UEFA rule England Women U19's match to restart in 96th minute

Yeah you have read this correctly....

England were playing Norway and we're 2-1 down needing a draw to qualify, We scored the penalty and the ref gave Norway an indirect FK for encroachment

But the German referee Marija Kurtes, under advice from her assistant on the line, ruled player encroachment and, instead of ordering the penalty to be retaken, incorrectly awarded an indirect free-kick to Norway.

The match ended less than one minute later, with Norway remaining 2-1 up, and both officials have since been sent home following their error.

The result will not stand, however, as the UEFA Control, Ethics and Disciplinary Body has ruled that the laws had not been applied correctly and both teams must now return to Seaview in Belfast on Thursday evening to replay the final seconds of added time, starting from when Arsenal player Williamson placed the ball on the penalty spot, although a different player can now take the spot-kick.

England will have an opportunity to salvage a draw from the fixture, though it is likely the match replay will last no more than 30 seconds.

Nevertheless, both teams are expected to go through their warm-ups with the same 11 players who were on the pitch at the end of the original game required to take the pitch again. Paramedics, stewards, match delegates and officials will also be required for the replay.

Before meeting up for their brief battle on Thursday night, England and Norway must first play their final group games during the day: England will play Switzerland and Norway will face Northern Ireland.

The replay decision complicates Switzerland’s calculations, as they do not know what result they need against England to qualify for the finals.

Before the controversial penalty, England had fought back from a 2-0 deficit to score an 88th-minute goal through substitute Rosella Ayane. It was eight minutes later when the penalty decision gave England the chance to equalise

This is ridiculous.

Its ridiculous because there is only 30 seconds left of the game and an incorrect decision has been given which happens in every football match, male/female. Its even worse that they have to go back for the final penalty, go through their warm ups etc. Also, the stewards, fans (who won't mind that much), officials, paramedics etc have to go back. That's poor.

I agree with FL, bad decisions are part of the game (hence why we don't need video refs etc) at worst they should have just awarded the goal and scored the game 2-2.

Ridiculous.

Seems a perfectly reasonable decision to make considering it's not a standard refereeing mistake but rather a decision that went against the laws of the game.

Hammersmith harrier wrote:Seems a perfectly reasonable decision to make considering it's not a standard refereeing mistake but rather a decision that went against the laws of the game.

Is not a referee mistake a decision that goes against the laws of the game because she does have control of the game? When Chelsea drew at home with West Brom 2-2 last season and Chelsea were awarded a penalty that wasn't a penalty when Ramies died, do you think the FA considered a decision to give an indirect free kick to WBA instead of a penalty to Chelsea and then to replay the game with the remaining minutes? I don't think they did by any long shot, do you?

FootballLight wrote:

Hammersmith harrier wrote:Seems a perfectly reasonable decision to make considering it's not a standard refereeing mistake but rather a decision that went against the laws of the game.

Is not a referee mistake a decision that goes against the laws of the game because she does have control of the game? When Chelsea drew at home with West Brom 2-2 last season and Chelsea were awarded a penalty that wasn't a penalty when Ramies died, do you think the FA considered a decision to give an indirect free kick to WBA instead of a penalty to Chelsea and then to replay the game with the remaining minutes? I don't think they did by any long shot, do you?

There is a difference between the two decisions though. In your example the referee believed there was a penalty, so no rules weren't followed, the mistake wasn't not knowing the rules, the mistake was being mistaken in what he saw.

In this case, the mistake was the referee did not follow the rules. They didn't make a mistake in what to award, the decision to award an indirect free-kick wasn't one available to them.

What Crimey said basically, saved me the effort of replying.

Crimey wrote:

FootballLight wrote:

Hammersmith harrier wrote:Seems a perfectly reasonable decision to make considering it's not a standard refereeing mistake but rather a decision that went against the laws of the game.

Is not a referee mistake a decision that goes against the laws of the game because she does have control of the game? When Chelsea drew at home with West Brom 2-2 last season and Chelsea were awarded a penalty that wasn't a penalty when Ramies died, do you think the FA considered a decision to give an indirect free kick to WBA instead of a penalty to Chelsea and then to replay the game with the remaining minutes? I don't think they did by any long shot, do you?

