June 14, 2014

Nishimura's Diagonal Channel Positioning impeded a profound Penalty Decision

Much was said about Yuichi Nishimura's penalty kick decision in last Thursday's opener game between Brazil and Croatia, many voices criticized, but partly also defended the referee for his game-changing decision. There has been little analysis that touched on the causes for this decision instead of only considering the symptoms. 
And specially the analysis of Nishimura's positioning reveals that he was actually incapable of making an adequate judgment on whether Fred was fouled or not. Check the following video.



FIFA has instructed their referees to be very flexible with moving diagonally on the field of play. As soon as play is moving towards the right half of the penalty areas, they were advised to use the so-called "diagonal channel", i.e. being positioned close to the penalty area's line on the right side, close to the assistant referee. This position reminds me on the movement UEFA's referees had to adapt during Champions and Europa League matches due to the Additional Assistant Referees' presence left from the goal (in 2011, this was changed to the right side of the goal, since referees complaint quite a lot about being forced to change the automatized diagonal movement in a few matches per season). 
The advantage is clear: referees are much closer to challenges that occur in this side of the penalty area and are thus able to more profoundly deem them either as fouls or as fair tackles. The disadvantage was visible in this penalty decision taken by Nishimura. The alleged holding offense by Lovren, who indeed slightly touched Fred, who then clearly slipped and simulated a foul, could have been optimally solved if the referee had a sidewise insight into this duel. If he had been positioned as required by the normal diagonal movement, he would have had a better, bigger angle of vision (maybe even 90°) instead of maximum 10° or 20° being positioned in the "diagonal channel", having a view "from the front" onto a situation which required a lateral perception. Nishimura must have seen the contact at the shoulder, but as we know a contact is not enough for a foul. The assessment whether there was a clear holding offense which caused Fred's descend demanded a sideways insight, which Nishimura unfortunately did not have. 

In-game position in the diagonal channel: NO SIDEWISE VIEW

Fictive position in the diagonal: SIDEWISE VIEW, GOOD LOOK ON THE "FOUL"

Toshiyuki Nagi, the second assistant referee, had this angle. He could have seen it much better and advised Nishimura to wave play-on or even caution Fred. Nagi even stood still, indicating that he saw something, but that he has doubts - for a moment, Nishimura looked out to him. 
But, as said, teamwork would not have been necessary if the referee had been positioned better, i.e. differently to what FIFA instructs and wants to see.

Massimo Busacca has publicly defended Yuichi Nishimura for his call. A coach has to do that, maybe, but reading his statements, you have to hope that behind closed doors clear mistakes seen by a billion of spectators in the world are analyzed honestly and following a root-oriented analysis.

What are your thoughts about the reasons for this decision?

Please find our complete Referee Observer's Report here.

87 Comments:

  1. Great start by Team Brych - Offensive Foul instead of penalty, offside goal, Penalty... I hope it continues like that.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I agree. Impressive start in a quite challenging match until now.

      Delete
  2. Looks like a clear foul from where he stands and the way the player positions his hand on the deceiving attacker's shoulder. You can see what Nishimura was thinking from the way he was positioning himself to get away from the dissent.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Doctor is doing well so far. But he really needs to cut those two-footed challenges from Costa Ricans.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Anonymous14/6/14 22:20

    I wholly disagree. Nishimura was in a good position in my view, from the 2nd picture you show he cannot see the contact (albeit minimum) on Freds left shoulder. Yes I agree that this was probably not a penalty, but the position you say is good viewing angle, is not a good view for this decision, Nishimura did well to come off of his diagonal and from his position he sells the decision brilliantly, albeit incorrect. If there was no TV replays then I believe that several referees would back the decision on the basis of his positioning and the way he sold the decision.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Anonymous14/6/14 22:23

    Just to add, I am not saying you are wrong, it is just how I see it, i think your analysis is excellent and world cup coverage is brilliant!! Well done :)

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Np. My point is not focused on the contact's detection (not only), but on the descend of Fred (dive, reason for falling, this cannot be judged in the diagonal channel. Nonetheless thanks for feedback.

      Delete
    2. Anonymous14/6/14 23:30

      That makes sense, I can see your point clearly now. I think an incident like that is where an AAR would pick it up (as you mention). It is a hard decision from any angle I think. Possibly this incident demonstrates a use for both GLT and the use of AARs.
      No worries Niclas, I think you do a fantastic job on this website! Really enjoy reading it. Keep it up sir!

