Australia’s campaign at the 2019 FIFA Women’s World Cup is over after the Matildas were bundled out of the Round of 16 following a penalty shootout loss to Norway.
Norway were arguably the marginally better side and did a pretty good job of shutting down Sam Kerr, but some key refereeing decisions drew the ire of Australian fans at the ground and watching from home.
A handball penalty Australia had initially been awarded was controversially taken back by VAR after a very lengthy review, while another appeal for handball in the box wasn’t referred to replay officials at all.
What really got Matildas fans going, however, was a straight red card shown to Alanna Kennedy for what looked to be nothing more than an innocuous challenge.
But was that really the full story? There’s no doubt Australia lowered their colours in the penalty shootout, while also squandering a huge chance to score in the first minute.
So, were the Matildas really robbed? Roar football expert Mike Tuckerman analysed the game with us on the Game of Codes podcast to work out just how much was the fault of the officials and how much the Matildas just had to wear.
Listen to the debate:
Visit our Game of Codes hub to catch the full episode and be sure to subscribe and review on iHeartRadio, Apple Podcasts, Google Podcasts or wherever else you’re listening.
Brainstrust
Roar Rookie
has anyone seen the so called handball given against Japan. This website is full of euro wannabees who are ignoring the incredible bias in favour of European teams at this world cup.
Nemesis
Guest
"Waz does there have to be a goal scoring opportunity?" For the Red Card sanction, the Law states: A player denies "a goal or an obvious goal-scoring opportunity to an opponent"
Nemesis
Guest
The ref's decision is the ref's decision. I think she is wrong. I've spoken to an FFA accredited ref and he said he wouldn't have given a Red Card. Doesn't mean a thing. The ref made the decision, it's done.
jameswm
Roar Guru
Just watched all of this. Yellow for sure, she held her. However no way they got to that before the goalie. Bolt wouldn’t have got there. Waz does there have to be a goal scoring opportunity?
Brainstrust
Roar Rookie
They did do exaclty that twice a few minutes later, no red card just a yellow and it was a better goal scoring chance than the goal keeper taking the ball in the other instance. Then even the second deliberate foul they let them off a yellow even, and the referee tried to hide it all by giving they player a long talking to. Clearly rigged.
Waz
Roar Rookie
Under the laws of the game it clearly is a red card and we had three match officials - referee, assistant and VAR - agreeing it was a red card. Many people misunderstand the purpose of this law. It is designed to cut out cynical and deliberate foul play. Job done.
Mister Football
Roar Guru
Marginally better? Let's be honest here, Norway was a lot better, and had the very best player on the park, no other Australian player came close to Graham. Australia had plenty of luck during the tournament: Italy's first goal called offside; Kerr's penalty; the 2nd half goals against Brazil were very lucky, and even the goal scored against Norway directly from a corner, a weak corner kick at that, bouncing twice with no one touching it, was about as lucky as things can get in soccer. Australia had more than its fair share of luck.
Lionheart
Roar Rookie
Short answer to the question posed - no. The Optus panel discussed this and were driven a bit by emotion but still answered no. But they did show footage of a clear hand-ball in the penalty box by Norway. For some reason I missed this in the game, but the footage is quite clear. The defender had her arms outstretched and the ball came off her right arm and out for a corner. I think only one, maybe two Australians appealed so it wasn't a highlighted moment. The corner was given so they rightly asked, then what did the ball come off? I think it was around the 65th minute. But that aside, calls that went against us could have gone either way, that's what you get with opinion based decisions.
Nemesis
Guest
Definitely a foul by Kennedy. Definitely a cynical foul, which equates to 'unsporting behaviour'. Definitely a Yellow Card. For it to be deemed a Red Card offence the foul must prevent "an obvious goal scoring opportunity". There is no way the Norwegian attacker would've obviously got to the ball before Lydia Williams, so there was no obvious goal scoring opportunity. Definitely not a Red Card.
Brainstrust
Roar Rookie
You got to be kidding, a player runs full speed into the goal keeper as they are touching the ball. Clear non goal decision and yet another pro Euro cheat on this website. The decision to have an offside flag for the first brazilian goal now that was ridiculous player 10 meters to the side of goal, correctly overturned.
Late kick off
Roar Rookie
Absolutely. If a Norwegian defender had done what Kennedy did we'd be wanting a red. I know the team tried hard but for the article to say Norway were "arguably the marginally better side" is being kind. Norway were clearly the better side and Graham was head and shoulders the best player on the park.
Punter
Roar Rookie
The best way to view this Waz, is to put yourself in the other teams shoes, if that was a player from Norway, I’d be screaming send off, straight red.
Stevo
Roar Rookie
The VAR has intervened in the game this morning where the French should have had a goal stand only for it to be overturned by VAR. Rubbish decision. The French were robbed.
Waz
Roar Rookie
“What really got Matildas fans going, however, was a straight red card shown to Alanna Kennedy for what looked to be nothing more than an innocuous challenge“ ..... it’s very clear in the footage that Kennedy is deliberately her openers short. There’s nothing innocuous about it.
Partyhat
Roar Rookie
Ummmmmm....... No.