Match #43 Sweden : Ukraine Tuesday, 29 June 2021 20:00 local time (15:00 EDT) Glasgow Referee: Daniele Orsato (ITA) AR1: Alessandro Giallatini (ITA) AR2: Fabiano Preti (ITA) Fourth Official: Davide Massa (ITA) Video Assistant Referee: Massimiliano Irrati (ITA) AVAR 1: Marco Di Bello (ITA) AVAR 2: Filippo Meli (ITA) AVAR 3: Paolo Valeri (ITA)
Interesting potential penalty shout in 41'. Attacker runs into defender who impedes the ball. I don't want this to be a penalty. But I think elsewhere on the field, this is called a foul...
No stoppage. Is that allowed? No reason for any from my perspective. There's a bad joke in here somewhere about an Italian ref ending the half promptly....
As a SWE fan (my daughter lives in Stockholm), I'm ok with this. I don't want to encourage attackers to just kick the ball past defenders and then run into them.
Is it even an actual foul though? The attacker doesn't have a greater right to the space than the defender. The defender didn't move into the path of the attacker. Seemed to me the attacker knew he had no good options and plowed the defender in the hopes of a call. Good call for me.
To the last point... #22 Ukraine deliberately stops his movement and reaches his right leg backward. I can understand arguments for "no penalty," but I think it's more than a stretch to say the Swede just ran into him. If not for a concious decision the Ukranian made, the attacker would have been running into space. As to the first point, unless we are seeing a separate set of facts, why do you not want it to be a penalty? We punish defenders when they lazily dangle a leg to obstruct or take away space. Here, the dangled leg comes with the entire body. I don't know, it actually seems like a pretty clear penalty to me. The lack of VAR intervention and the ability for people to reason that it shouldn't be a penalty feels like it only stems from it being mostly an upper body foul as opposed to mostly a leg foul. If nothing else changes and those facts are inverted, it's one of the clearest penalties you'd ever see.
Hmm. Maybe I'm going to be in the minority here. But I just don't see that. At minimum, the leg action is clear. But I'd also strongly argue that the defender deliberately halts his movement to take away the path of the attacker.
Hmm. I haven't gone back to re-look at it, but my recollection was that he had simply squared up naturally to defend and the attacker pushed the ball away and plowed him.
In total trivial matters, Orsato is the first ref I've noticed not using a Valkeen. . . . and is anyone else geeky enough to auto-correct in their head every time the TV says "penalty kicks" if tied after extra time? . . .
Pretty easy there. I like that he just took the one look instead of dithering at the screen. (Though I do wish he got that live.)
Yep. All the Clattenburg considerations are met. Brutal? Yes. Excessive? Yes. Force? Yes. Endangers safety? Yes.
He did not swing his arm back in a reckless fashion. Can't expect a player to run with hands tied behind his back.
Ridiculous Plays ball. Player runs into foot. There was no “challenge”. It was a fair and correct manner. The opponent endangered himself by arriving late
Is it unanimous? Nobody making the "Ukranian runs into raised Swedish leg" defense? Hope he's OK. Good thing Ukraine still has subs.
Even Reddit largely agrees that this is a red card. https://www.reddit.com/r/soccer/comments/oahc5a/marcus_danielson_red_card_against_ukraine_98/
Ukraine player was already committed to the play. No way he could avoid that. Red was justified as no player should be allowed to go into a ball like that.