Undeniably, this is the turning point of the game. Stamford Bridge, 50th minute sharp: Kai Havertz comes to the penalty spot in front of Alexander Meyer. The German stops and sends his shot to the post. The whole BvB exults. But not for very long. The VAR passes by and asks Mr. Makkielie to withdraw the penalty after six interminable minutes. In question ? Dortmund players, like Chelsea, entered the 16 meters too quickly.
A decision that changes everything. Because in the process, Havertz tries his luck again and frees the Blues with the goal of qualification.
After the match, the German players flew into a rage. Like a revived Jude Bellingham. “It’s a joke”began the Englishman. “With this kind of penalty where the shooter cuts his run, you will always have players one meter inside the box.
Same story from Emre Can who did not take long to identify the culprit. “We lost because of the referee”, commented hot the German international. “Give back the penalty to withdraw like that, how is it possible? I don’t understand. The referee was very bad today. The way he spoke to us was arrogant. We were playing here at Stamford Bridge, maybe he was scared of the fans, I don’t know. UEFA must assign us another referee, it was not going at all. Havertz stops on the penalty, he slows down, the referee says nothing.
“A pure scandal”
Difficult to contradict the midfielder. Havertz effectively scores a short timeout, which alters the run that rushes players from both sides into the box too soon. If the frustration is understandable, the referee applied the rules to the letter.
For the German consultant Matthias Sammer, this is professional misconduct. “The penalty, as well as the fact of having to withdraw it, is a scandal in good and due form”he railed for Amazon Prime at the end of the meeting. “Makkelie is a very, very arrogant person. As a referee, you have to have a certain charisma. When explained to him about the strict regulations, the former coach fumed: “I don’t need a rule keeper. If the rule remains like this, I would tell my players to go in twice to disrupt the shooter. It does not mean anything.”
”A decision according to the rules”
Also present on the set, former referee Wolfgang Stark gave his opinion on the phase that led to the penalty. “For me, the question here is whether it is a clear and conscious enlargement of the body or not. For me, it’s a natural move from the Dortmund player, that’s why I wouldn’t have awarded the penalty.”
On the other hand, he does not contest the second decision of the arbitrator. “The decision to replay the penalty was in accordance with the rules. Indeed, Salih Özcan, who eventually cleared the ball after Kai Havertz’s missed shot, was one of many players who entered the penalty area too early.
This difference of opinion proves that this decision was not easy to make. On the side of Edin Terzic, we temper the anger that was present in his ranks. “When the decision takes five or six minutes, it’s not easy to make,” he explained. “I am Dortmund manager, responsible for the performance of the team, not that of the referee. We haven’t talked about the referees in recent weeks, we’re not going to start tonight. There were times when we were unlucky, obviously, but that’s part of the game, we won’t complain about that. Beyond this important match fact, Chelsea was above all superior to Dortmund. The reason for the elimination is certainly more to be found in this poor performance than in the refereeing decisions. As Sébastien Haller admitted, lucid after the meeting. “We must be disappointed with the match we have just produced. We should have been braver with the ball. Qualification is deserved for Chelsea.”
