Penalty in the relegation battle
DFB gives mistakes from referee team
05.05.2025 – 7:19 p.m.Reading time: 2 min.
A referee decision caused discussions in Augsburg on Sunday. Now the DFB speaks up – and admits the mistake of the referees.
On Sunday afternoon, Holstein Kiel scored new hope again with a 3-1 away win at FC Augsburg in the relegation battle of the Bundesliga. But the result of success already raised questions during the game. Because the goal for 1-0 might not have been allowed to fall.
What happened? In the 24th minute, Kiel’s Bernhardsson entered the FCA penalty at a high pace. Opponent Chrislain Matisma put on the tackle and gave the striker away the ball between his legs. Afterwards Bernhardsson fell through the tackling force.
Referee Harm Osmer’s penalty whistled to astonishment of the Augsburg. Video assistant Sven Jablonski also had no objection. Kiel was awarded the penalty that Shūto Machino converted ice cold. For FCA trainer Jess Thorup “a crucial point” in the game. He explained: “I saw this ten times in the cabin. From my side it looks like he only hits the ball.”
Even Bernhardsson then spoke of a “hard decision”. This could have been “in both directions”. But he was glad that the referee had decided on a whistle.
One day after the game in Augsburg, the DFB now switched on – and subsequently agreed with Thorup and FC Augsburg. Marco Fritz, Head of Evaluation and Rule interpretation of DFB Schiri GmbH, confirmed the wrong decision to the “kicker”.
The ex-FIFA referee indicated: “In his tackling against the ball-leading Kiel Alexander Bernhardsson, the Augsburger Chrislain Matsima played the ball with his right foot in his own penalty area, which also changed his direction of running.” There was also “minor contact” on Bernhardson’s right foot. “In our view, however, this was not the cause of Bernhardsson’s fall.”
Fritz continues: “The playing of the ball was in the foreground in this campaign, the fall of the striker resulted from a subsequent, non -punitive body contact due to the tackling. For us, the correct decision would have been.” Means: Kiel should not have got a penalty.
Then why didn’t video referee Jablonski intervened? Fritz said that the playing of the ball was not the decisive factor for him when the Augsburg tackling was not the decisive factor, “but physical contact against Bernhardsson at a high speed.”