58 GERUSA Dallas
HIGHLIGHTS
Very challenging and pretty breathless game for Hugh Dallas. Referee from Scotland showed excellent game-manager skills and impressively kept everything in check (with the help of his AR, Philip Sharp) thanks to well-placed sanctions, effective verbal warnings and his manner which aroused both trust and fellowship from the players. Really well done, Mr Dallas. His performance is remembered for one incident only though - Frings, goaline, handling, no penalty. I, and FIFA, think he was right back then.
His performance was of an 8,7 level - faultless handling of this very dynamic game, besides a missed reckless elbow at 27' (- 0,1), if you support him in all of the Key Match Incidents, which are analysed below:
2002 - A rare situation where the easier decision is to award a penalty and send off the offender; Dallas had the courage to play on. I think he was right - the handling was not clearly deliberate. FIFA supported his call - correctly so, in my view.
2020 - Nowadays, it looks like too much of a penalty (and too many people would expect it) not to be given. Though the logic is the wrong way around there...
Me - My own theoretical solution would actually be a penalty. Visible most clearly on the live sequence but only in frame-by-frame, Frings ever-so-slightly moves his arm towards the ball. I would call his movement subconsciously deliberate (there was simply not enough time to think "I'm going to handle this"). My solution is quite abstract and not really relevant for tickbox criteria etc.
Very challenging and pretty breathless game for Hugh Dallas. Referee from Scotland showed excellent game-manager skills and impressively kept everything in check (with the help of his AR, Philip Sharp) thanks to well-placed sanctions, effective verbal warnings and his manner which aroused both trust and fellowship from the players. Really well done, Mr Dallas. His performance is remembered for one incident only though - Frings, goaline, handling, no penalty. I, and FIFA, think he was right back then.
His performance was of an 8,7 level - faultless handling of this very dynamic game, besides a missed reckless elbow at 27' (- 0,1), if you support him in all of the Key Match Incidents, which are analysed below:
Key Match Incidents
49' - Penalty (for Handling) to the United States?
The controversial incident from the match. For many I am sure you don't have to watch the highlights to remember it even to the minute detail! My thoughts:2002 - A rare situation where the easier decision is to award a penalty and send off the offender; Dallas had the courage to play on. I think he was right - the handling was not clearly deliberate. FIFA supported his call - correctly so, in my view.
2020 - Nowadays, it looks like too much of a penalty (and too many people would expect it) not to be given. Though the logic is the wrong way around there...
Me - My own theoretical solution would actually be a penalty. Visible most clearly on the live sequence but only in frame-by-frame, Frings ever-so-slightly moves his arm towards the ball. I would call his movement subconsciously deliberate (there was simply not enough time to think "I'm going to handle this"). My solution is quite abstract and not really relevant for tickbox criteria etc.
66' - Confrontation; sanctions?
Certainly a situation that would have been used in seminars very often - Dallas and his AR Philip Sharp managed this in an absolutely textbook way in the pre-comms era, also noting Dallas wisely pulling United States no.10 out from the gaggle of players before he went over to his AR.
Is United States no.10 action an act of violent conduct, or is it too ambiguous to say so?
Potential penalties (for holding) at 24' and 33'
A penalty was quite possible in both scenes, but I have no problem with playing on either.
Assistant Referees
Very challenging start to the game for Ali Al-Traifi, who realised a very, very good performance besides an important mistake at 2'. Most impressive was the onside at 30'. Philip Sharp showed his worth as a team-member in the confrontation scene - but got the wrong player! He correctly raised the flag twice too.| Hugh Dallas - 8,6 Philip Sharp - 8,4 Ali Al-Traifi - 8,4 Mark Shield (SCO, ENG, KSA) | Germany 1-0 United States Quarterfinal |
 Kehl (66.) - SPA (Holding) Jeremies (68.) - Aggressive Behaviour | Lewis (40.) - Persistent Infringement Pope (41.) - SPA (Impeding) Reyna (68.) - Aggressive Behaviour Mastroeni (69.) - SPA (Holding) Berhalter (70.) - Tackle |
Would be interested in reader's thoughts on 49' handling scene!
ReplyDeleteIMHO, clear penalty.
ReplyDeleteBeen a long time since I've seen highlights here. As I've said separately to Mikael, I think the non-penalty was correctly decided at the time. That being said, I don't think Dallas or Sharp saw the ball-to-hand contact so if they did get it right, they just got lucky. Anyway, for other matters...
