The Real Reason England Beat The Netherlands.

Thanks for watching! If you enjoyed the video then please hit that LIKE button and SUBSCRIBE! Thank you for your support!❤

A penalty is just a freekick in the 12 yard box, to try to make out it's something different is idiotic.

even if the penalty didnt happen.. england would have 100% scored.. they played good that game..

Never a pen

In my opinion the majority of fouls are not intentional. That doesn't mean they are not given. If this is a foul anywhere else on the pitch then it is a foul in the penalty area.

Yes, its a penalty, intentional or not, VAR would not have looked it if his foot wasnt so high with studs up. Would I be surprised if nothing came of it, absolutely not, but on this occasion it was.

It's not a penalty. It's an apology from FIFA for the "hand of god" incident, for Lampards screamer that got disallowed years ago, for every time we've been the better side and lost to a "moment of brilliance" and been so close to closing out important games to have it slip away. It's the football gods saying it's our time

It was studs up and the law says its a penalty. IT is the same as if a player rounds the keeper and the keeper takes them out when the they are not going to make contact with the ball again, I dont like it but the current law means it is a penalty.

If we are going by what the law should be then the sliver of someone's shoulder does not make them offside and England won 2-1 anyway

It is penalty, you never go with your foot opened like that because you can hurt someone pretty bad, yellow card clear also!

This corruption luck is at sunday over !

Rubbish. Left the video 30 seconds in. Studs up, late tackle, direct contact with opposition.. anywhere on pitch is a free kick, VAR rulled it, the official ruled it afterreviewing...so bugger off, you are wrong., the officials are right. Its a a straight penalty. Won't watch rest of this now.

Rules are there to prevent teams getting an unfair advantage or to prevent injuries. This penalty was given because the defender approached Kane studs first. In no tackle anywhere on the pitch are you allowed to go studs first, especially at the height he's done so here.

How many unintentional late tackles have you seen given as fouls, almost all of them. It doesn't matter if things are intentional or not, you accidentally risk injury to someone, it's treated just as equally as if it was deliberate.

Otherwise all those clear intentional professional foals where people rugby tackle the last man to prevent a counter attack would be getting reds instead of yellows.

The defender hasn't tried to play the ball here, he's tried to block the ball with his studs but unfortunately he's done so too close to Kane and caused a risk of injury.

The rules are the same rules all over the pitch. You're looking at it wrong, just because the reward is greater, doesn't mean the foul needs to be greater. A foul is a foul, wherever it happens, it's just in the box the consequences are greater, everyone knows that going into the game. Don't want to give away a penalty? Don't show your studs and make contact with the person who played the ball last. If it's a free kick anywhere else on the pitch, it's a penalty in the box. It's as simple as that.

With respect, intent has nothing to do with it. With respect, there is no difference in law between fouls in/out of the penalty box. By law, it's a foul (I can explain why) and it's in the penalty area, end of. However, you are correct that referees (I am one) definitely use discretion on fouls differently depending on the game situation/position,minute for game management etc. So, I need 51% certainty to give a defensive foul (everyone's forgotten in 5 seconds) , 70% for an attacking foul (potential goal) and even higher for a penalty. This is because the consequences of my decision affect the game more in attack than defense. It's game management and 'selling' a decision to players is crucial to retain control. Selling a pen is much harder than a defensive fouso I have to much further to absolutely sure than notl. The Dumfries challenge as a defensive foul is given every game as attackers chase the ball down on a clearance and catch the defender on his follow through. I may even caution depending on game temperature. However, I know why the ref denied the pen. He will say Kane got his shot away and the contact didn't impact play and the consequences of a pen are huge. That is what I would do. We don't have VAR so play on lads/lassies ...
So we are really talking about VARS role here. It is definitely a foul (in law) so it has to be overturned but in any non var game, it's play on and few would complain accept Gary the Grumpy number 9. It's hard for non refs to understand discretion on fouls and how we apply it and it's been a hotly disputed topic on ref chat groups I can assure you. So, I am agreeing and disagreeing with you. Refs do 'manage' games and decisions according to outcome/jeopardy and this is OK as fouls are Venn diagrams and discretionary where the foul/not a foul circles cross. It's only now that VAR highlights the ineffectiveness of the laws with technology that these instances happen. The handball law is also in that category. The Lukaku goal chalked off for prior handball (which must be intentional) was ridiculous and would not happen in the EPL.

The problem is Southgate likes to be the last to make subs so the opposition can't make subs to counteract what Southgate is trying to do so he leaves it last minute. Luckily it has worked out for us so far. Spain however will be a huuuuuuge hurdle. Hoping we win so we get a bank holiday though

Kane kicks Dumfries foot? 😂😂😂 thats like saying 'no officer, he headbutted my fist'

The 'hand of god' wasn't a goal but it stood and changed that game  Diego Maradona during the Argentina v England quarter finals match of the 1986 FIFA World Cup struck the with his hand. It was allowed as a goal.
Stop your moaning and move on
It's a game of football not trench warfare

Love how people think their opinion matters in football moreso than the professional referee who adheres to the rules set by the employer.