      Delete
  6. It seems Duarte was in an offside position before scoring. Difficult decision though...

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yes, offside goal, seemed to be a positioning error of Lupp.

      Delete
  7. Martin Caceres lucky to escape from a straight red card, it was orange but more red than yellow if you ask me. .

    ReplyDelete
  8. Five minutes of added time in CRC/URU game. Where did that come from?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. It's asking for trouble.

      Delete
    2. 3 goal celebrations that lasted between 3 and 4 minutes plus a light injury (cramp). Absolutely justified.

      Delete
    3. ...but the added time was not extended as should have been.

      Delete
    4. No need to look for more trouble. 5 mins, end the game. Nothing good happens for officials in the extra time..

      Delete
    5. That's the formal problem! Normally I would again say "please enlarge it to 90+6" - maybe he weighed up the benefit of this in a 3-1 game and the risk of continuous serious foul plays by frustrated Uruguayans.

      Delete
    6. It's sure some instructions were given to referees to reach uniformity in adding time. In every match we saw many added minutes, also to first halves. It's impossible to see Brych giving 5 minutes in such scenario :D

      However, it's a big problem for refs to add extra minutes to that additional time if there are further breaks... It's really annoying to observe it in every competitions :)

      Delete
  9. First red card of the tournament, excellent decision.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Brych's performance:
    + offensive foul
    + offside goal
    + penalty call
    + correct RC
    + physis
    + player management
    + full control
    - 2nd goal maybe offside
    - maybe also RC in 81'
    - maybe missing YCs earlier in the game
    This reduce the very good performance by Brych's team in a challenging and combative match. A real pity! But they will get a second appointment.

    ReplyDelete
  11. Agree mostly, expect that I find the penalty kick soft in comparison to other scenes. Caceres was close to a RC, the sending off of Maxi Pereira justified. Maybe 1-2 YCs could have been issued (Tejeda, Gamboa).

    ReplyDelete
  12. Anonymous14/6/14 23:15

    I'm getting the impression that WC referees consistently delay the first yellow card until it's absolute neccesary and in "orange" situations they tend to choose yellow. Might be the pressure but you could pick a lot of situation from the first halves that were unquestionably reckless but the offenders got away with a verbal warning. On the other hand, despite all the errors we have seen refs seem to have great control throughout the game.

    ReplyDelete
  13. To summarize it, I am very satisfied with Brych's overall performances, it was widely on 8.5-8.6 level if we sum up everything. The problem is Caceres' YC (it is a perfect "by book example" for a RC, in the spirit of the game and in "real refereeing" a YC is probably ok), the penalty area decisions are ok for me as well, the RC, too. He should have chosen a better moment for the 1st YC - as Turan mentioned, those double leg fouls by CRC were worth of a YC by time.
    Lupp's mistake spoils a very good performance. My intuitive marks are 8.6 / 8.5 / 7.9 (8.6) - if you rule Caceres' YC as correct, that must be said.

    ReplyDelete
  14. Anonymous14/6/14 23:41

    The slow-motion made it a red Card for caceres, but I can understand YC in the "normal" view of Brych...
    Good Approach by him, but it is unlucky that no player of Uruguay got a YC because they had several tackles in halftime one. I can follow Brych´s approach in these situaions - nevertheless the card statistics are unlucky in the point of view of a ref...
    I didn´t see a good slow-motion for the maybe offside, but my feeling is that the feet of the forward were onside, the body offside. Mistake, but acceptable one of Lupp (remember: if there are doubts, decide in favor of the forward)

    best regards
    phil

    ReplyDelete
  15. Good performance until now by Kuipers in a not really demanding first half.

    ReplyDelete
  16. Agree, maybe a YC for Verratti?

    ReplyDelete
  17. Lannoy's opinion on Nishimura and Fred: http://www.lemonde.fr/coupe-du-monde/article/2014/06/13/stephane-lannoy-c-est-fred-qui-a-abuse-l-arbitre_4437757_1616627.html

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Correct me, but this is already a sign that Lannoy has maybe already finished his (international) career. A FIFA referee talking publicly about another FIFA referee is actually a no-go.

      Delete
    2. I was thinking the same....