ReplyDeleteI don't think 2' is that close at all. I think it's pretty clearly onside even with the bad angle of the clip here. The cut of the grass, for me, pretty clearly shows two defenders closer to the goal than Donovan possibly could be at the moment the ball is kicked--even accounting for the lean of the upper body.
'24 might be more likely to be given as a penalty today, but simply never was back then. The attempted crackdown on such holding didn't really occur until 2008 or so.
26' is a missed yellow card on O'Brien for me.
30' is not really that impressive of a call. The cuts of grass are in 6-yard increments. Donovan is AT LEAST 3 yards onside there. That is an expected call for any FIFA assistant at any level and at any time.
33' wasn't a penalty then and I don't think it's a penalty now. More grappling from both sides than clear holding by one.
34' highlights some of the complaints that American fans had about Dallas at the time. He felt the need to admonish American players even when the Germans were the clear aggressors. In that situation, Ballack unfairly and unnecessarily charged Sanneh once the ball was out of play. Rather than dressing down Ballack, he admonished both. I hypothesized at the time that Dallas was simply more comfortable talking to the American players in English and/or was just used to seeing the German players more (in UEFA) so didn't feel the need to communicate with them as much. For me, it wasn't a big deal. But for American fans, it definitely got noticed. It started with Berlhalter's admonishment at 13'. He was also very aggressive in telling American players to leave after the goal line incident. And even the way he told Reyna to move to a remote area at 67' was paternalistic. For whatever reason, he just didn't interact the same way with Americans as he did with Germans.
I was never convinced there was enough force to merit VC on Reyna at 66', honestly. And the way Jeremies and company accepted the decision kind of tells (or told) me that the Germans know they were at fault for the instigation. I think it was handled very well overall--mostly by Sharp. Dallas was used to that sort of stuff from the Scottish league, though!
Thanks for your comment!
DeleteThat's a really interesting point about the way Dallas dealt with the United States players. It reminds me of the discussions about Çakır's performance in the PORISL match at EURO 2016.
To be fair, I thought the way he dealt with the players was excellent - thinking about it, I suppose the United States players were more nervous than their Germany counterparts, so more difficult to 'connect' with on an empathic level.
Bringing the protagonist out like he did for Reyna is 'textbook' and coherent with his anxious-not-to-lose-control but also hectic style.
I would have given the final to Dallas, not Collina, personally.
Dallas not Collina is a strong statement! Why not Collina in the final?
Delete@49': Unclear situation, both decisions can be supported - I would say, even with 2020 interpretations.
ReplyDeleteIn 2002, the main question was, whether the hand moved towards the ball or the ball went, where the hand already was. As you pointed out, there seems to be a small movement towards the ball, but it's doubtful, whether that's enough (and nearly impossible to detect for the referee).
In 2020, we should rather ask, whether the arm is in a natural position and whether it was an expected ball for the defender. Both questions are not so easy to answer. Yes, the arm hangs down naturally - but it also slightly increases the body surface, maybe with the intention to block the ball. And yes, Frings could expect the ball to come towards him, but as it bounces from the floor and a deflection by the GK was quite possible, he could not be sure about the exact path of the ball, I think.
I wouldn't have thought I'd end this tournament with discovering Dallas being a new favourite of mine. This was a very strong performance combining excellent soft skills and management qualities with disciplinary control. Excellent warnings given in 14' and 34' and while he missed a booking for reckless use of arms (27') and perhaps one for blatant holding (40'), he was brilliant afterwards. Very good SPA punishment (but weren't both players holding in 66'?), excellent PI booking and correctly punished tackle and player skirmish. Dallas is not throwing around cards and tries to solve it differently at first, but he has no hesitation to book when needed: 5 cards between 66' and 70' proove that.
ReplyDeleteAs for the crucial handball, I agree with you. Back then most likely the better call, I wouldn't call either wrong. It is nearly impossible to say if there was movement towards the ball by Frings. As for the scenes in 25' & 34' I can live with play-on in both cases, but Frisk and Moreno both punished them - it would have been better, not just for uniformity.
Overlooked, but interesting: Lewis could have been shown a SYC for blatantly taking the free kick in 67' before Dallas had blown the whistle.
If you support him in the penalty scenes, surely one of the best performances on many levels by Hugh Dallas, who seemed quite deserving of the final.
P.S.: Neuville was shown the card on the pitch, post-match FIFA changed it to Jeremies. MI case, curious how that happened.