In Bielefeld, an actor of Bayern adds his opponent to his opponent by a violent arm of arms a head injury. However, he does not ask him the referee of the square, but his own coach. In Mönchengladbach, meanwhile, a Cologne for his “high leg” is rightly not concerned.
- “Tool” or “weapon”?
- More about: Sheet music and single criticism to Arminia Bielefeld vs. FC Bayern
- Red for Nianzou would have been the better decision
- Why Kainz ‘”Hot leg” was compliant
- Aytekin explains and calms the minds
In the evaluation of the air purposes between Tanguy Nianzou and Fabian Kunze, who had been born in the game between Arminia Bielefeld and FC Bayern Munich (0: 3) after 44 minutes, the two head coaches were largely agreed after the final whistle. Both the Bielefelder Coach Frank Kramer and the Munich exercise leader Julian Nagelsmann found that the violent arm’s remedy of the central defender of Bayern would have been adequately punished in midfield with the red card. And that, since referees Matthias Jölenbeck had only pronounced a warning, they should have given an intervention of the video assistant Markus Schmidt, who had failed.
Nagelsmann had not taken Nanzou on the pause of the field and referred to as a “small educational measure”. “You have to learn as a bit more cautious,” he said. Kunze was treated after the hit on the head and throat minutes on the square and then replaced. “The only thing you may be able to ensure the Cologne Keller is that it was no impact movement,” says Nagelsmann at the press conference after the game. “The elbow is already outside, but he does not go into the duel with a lot of startup. But we can not complain if there is red.”
“Tool” or “weapon”?
That both coaches in their judgment match a decision of the impartial so is not the rule. Nevertheless, it is worthwhile to analyze the reasons why the referee decided differently and the var has renounced an intervention. Undoubtedly, Nanzou wanted to reach the ball in the duel with Kunze, for this purpose he jumped on the ball and his opponent from the opposite direction. He missed the ball, but he met Kunze with the forearm and a part of the elbow on the side of the neck and head. The yellow card showed the favorably positioned referee Yöllenbeck without any hesitation.
More about: Sheet music and single criticism to Arminia Bielefeld vs. FC Bayern
For years, the impartial in the evaluation of arms in air branches are based on whether the arm is more likely to be used as a “tool” or rather as a “weapon”. The latter is approximately at a stopping movement of the case, for example, for example, at 1. A role also plays whether the elbow tip is used – which can significantly increase the risk of injury – or the forearm, whether the face is hit or the neck and not least, how high the intensity of a hit is. The transition between “tool” and “weapon” can be fluent, so sometimes the discretion of the referee is in demand.
Red for Nianzou would have been the better decision
If Nianzous use is based on the so-called hit picture – a push in jump with the forearm against the neck and not a blow when picking up with the elbow against the head – then there is a discretion to the yellow card at least not as a clear and Obvious errors to rate the VaR forced to engage. The high intensity of the hit, on the other hand, and the sheer force of use are arguments for a field reference, which weighed heavily and made a red card for a better decision. Nianzou may have pretended to use his arm as a “tool”, but in the result he knew more than “weapon”.
And by the way, regardless of that Kunze had to be replaced. The impartial can not and should not wait for the penalty measurement whether an injury sequence results, but assess the risk of injury based on body use. This means that there is a red card for clearly brutal fouls even if the victim remains intact and can easily continue to play. However, it also means that an injury sequence does not necessarily lead to a field reference, provided that body use along the evaluation criteria such as strice picture and intensity does not clearly speak.
Why Kainz ‘”Hot leg” was compliant
Sometimes, injury as a result of a dazon, it is not even a foul. As in the encounter of Borussia Mönchengladbach against 1 FC Cologne (1: 3) after 34 minutes in the run-up to the third goal of the guests. Since Florian Kainz had crossed his right leg at the sideline at the height of the midline in the duel with Matthias Ginter and brought on abdominal height, with the studs he reached the ball, which he played like his teammate Mark Uth. Ginter also reached his leg to the ball, but he came a bit late and missed him, instead he stepped from below against the leg of Kainz.
While the Cologne there was unimpressed and his team met a few seconds later to the 0: 3, the Mönchengladbacher was rolling on the lawn. Referee Deniz Aytekin gave the hit, but then the scene looked at the monitor after consultation with Var Sören Stors. However, he did not need long to conclude: the use of Kainz was conformed to Kainz, so the hit retains its validity. This decision was correct, it corresponds to the desired control design in such situations.
Aytekin explains and calms the minds
Accordingly, in duels in which the ball is basically playable for both players, can not be recognized on a dangerous game or on foul when a player with “long” or “high leg” goes into the duel, but clear to the ball is oriented and it also clearly plays before it may occur to a body contact with the opponent. That is: in situations where primarily on the amateur courts is asserted, the opponent has been misleading “held over the slippers” to get the ball, the impartials should still be able to continue playing the ball in controlled games of the ball.
That has rightly done Deniz Aytekin, the On-Field Review would not have been necessary. After returning from the monitor to the field, the referee explained both the coach of Gladbacher, Adi Hütter, as well as Matthias Ginter, who had to be treated why he did not decide on foul and recognized the gate. Of course, the referees are not obliged to such explanations. But by such transparency, if it allows the situation to calm down the minds. Exactly that was aytekin, who whistled this local duel for the fifth time – and it had again firmly under control.