The referee awarded Eintracht Frankfurt two legitimate penalties against Leverkusen, and he denied them two more penalties, and rightly so. A penalty has to be repeated, with another the VAR technique is on strike. But the referee is undeterred.
One of the most important elements of a good referee’s game management is to have a clear and, above all, predictable line for the players when evaluating duels. In the contact sport of soccer, not every touch is a foul game, even if the opponent has not played the ball. Therefore, for the referee, especially in situations in which a player falls to the ground, it is essential whether the previous contact was the cause and decisive factor for the fall or not. The referee should assess similar situations in the same way, and it should be clear where he draws the line between permissible duel toughness and illegal physical activity.
This applies in particular to duels in the penalty area, where the technical punishment of rule violations by the defending team in the form of a penalty kick has greater weight than outside this area. In the game between Eintracht Frankfurt and Bayer 04 Leverkusen (5:1), referee Frank Willenborg showed what a clear and good line looks like in this regard. After ten minutes, Frankfurt’s Daichi Kamada put the ball past Charles Aranguiz in the Leverkusen penalty area, who then “put his body in” a bit, as footballers say.
But there was no tripping, no holding, and no jostling, and Kamada started to bank even before there was any contact. This one came afterwards, it was minor and it wasn’t the cause of the Frankfurter falling. Referee Willenborg was well positioned and rightly allowed play to continue, as he did in the 27th minute after a duel between Leverkusen’s Piero Hincapie and Randal Kolo Muani in the visitors’ penalty area. The ball-carrying Frankfurt striker was also about to fall before Hincapie stretched his arms towards Kolo Muani’s torso. In any case, the defender could not be held responsible for his fall.
The situation was different in stoppage time in the first half, when Edmond Tapsoba was too late in his own penalty area when tackling Frankfurt’s Jesper Lindström and his right foot didn’t hit the ball, but the right foot of his opponent. This kick was undoubtedly the decisive factor in Lindström falling and stopping a promising attack by the hosts. Willenborg’s decision to award Eintracht a penalty and caution Tapsoba was therefore perfectly correct, recognizing the foot strike well and making his decision without hesitation.
Leverkusen goalkeeper Lukáš Hrádecký saved Kolo Muani’s penalty, but he had already left the goal line with both feet in front of the shot. According to the rules, keepers must have at least one foot on or behind the line by the time the penalty taker has taken the shot. Until the end of September, however, referees and video assistants in the Bundesliga mostly ignored it when the goalkeepers left the goal line with both feet too early when a penalty kick was saved, provided that it was only a few centimeters.
In the most recent international break, however, the sporting management of the referees announced that this leeway will no longer be granted with immediate effect – as has been the case internationally for a long time – and that the video assistant will have to intervene if the referee does not notice the violation in question on the field . That’s why VAR Robert Schröder reported to his colleague Frank Willenborg during the game in Frankfurt and informed him of Hrádecký’s violation of the rules. The referee then took the penalty again, but this time it wasn’t Kolo Muani who played again, but Kamada, who then scored. Such a change of shooter is possible if a penalty kick has to be retaken.
The referee needed VAR support again after 68 minutes. He had judged Hincapie’s tackle in the Leverkusen penalty area against Kolo Muani to be in accordance with the rules, but the defender missed the ball and hit the striker, who fell as a result. Because Hincapie thwarted an obvious scoring chance, but his use in the penalty area was ball-oriented, he did not get the red card, but only a yellow card. However, since it was his second warning of the game, he still had to leave the field early. Kamada converted the penalty kick to make it 4:1.
Surprisingly, there was no on-field review on the monitor after the intervention of the video assistant. The reason for this was given on the Twitter account of the DFB referee: “Due to a technical problem, the referee could not be provided with any pictures,” it said. However, the VAR gave the referee instructions “with the help of which he decided on foul play, penalty kicks and yellow-red”. Before making the final decision, Willenborg also spoke to his assistant Arne Aarnink. An on-field review is common for so-called subjective decisions, but not mandatory. According to the rules, the referee can also change a decision after verbal information from the VAR, as happened here.
It remains to be clarified whether Frankfurter Christopher Lenz’s tackle against Tapsoba when winning the ball, which preceded the goal to make it 2-1 for Eintracht in the 58th minute, was regular or not. The Leverkusen bank protested vehemently, claiming that Lenz had committed a foul. However, the television images did not provide any clear information as to whether it was actually Frankfurter who had played the ball in the duel or not the Leverkusener, which would have turned Lenz’s effort into a foul. Due to this lack of clarity, however, one could not speak of a clear and obvious error on the part of the referee. The fact that the VAR did not intervene in view of this was once again correct.
After 82 minutes in the encounter between VfL Wolfsburg and Borussia Mönchengladbach (2:2), the guests unsuccessfully demanded a penalty after a duel between Maximilian Arnold and Marcus Thuram in the penalty area. Both players ran to the ball after a save by Wolfsburg goalkeeper Koen Casteels, which Arnold tried to reach with a “long leg” and shield against Thuram. Before he reached the ball, however, he put his leg in the path of his opponent and hit him on the shin, causing him to fall. A penalty kick would therefore actually have been appropriate. However, referee Benjamin Cortus should not have given Gladbach the previous free kick, which Casteels parried. Because there was no tripping by Paulo Otavio against Thuram, but rather it was the Gladbacher who stepped on his opponent’s foot and then fell to the ground.
The two top games on Sunday evening were safely managed by the referees: Tobias Stieler in the game 1. FC Union Berlin – Borussia Dortmund (2-0) and Sascha Stegemann in the clash between FC Bayern Munich and SC Freiburg (5-0) solved their Tasks well and noiselessly. The trickiest scene for Stieler undoubtedly happened after 83 minutes when Berlin’s Robin Knoche put his hand on Mats Hummels’ upper arm in front of his own goal and held the Dortmunder slightly. It was justifiable that the referee did not award a penalty after the subsequent spectacular fall of Hummels, who was already leaning slightly backwards at the moment of contact. It was a borderline case where the referee had discretion.
