So, other than the corner kick, is this enough so far to give Kuipers the final? Not tested, really. Eight fouls total. No issues that I've seen. Honestly, fitness might be the biggest issue but he makes up for it with positioning. I guess the two big questions, if this holds, is how much the first goal matters and if he can truly sort of "coast" into the final without any real test (which, after all, might have been partially by design).
Again, an OOB check when a goal is scored is a black and white call. I don't suggest questioning foul calls, unless it's a red card check, which is in place now anyways.
i don’t see any chance that a change would be going back to look at a prior restart after a goal—that would be a fundamental law change to mess with a restart that had already occurred. I just don’t see happening. But I have long thought that the GK/CK decision was likely to be the next meaningful addition. It’s a big decision, it’s easy to check, and the restart is rarely taken quickly. The majority of the calls are so obvious the check will cause no delays, and even the harder ones won’t cause much. Probably one or two per game that are close enough that the check wouldn’t be complete before the natural timing of the restart. I’m not advocating for it, but I think it is inevitable that it will be an add at some point.
Right, but once you allow any restart to be checked because it has led to a goal, you then have opened up the door to attacking free kicks. You may not personally advocate that, but it's a natural extension. The fundamental impetus here would be that a referee decision led to a wrong restart that then led to goal. If that holds for corner kicks, it absolutely must hold for attacking free kicks and even throw-ins. The nuance that the free kicks are subjective but the others are not really won't matter for most people particularly when penalty kicks can be overturned or awarded via VAR. And if you review corner kicks that result in goals, it will not be long until you have to review the lack of a corner kick award. Again, I point back to WC10. The Dutch conceded a goal to lose the World Cup after not receiving a corner kick at the other end. If popular demand in big moments is going to cause a shift like reviewing corner kicks that lead to goals, it will ultimately cause an extension to look at any corner kick/goal kick decision. Team is down 1-0 in stoppage time and a wrong goal kick is awarded to their opponents? Yeah, they are going to ask why the obvious corner kick can't be awarded given VAR would be checking any corner kick decision that resulted in a goal. And the answer for "why not?" is hard to articulate.
Important point. This is how it will likely be done if it comes to it. The check wouldn't be contingent on a goal being scored, it would just occur on every corner kick/goal kick decision. That's better in some ways, because it doesn't open up the throw-ins and attacking free kicks. But it's worse in others because it means every single goal line decision has gone to VAR.
I agree with many points against it, and the hurdles are big for sure. At some point they will look at it.
Well, that's a good dissent card. The foul is a bit more questionable. I'm actually fine with it not being given. The Czech attacker is 1 v 3 and knows it. There's an arm on his arm, but is he really held back to the point he's restrained in any way? Doubt it. It's a call that can go either way. Good for Kuipers for addressing the dissent, though he sort of had no choice.
So looks like I've missed most of a match with not much (!) outside of a questionable CK. ...is the legality of blooded PK takers now expanded to open play? There is a sodden bandage and frank blood on the guy's neck
it seems like they've been good about dealing with dissent in this tournament generally. The first half the referee had basically nothing to do. The Czechs seemed to be shying away from all contact. But the second half has had a bit more happening.
Yeah, I could go either way on it. Calling the foul probably was the path of least resistance, but once he didn't, the dissent had to be addressed. I've noticed a couple times in the wide shots from the goal line that Kuipers seems to be wincing in big sprints. Maybe just a normal facial reaction from digging deep late, but he has had fitness issues.
Yeah. I was wondering about his proximity to play having played a role. Also, the way the Czech player’s left leg moves after the contact may have made Kuipers think then Czech player tripped himself. (I made a gif of the play but I can’t figure out how to post it.)
So how much it will it matter for Kuipers that, basically, the margin of victory came down to a goal that came off a corner kick that wasn't a corner kick?
Well, who do we think has had the best ARs? This wasn’t Kuipers’ call after all. So I’d look at it from the standpoint if there’s any sort of tiebreaker, ARs might matter so who had the. Eat team performance? With all the VAR offside checks it’s sort of hard to say. Cakir or Rapallini? At this point, Kuipers didn’t do anything wrong. If he’s healthy, he has the final. I’d bank on it. If you don’t see Cakir’s name for a semi, then I’d change my tune. Or if England is eliminated, of course, but even then I think a healthy Kuipers is the obvious choice. Actually if England somehow folds, I think it’s Taylor-Cakir semis with Taylor getting the bigger one. If they win, as expected, I just don’t know who gets Italy-Spain. Is it better to put Cakir there or on the England match? There are arguments against each choice.
So... this is an angle from behind the goal on that CK that led to the goal... do we still need to think we need VAR on corners? Quick one to end the corner controversy, maybe. This angle shows the ball went out off the Czech player’s hand. #DEN #CZEDEN #CZE #Euro2020 pic.twitter.com/DLulxstTrl— Dan Salisbury-Jones (@dsj_itv) July 3, 2021