from other players in situatiosn like this. If another player punched someone in the head, yeah, it's a red card. Because any punch is "excessive." But this is a mistake. It's a yellow card because we treat such strikes as reckless. This was the right decision. And Mateu Lahoz is himself. Things would be boring without some characters like him. I am absolutely totally fine with the way he handled it, though the scrambling to do a full circle around the incident was funny. He's expressive and demonstrative. And it works for him. Neuer's play was 7 years ago. I took a lot of flak, but I think it was correctly adjudged at the time (though a DFK coming out might have been too much). But times have changed. I'm not so sure how it would be called anymore. Either way, we can't be leaning on something from 7 years ago to justify mistakes now. Finally, was that the same Taylor Twellman who rails about head injuries in every other breath seemingly trying to defend Lloris because he might have been playing the ball? First of all, OF COURSE he was trying to play the ball--the assertion that the penalty was because he wasn't is asinine. Second, why should that matter to Twellman of all people, given his advocacy around head injuries. My mind is blown by what I just heard.
I don't like that PK call. If the ball was better to Mbappe, then yeah. But Mbappe was never getting to that ball. I do love the first PK call. Mateu never does fail to disappoint though.
Disagree. I thought that was a training video play for obstruction with contact. The defender deliberately blocked the attacker's path.
100% this. He uses any opportunity to rail against FIFA, UEFA, the laws of the game, team medical staffs, etc for not taking head injuries seriously. It's exhausting. We get it. Head injuries ended your career. Don't need to bring it up every broadcast. But when a keeper wipes out an attacker with a bunch he looks for reasons to justify it not being a penalty. Just a joke.
Exactly what I was thinking. Someone like Twellman to argue a player getting punched in the head by a GK is okay because the ball slightly touched his hands after the opponent got their head on it was baffling.
I think this is where I am. I don't love it. But I don't hate it either. It's a foul. It's deliberate. But it's in that soft category. Let's be realitsic here. Mateu Lahoz knew he had already given an unconventional penalty on one end that pretty much came from nothing. At the other end, we have a deliberate foul that is usually considered a soft penalty. Why wouldn't he give it? I know some people think of that as a makeup call, but it's pretty easy for balancing purposes. The first one he felt obligated to give on an incident with no intent; the second one he could justifiably give and it came from an incident that had intent. Two pens, 1-1. There's some game management involved there.