      Delete
    3. Anonymous15/6/14 03:17

      That reminds me of one thing four years ago, when German at-the-time FIFA ref Knut Kircher harshly critized Undiano after his GER vs. SRB performance (for those who can read German: http://www.zeit.de/sport-newsticker/2010/6/18/251234xml ). Seems like he was a little bit bitter at that time after receiving the special UEFA treatment for referees without a perspective (in his case demotion from Premier to Cat. 2, now Cat. 1, later on, he was further demoted and quit international refereeing altogether). I just can't understand why active elite referees can't just wait the year or two until retirement to start playing the armchair referee.

      Delete
  18. Not a demanding match..... despite or because of Kuipers.... I think the latter...

    Even after the wrong penalty call an excellent performance by Rizzoli !! SUBLIME matchmanagement!

    Regards RC

    ReplyDelete
  19. Anonymous15/6/14 01:23

    Not a good job from the German team to tell the truth....some missed YCs in the beginning, clear RC for Caceres overlooked, an offside goal, alongside Brych's typically indolent and inelegant style of refereeing. Not to mention his pointless outbursts towards the players, who sometimes can hardly believe the referee is behaving that way. I'd say he is one of the least appreciated referees among the players.

    As to Geiger, he did very well. There is every likelihood that he'll move through to the knockout stage.

    Kuipers living up to expectations thus far.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Anonymous15/6/14 01:29

      Maybe you start to compare difficulty of the matches - Geiger easy, Brych difficult - and become more balanced in your judgement of the performance. Your comment does not imply much fairness. And that is also a 'truth' my friend.
      From my point of view Rizzoli and Brych were with distance the best so far, Geiger good in a never challenging match and Kuipers is good as usual, up to now.

      -ref7-

      Delete
    2. Anonymous15/6/14 01:33

      Can't you comment on facts and turn aside your (doubtful) definition of fairness and level of difficulty of a match? Many thanks!

      Delete
    3. Anonymous15/6/14 01:37

      Well, everyone knows that Rizzoli is much better than Brych and perhaps the best referee in the world, together with Kuipers. However, the Italian performed very badly yesterday. We all have bad days, guys.

      Delete
    4. Anonymous15/6/14 01:37

      My friend, what you presented are no facts - except the offside goal we all saw. They are mostly your interpretations. They are valid, like others are valid, and like we had the luck to see them with slowmotions. Referee did not have the chance.

      FAIRNESS means:
      You didn't even mention 1 of the positive points.
      CONTROL. PENALTY. OFFSIDE GOAL CORRECTLY DISALLOWED. RED CARD. RESPECTED AUTHORITY.

      DIFFICULTY means:
      Mark Geiger had a good performance with a few problems in foul detection. In an easy match. All players were fair and not emotive. Not comparable to Brych, Nishimura, Rizzoli.

      -ref7-

      Delete
    5. Anonymous15/6/14 01:43

      Now I dare to place a comment. It is a bit embarrassing that the very good job of the creators of the site and many other users, some anonymous users seem to be really incompetent about refereeing and manage to shadow this expertise we have here so much. Really a pity.
      Rizzoli and Brych did very well but there performances were spoiled by 3 single crucial mistakes. That's all. Mistakes can happen, they are humans.

      Delete
    6. Anonymous15/6/14 01:55

      "My friend", control and respected authority are not facts! It's your opinion. Well, "my friend", there are people here bringing up the same mistakes in terms of missed cards. It's not my assessment in case you haven't realized it.

      Concerning level of difficulty, "my friend", I don't think Uruguay-Costa Rica was a too difficult match at all. It was entertaining but not that challenging. A hig-level referee would have passed the test in a better fashion.

      And "my friend", do not mistake good performances for easy matches. Sometimes people tend to do it, Don't forget good referees are able to make some matches easier to handle.

      Delete
    7. Anonymous15/6/14 01:58

      How can 3 crucial mistakes lead someone to say the referee did "very well"? OMG!!! Do weigh your words, please!

      Delete
    8. Can't you just stop to behave like children... enjoy this World Cup and don't behave like people younger than me, and I am not even that old...THANKS.

      Keep one thing in mind. The comment function is a feature of blogspot. It can be disabled and I am considering to do so if this trend of trolls continues here.

      Delete
    9. Anonymous15/6/14 02:11

      Man, these are just opinions. Can't we express them? I see nothing wrong in this. You have to learn to cope with different views. Not being able to do so is childish :)

      Delete
    10. It is about the tone, not the contents, at least I hope you do not exchange opinions that way in real life.