There is a difference between the two decisions though. In your example the referee believed there was a penalty, so no rules weren't followed, the mistake wasn't not knowing the rules, the mistake was being mistaken in what he saw.

In this case, the mistake was the referee did not follow the rules. They didn't make a mistake in what to award, the decision to award an indirect free-kick wasn't one available to them.

Ok yeah, I see what you mean now. However, you can't really make such a decision like that. Do you think the FA (before this incident) would have taken it back if this was the case in a Premier League match? No, they wouldn't. Sure they'd be some moaning, but they wouldn't replay the final minutes of the game or the remaining time would they.

FootballLight wrote:

Crimey wrote:

FootballLight wrote:

Hammersmith harrier wrote:Seems a perfectly reasonable decision to make considering it's not a standard refereeing mistake but rather a decision that went against the laws of the game.

Is not a referee mistake a decision that goes against the laws of the game because she does have control of the game? When Chelsea drew at home with West Brom 2-2 last season and Chelsea were awarded a penalty that wasn't a penalty when Ramies died, do you think the FA considered a decision to give an indirect free kick to WBA instead of a penalty to Chelsea and then to replay the game with the remaining minutes? I don't think they did by any long shot, do you?

There is a difference between the two decisions though. In your example the referee believed there was a penalty, so no rules weren't followed, the mistake wasn't not knowing the rules, the mistake was being mistaken in what he saw.

In this case, the mistake was the referee did not follow the rules. They didn't make a mistake in what to award, the decision to award an indirect free-kick wasn't one available to them.

Ok yeah, I see what you mean now. However, you can't really make such a decision like that. Do you think the FA (before this incident) would have taken it back if this was the case in a Premier League match? No, they wouldn't. Sure they'd be some moaning, but they wouldn't replay the final minutes of the game or the remaining time would they.

I actually think they would. The big difference is the quality of refereeing in the Premier League is far and above what you get in a women's U19 match, so a mistake like this simply wouldn't happen. The mistakes referees make a very, very rarely mistakes of what the rules are. I think if a mistake as fundamental and as important as this happened, they would replay it. The main obstacle would be TV money rather than anything else.

England scored their penalty

Didn't Stuart Atwell award a goal that never was (went wide) and that stood.

Crimey wrote:

FootballLight wrote:

Crimey wrote:

FootballLight wrote:

Hammersmith harrier wrote:Seems a perfectly reasonable decision to make considering it's not a standard refereeing mistake but rather a decision that went against the laws of the game.

Is not a referee mistake a decision that goes against the laws of the game because she does have control of the game? When Chelsea drew at home with West Brom 2-2 last season and Chelsea were awarded a penalty that wasn't a penalty when Ramies died, do you think the FA considered a decision to give an indirect free kick to WBA instead of a penalty to Chelsea and then to replay the game with the remaining minutes? I don't think they did by any long shot, do you?

There is a difference between the two decisions though. In your example the referee believed there was a penalty, so no rules weren't followed, the mistake wasn't not knowing the rules, the mistake was being mistaken in what he saw.

In this case, the mistake was the referee did not follow the rules. They didn't make a mistake in what to award, the decision to award an indirect free-kick wasn't one available to them.

Ok yeah, I see what you mean now. However, you can't really make such a decision like that. Do you think the FA (before this incident) would have taken it back if this was the case in a Premier League match? No, they wouldn't. Sure they'd be some moaning, but they wouldn't replay the final minutes of the game or the remaining time would they.

I actually think they would. The big difference is the quality of refereeing in the Premier League is far and above what you get in a women's U19 match, so a mistake like this simply wouldn't happen. The mistakes referees make a very, very rarely mistakes of what the rules are. I think if a mistake as fundamental and as important as this happened, they would replay it. The main obstacle would be TV money rather than anything else.

I doubt it. Not only are the FA just béllénds to begin with but they fail to deal with any incorrect decisions to begin with. I understand they are well trained compared to women's U19's and this will be very rare if ever seen again but I just couldn't see the FA stepping in to say we need to replay this part of the game because it was a mistake to award the wrong offence when it was a penalty.

Incredible that a referee, at any standard, could be so ignorant of the laws of the game.

Anyway justice done, right decision, all's well that ends well etc.