You are the overweight customer base who hands all over their money and not uninformed opinions no one asked for. Just cheer and drink your beer.

The defender came in with poor timing with a high foot and open studds. He made contact with the strikers foot via the studs. The intentuon is irrelevant it by the letter of the law is dangerous play and a foul. The location makes it a penalty, not a free kick. The assistant ref reviewed it, the referee reviewed it via VAR this was not a on the spot decision.

My opinion is irrelevant just like yours, the sinple fact is it was a penalty, the penalty happened and overall the better team won. You can say 'never a pen for me' all you want, but you're all like plumbers, customer service agents, cleaners, welders etc. 'For you' means nithing, you are nithing in this sport, just again the people who give money not uninformed opinions.

I really hate the way that people try an d force a narrative on what, in reality, is just a low scoring sport. People always rush to find a reason for a team doing well, why they are winning, but in reality you would need to play 10-20 games before you would get a a realistic idea of what was going on.

Late challenge, studs showing, penalty given. Nothing unusual there.

A studs up challenge that exposes the sole of the boot is a caution ( yellow card at minimum ) referees are encouraged to at the very least caution players who commit such challenges and therefore a penalty inside the 12 yard area. Please remember what happened with the challenge from Son and the challenge that Harvey Elliot endured. This rule is designed to protect the players. Tackles made with studs up can end a players career by snapping their leg in two and no one wants to see that. Great videos here and I look forward to seeing the Spain analysis, fantastic channel.

It doesn't have to be intentional to be a foul. You can still accidentally foul someone.

It was a penalty because the Ref. said so. That’s how the rules of football are laid out. Maradona’s “Hand of God” handball in the 1986 World Cup wasn’t a handball because the Ref said so.

Initially i thought it wasn't a penalty however after examining it closer, it was.

Why do people invent new rules for fouls when saying it's not a penalty? Since when did non deliberate intent make a foul not a foul? Since when did a foul in the penalty box have to be so gravely terrible it's worthy of a penalty? Since when did the defenders right to challenge for the ball mean a mistimed tackle is not a foul? Yes it was mistimed, yes he had a right to challenge, yes it wasn't deliberate. But non of these factors prevent the challenge from being a foul.

Definite penalty. It doesn't have to be deliberate ! And while we're on decisions Dice had his foot t stepped on by Simons. That's a foul. Lots of fouls given this tournament for feet getting stepped on !

UEFA have tightened up the rules about dangerous play. The Ref had no choice according to the rules. Outside the box 99% of people would award the foul and free kick.

I can't believe your reasoning for saying it was not a penalty, it was not intentional, what a load of cobblers .... many players have been booked in this tournament for a late tackle including Jude Bellingham, there's was not intention in their challenges either but it was still a foul for which they were booked. You then go on to say it would have been a foul in any other part of the pitch as if the penalty area is not part of the pitch, just laughable. It was a high reckless tackle in which the defender got nowhere near the ball and could have seriously injured an opponent. Serious foul play gives away a free kick and if that is in the 18 yard area it is a penalty. Educate yourself on the rules of football.

He's another one of these people who conflate what they think the law 'should be' with whether it was implemented correctly.
Reading the laws of the game isn't complicated.

Dumfries’ refusal to run to collect a ball that was heading out was definitely gettable was quite amazing. 4 times he just outright refused to try get it and it went out for an England throw in. I was amazed by his lack of effort.

Its obviously a penalty lmao how😂you gonna have an account like that and dont know rules😊

You said it's "not a penalty FOR YOU" and that's the problem. It was not a subjective decision, it was a rules based decision. The defender went in studs up, made no contact with the ball, and made contact with the player in the box. This can obviously be seen in the replays and therefore was a clear and obvious error. Was it unlucky for Netherlands? Sure. Did he stud Kane deliberately? I don't believe so, but most penalties are accidental anyway. Did it affect the trajectory of the shot? No, but it doesn't have to. The foul was committed before the ball went out of play, and thus the foul must be given.

doesn`t have t be intentional, kanes studs are down, the duch players studs are up, yes he is going for a block but his studs are up, his leg is too high and kane although made contact wit the ball also followed through to the studs. I personally think it`s the potential, imagine if kane went for a header, i`ve seen many free kicks for a lot less in this tournamrent so we have to be consistent, no free kicks in the box so it`s a penalty.

I have no idea how that is not a pk
It's a clear pk

It's a dangerous tackle, with studs showing, that would have been given as a free kick anywhere else on the pitch.....it was a penalty!

Great analysis. I was telling my son how it's definitely not a pen, just as the ref decided it was. I was not disappointed to be wrong. Come on England!

I didnt think it was a penalty. But i celebrated when it was given. I can also see why it was given. I guess beong a fan of a smaller club im very used to these decisions usually not being given for my team.