      Delete
  20. I think that referees have specific instructions to give cards only when strictly needed, this quite lenient style has been used until now by almost all the referees. A few minutes ago Kuipers might have given a clear YC...

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Anonymous15/6/14 01:58

      I don't understand this tactic: hey, I'm so experienced, I'm so good, I don't need cards to punish bad tackles. it's against common sense, it's strange philosophy. such were Roldan, Rizzoli, Brych and now Kuipers. sad

      Delete
  21. 5 minutes of added time it's really too much, nothing extra ordinary happened in second half... anyway very good performance by Kuipers it is in my opinion in 8.5 area, mandatory YC in the last minutes, correctly given.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. agree with you. Good performance by Kuipers and team in a not really difficult match. Next game for them!

      Delete
  22. Kuipers was excellent... again. No complaints really, Italy ran out deserved winners.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Anonymous15/6/14 02:07

      Good job from Kuipers, indeed. In case the Netherlands do not get through to the finals, he is perhaps the odds-on favorite to be at Maracanã on Sunday, July 13th.

      Delete
  23. Kuipers excellent, not a very difficult match. Correct no penalty for Gerrard, good offside decisions. Maybe a YC for De Rossi or Chiellini, but completely understandable that he did not issue them.

    ReplyDelete
  24. So far, Geiger and Kuipers delivered the best performances (only two without crucial mistakes in my opinion). We must agree that high level of play (and also high level of difficulty for referees!) is fantastic at this tournament! (Un-)fortunately, normally referees who made such mistakes like Rizzoli's Roldan's and Nishimura's team are forced to leave tournament. This time we have a big amount of huge controversies/mistakes, so it probably won't be the case. Refs are normal people, so to err is normal thing. Overall performances by Rizzoli and Brych were really good, but were crowned by big controversies/mistakes, so we shouldn't say neither about excellent nor very poor performances. They faced very difficult matches and surely did what they could to give us the best possible performances.

    My ranking for now:
    Geiger, Kuipers
    ----
    Brych, Doue, Nishimura, Rizzoli
    Roldan

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Anonymous15/6/14 02:30

      Hubert, I think it's unfair to put Roldán in the bottom of the list as he himself did not commit crucial mistakes. Assistant referee 1 is to blame! Obviously it functions as a team but when it comes to assessing specifically the referee, I'm sure Busacca is gonna be wise enough to separate the wheat from the chaff.

      Delete
    2. His performance is very difficult to judge. Let's start from his overall performance, which was in my opinion the weakest one, with definitely too much allowance of reckless play. It could've easily ended in total war, but there were revanges... It's the first point.

      The second is the responsibility of obvious crucial mistake at second disallowed MEX goal. Of course, raising a flag is scandalous, there wasn't even offside position. 7.9 for Clavijo without a doubt. But wasn't Roldan able to detect who touched the ball? Isn't it his fault? If yes, isn't it crucial mistake? If he detect who touch the ball, he would correct his assistant and let the play continue. It didn't happen, so he IS also responsible for this mistake. Is this enough to low his mark for 7.8 (taking into account his poor match-management)? We are not professional observers. From what I know, it's 7.9/7.8 for main and assistant referee.

      Third thing. What about the handball? The hand surely wasn't in natural position. 4MEX was expecting that shot and didn't even try to position his hand in other way. Typically careless behaviour. You can't justify such handball by small distance. It was expected ball and unnatural position of hand. Is this enough for crucial mistake. It depends from observer. I see it a crucial mistake, someone could see it other way around.

      One is sure, his man- and match-management was the worst presented by officials at this WC. Do you agree?

      Possible marks:
      8.0-8.1 if you decide to back the referee up
      7.8 if you call one of those situations a crucial mistake
      7.0-7.1 if you call both of those situations crucial mistakes.

      I went for 7.0, but would also like to read some argument-based comments about RESPONSIBILITY at disallowed goal and HANDBALL. I couldn't find it here and it could be fine discussion.

      Delete
    3. The second disallowed goal is the responsibility of him and his assistant IMHO. At least bad communication has to be criticised here.

      For the handball: Yes and no. Yes, no natural position, but also a very close distance and not a try to enlarge his body. I believe that the Mexicans would have gone wild if he whistles this penalty.

      I would go for 7.7.

      Delete
    4. The problem is the body surface was enlarged, we have even hand movement toward the ball and totally expected ball (it was sure that CMR player will shot). For me it's no room for other interpretation, but of course, I fully accept other views.

