The BVB loses against FC Bavaria — and then criticizes referee Felix Player, especially because of its penalty decision for the Munich. In fact, the referee would have remained better in his generous line, which was actually good for the game.

Borussia Dortmund was extremely large after the 2-3 home defeat against FC Bayern Munich of anger on the referee Felix Player. The BVB felt disadvantaged in games-shaped situations and threw the impartial a missing balance in the game line, as it formulated Felix Zwayers director Michael Zorn opposite the Kicker.

He decided the game in the end because he had no line, he said. If I pipe some things or look at me, I have to do that on the other side.

The criticism, especially at two decisions of the 40-year-old: When Marco Reus came after 53 minutes in a combat with Lucas Hernández in the penalty area of ​​the Munich, there was no penalty for the homeowners, and video assistant Tobias Well also recommended no On-Field Review to change that. Twenty minutes later, Player continued to play after a hand game of Mats Hummels in the Dortmund penalty area, but after consultation with the Var this time, however, to the monitor on the field of play and finally spoke to Bayern a penalty. The transformed Robert Lewandowski to the winning goal.

In order to judge these two decisions, it is not enough to consider it isolated, you have to be in the context of the entire game line of the impartial places. During the duel between Hernández and Zeus, there were three contacts against the ball-taking BVB captain: to push his hand against his back and too little touches on the calf and at the foot. He had perceived Player, then he led it in the interview of the transmitter Sky, the impulse against the upper body, which he did not evaluate as a punitive. Whether there was another contact, was denied by Var.

That Zeus did not get a penalty, was reasonable

Even if that was not right in harmony with the pictures, one can hold on: the essence of this duel had observed the referee. For me, this is a situation that is not black or white, but represents a robust duel, he said. I decided against a penalty due to my generous line in the game.

A reasonable, comprehensible decision, the Player himself has put in the context of his game management: he left the rapid match and a certain dual-fighting hardness, which was conducive to the play flow. In borderlines, he mostly decided to continue playing.

More about: Hummel's reacts to BVB bankruptcy and Elder Off

So also in this situation. For a penalty whistle, it would also have given reasons if you have the contacts caused by Hernández as the causal that Zeus went to the ground. However, that Player did not do that to his line in the two-fight rating.

There is something that happened a role immediately after the game in the medial consideration of the game, but very well in the day: just before the duel between Hernández and Zeus, Erlang Haaland had just found himself in the punishable offside, which the referee team on the Field remained hidden.

Haaland away from the penalty would have prevented the penalty

Will Jude Bellingham face punishment for criticizing referees? | Bundesliga | ESPN FC

That is, even if Felix Player recognized for penalty, this decision would have been corrected by the Var due to the daunting of the Dortmund attacker, as John Trees, the project manager of the DFB for the video assistants, on Sunday on the website of the association explained. Because the punishable offside of Haaland was in time before the duel scene. But because there was no penalty and no Var procedure, video assistant Well did not have to check the scene on a possible away.

So it happened that there were no pictures with calibrated quotes from Cologne. And because the situation was considered very close, with the naked eye was not doubtless to see if Haaland had been in the away or not.

Only on Sunday, several television channels with their own animations showed the way before John Trees officially confirmed this situation with his statement. Thus, a scene in the grouch area ultimately one, in which there was no discretion. If the earlier had been clarified, it would probably have been able to steam some excitement.

Hummel's' Hand spiel: Pro and Contra penalty

Remains the hand game of Mats Hummels. If you look at it insulated, then undoubtedly find good reasons to evaluate it as punishable: the Dortmund er defender went with held arm in an active movement to the ball and played it with the elbow, as John Trees described the process. Ability is as not to classify.

So it also saw Player himself who explained to have consulted Var because he had perceived the hand game on the field, but not how far Hummel's had the arm of his body stretched away. So it was finally the on-field review and come to the penalty decision.

However, there are also counter-arguments. For example, Trees leads to, Hummel's had not had at the time of the ball tour of the ball, had also been irritated if necessary by another teammate - as well as by opponent Thomas Müller, would be added.

Above all, however, that since this season is again stronger the factor intent in the evaluation of hand pieces focuses on — and that Mats Hummels here rather failed in distress a header attempt unhappy than he actually intensified the ball with his arm to be began from the penalty area.

On the first match day of this season, there was a pretty similar scene against Bertha BSC in the game of 1. FC Cologne against Bertha BSC, in which the Cologne Rafael Czechs missed the ball after a flank of the Berliner with his head and directed with the forearm into the goal. At that time, too, there was an on-field review, but referee Robert Hartmann, who had to help his colleague Player in the field, decided against a penalty, because he did not see a purpose, but only a failed head ball attempt. A decision that was accepted by the Felix Zwayering direction of the Bundesliga referees as a reasonably acceptable.

Do not give the penalty, would have fitted better to Players line

From this discretion, Felix Player could have made use — and that would have been meaningful because he had previously used this scope several times in the sense of football. Especially with borderline or unclear penalty area scenes he always left.

To be mentioned in addition to the mentioned duel between Hernández and Zeus also a wring-up of Hummel's against Leon Goretzka in the Dortmund penalty area and a hand game of Alphonso Davies in the box of Bayern, both in the first half. This line got the game well, the associated balance led to acceptance on both sides.

It would have been a decision of the game, according to Hummel's' hand game in the originally made decision — which would have been possible after the review, which was not permissible, but by no means mandatory — and, if necessary, on the lack of intent and the similar Scene from the Cologne game to refer.

For example, the balance had been respected, and the line remained stringent in the use of the discretion. After the game, Felix Player would probably not have been almost as violent, as it was the case.

John Trees also admits the question of being able to understand whether the assessment of the hand game matches the generous line of the referee. Although he then judges the assessment of the hand game as punishable, if one considered the situation still detached, one may quite read out of this statement that the Felix Zwayering line of the referees would have been a different decision. Also, therefore, because it has long since not only found at the Dortmund more acceptance. And acceptance is a particularly high for impartial.

Alex Forehead

Sources Articles