      Delete
    5. Anonymous15/6/14 03:01

      Nishimura was the worst. Rizzoli, Brych and Roldán not good at all either.

      Delete
    6. Hubert, concerning the handball penalty claim, I agree that it was an enlarged body surface. But in this case the distance between the ball being shot and the hand touching it was way too close to call it deliberate. We are talking about 1-2 meters and a high pace shot. Furthermore I think it was ball -> hand and not hand deliberately going to -> ball. That's why weighing up the multiple criteria I come to the conclusion NO handball at all, and since there are defending arguments, Roldán is to be backed at least in the referee observer's report.

      Delete
  25. The best compliment you can get from a losing nation:

    BBC: 'Kuipers got everything right tonight. We have not seen alot of that in this tournament so far. Nice to see a quality ref'

    very sportive....

    regards RC

    ReplyDelete
  26. Anonymous15/6/14 02:41

    My ranking as yet:

    Geiger, Doué, Kuipers

    Roldán, Rizzoli, Brych

    Nishimura

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. My ranking (team performance):
      Geiger, Kuipers
      Brych
      Doué
      Nishimura, Rizzoli
      Roldán

      Delete
    2. IMO Kuipers is no1 until now. Doue in no2 and Brych in no3.

      Delete
  27. Osses without spray. Strange!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. And also with a strange habit of whistling 4-5 times every time he wants to stop play...

      Delete
  28. Apart from an offside decision against Bony of which I haven't seen a replay, good performance by Osses in an easy match so far.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. For me, he's in top-three performers for now. You can expect a different style from CONMEBOL refs, it's unavoidable. But he was nearly faultless in first half, however in the less demanding match at this tournament so far.

      Delete
  29. Good match by Osses, I haven't seen three replays of penalty area decisions (Y.Toure, Okazaki) but I believe that these were all good decisions. His excessive use of the whistle is a point of improvement, but compared to other issues we have seen so far not a big thing. Good card management

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Anonymous15/6/14 04:57

      but again additional time were not sufficiently prolonged...

      Delete
    2. Very annoying use of whistle. It's the first time I hate a referee using his whistle.
      Plus, get that whistle out of your mouth when you're showing a yellow card.
      I didn't see any personality.
      He was in the way of play many many times, which is unacceptable in this level. Terrible time management and so on.
      Plus, why did he start with a free kick on the 92+ mark when he stopped the throw in for an injured Ivorian player?

      Delete
  30. Osses with the best performance so far, Kuipers in an easy match with 2 clearly missed YCs, Brych with a good performance cause his only 2 clear mistakes in my view were 1 missed YC and the second goal für CORI, which was 2-5 cm offside but in the situation following the idea of giving advantage to the attacking team when you?re in doubt, you can even say the offside was " too close to call " - the RC was perfect, the penalty courageous and correct, all in all a really good performance!
    Geiger did a good job as well, so we can say that the 3rd day was much better than the two before.
    But does anyone know why so many referees waited so long with their first YCs? Did they watch a film of Undiano Mallenco in the training camp and have nightmares afterwards?

    ReplyDelete
  31. Anonymous15/6/14 06:15

    There are four European referees still waiting for their first match appointment, they are Cakir, Proenca, Webb and Carballo. If we assume from now on, European referees will be appointed to all the matches in the group stage which they are eligible according to confederation neutrality, then there will be three European referees with only one match in the group stage. I also assume a few non- European referees will not get second match due to poor showing in their respective first game. Then quite few referees will have to be appointed for three games in the group stage. I am really not sure if FIFA have enough non-European referees to cover all games in final round of group stage.

    ReplyDelete
  32. Anonymous15/6/14 06:25

    My prediction for next appointments
    Belgium vs Algeria: O'Leary (NZL)
    Brazil vs Mexico: Webb (ENG)
    Russia vs Korea Rep: Pitana (ARG)

    ReplyDelete
  33. Anonymous15/6/14 06:29

    Nishimura will be appointed again I think, but it will be in a not too meaningful third round match. I am not too sure if Roldan will get another match in this world cup. But Roldan is still very young, he is age eligible to return for the next two world cup.

    ReplyDelete
  34. Very annoying use of whistle. It's the first time I hate a referee using his whistle.
    Plus, get that whistle out of your mouth when you're showing a yellow card.
    I didn't see any personality.
    He was in the way of play many many times, which is unacceptable in this level. Terrible time management and so on.
    Plus, why did he start with a free kick on the 92+ mark when he stopped the throw in for an injured Ivorian player?

    ReplyDelete
  35. Btw, please check minutes 43-44 in Doue's match.
    http://livefootballvideo.com/fullmatch/world/world-cup/chile-vs-australia-2
    Cahill should have gone, for me it is a clear violent conduct. AR2 should have informed the referee properly. Crucial mistake, Doue was not responsible for it, for my taste.

    ReplyDelete
  36. Anonymous15/6/14 11:22

    As I know FIFA Brych and Rizzoli will both get high-profile matches, maybe rather Brych than Rizzoli (Casillas foul too obvious). The offside goal of Stefan Lupp was about centimetres; benefit of the doubt has to go to striker and assistant. Very thin decision. The rest of both performances was just excellent and I'm surprised the majority on this blog has not detected that. Expect Dr. in big matches in the further competition. Also liked Geiger much!

    ReplyDelete
  37. I am the observer from the Italian Facebook referee blog "Roba da Arbitri". So far we have ranked the referees this way, do you agree?

    Brych 8.6
    Osses 8.5
    Kuipers 8.4
    Doue 8.4
    Geiger 8.3
    Rizzoli 8.2
    Nishimura 7.9
    Roldan 7.4

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Anonymous15/6/14 11:33

      Rizzoli 7.9 and Kuipers 8.5 for me, I am o.k. on the rest...

      Delete
    2. The only reason why I don't give 7.9 to Rizzoli is because while the penalty is certainly a crucial mistake it was very difficult to see ... so I don't feel like giving him -0.5 for that. As for Kuipers: I give 8.4 because there is no crucial decision taken right, quite an uneventful match.

      Delete
    3. I am rewatching Rizzoli's performance at the moment. Nobody seemed to mention so far that the free-kick leading to the 1-3 was actually a wrong decision. The handball by Pique existed, but was undeliberate.
      Furthermore I have problems with accepting the missed violent conduct by Diego Costa, the forehead moved forwards and clearly touched the defender. And Daniele, don't you think it was a clear foul during the 1-3 on Casillas?

      Delete
    4. Yes Niclas you are right the 1-3 goal was not valid, quite a clear error. The reason why I am not counting them as -0.5 though is because in the Serie A Rizzoli is used to having AARs. I know it's not that much of a valid excuse but I see why he's not that used to evaluating those situations. I agree however that his performance wasn't that good. Nishimura did better (apart from the penalty), but his error was much easier to see to the "public".

      Delete
    5. I specially agree on the last point you made. I also thought about the explanation about AARs in UCL and Serie A. But, as you said, this cannot be an excuse, specially considering that even with AAR presence it would be Rizzoli as the referee who has the last word.

      Delete
  38. I think, yesterday we saw two very good performances by Brych and Kuipers and too good performances by Geiger and Osses.
    Personally, I was happy with his choice of cards. Yes, it was very lenient, but consistent and it worked well as the game did not become unfair (except Pereira's kick). The offside goal was tight enough to accept it. This match was probably the most challenging so far, at least the first sending-off and the first correct penalty.
    Geiger and Osses both without real problems in easy matches.
    Therefore my ranking is:
    Brych
    Kuipers
    Geiger, Osses
    Doue
    Nishimura, Rizzoli
    Roldan

    Geiger and Osses should get a more challenging second match, NED-CHI and USA-GER come to my mind.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I'm talking about Brych in the 2nd paragraph ;)

      Delete
    2. I agree with your words Philipp, but think that Lupp's mistake was indeed resulting from a tight offside position, difficult to see, but nonetheless it stays a mistake. He could have seen it, he should have seen it if he had been positioned accordingly. From colleagues I got to hear that in some countries the replay showing the offside line was not shown at all..so maybe most of the people did not even notice the (potential) offside position.

      Delete
  39. Anonymous15/6/14 12:08

    Rodriguez in Belgium vs Algeria, according FEMEXFUT

    ReplyDelete
  40. Anonymous15/6/14 20:41

    My ranking up to this point:

    - Irmatov, Geiger, Kuipers, Doué, Osses

    - Rizzoli, Brych

    - Roldán, Nishimira

    Regards

    AP

    ReplyDelete

Copyright © . The 3rd Team
Theme Template by BTDesigner · Powered by Blogger