As of: 2:21 p.m. | Reading time: 2 minutes
You can listen to our WELT podcasts here
In order to display embedded content, your revocable consent to the transmission and processing of personal data is necessary, as the providers of the embedded content require this consent as third party providers [In diesem Zusammenhang können auch Nutzungsprofile (u.a. auf Basis von Cookie-IDs) gebildet und angereichert werden, auch außerhalb des EWR]. By setting the switch to “on”, you agree to this (revocable at any time). This also includes your consent to the transfer of certain personal data to third countries, including the USA, in accordance with Art. 49 (1) (a) GDPR. You can find more information about this. You can revoke your consent at any time using the switch and privacy at the bottom of the page.
Borussia Dortmund achieved a flattering 1-1 draw in the top game at Bayer Leverkusen. Nevertheless, coach Edin Terzic makes allegations against referee Daniel Siebert. In the interview, the referee defends himself.
22:6 shots, 16:1 corners, 61 percent ball possession – Bayer Leverkusen was extremely dominant in the top game of the Bundesliga against Borussia Dortmund, but still had to live with a 1-1 draw in the end due to a lack of effectiveness. The appearance of the BVB coach was all the more surprising.
Edin Terzic, who had oriented his team extremely defensively, raged at referee Daniel Siebert after the game. It was about a missed penalty for Karim Adeyemi in the 21st minute. According to Terzic, the attacker has been constantly disadvantaged by the referees since a swallow in April 2023.
Here referee Siebert comments on the allegations.
also read
Excitement after the big game
Ask: Why didn’t you whistle a penalty for Dortmund in that scene?
Daniel Siebert: The contact on Adeyemi’s right thigh was so minimal that it did not cause the fall. So no swallow, but also no penalty-worthy foul.
Ask: Were you surprised by Terzic’s violent attack?
Siebert: From his point of view, I can understand that in this individual case. But you have to see the scene in the overall context of the game. If on the one hand I don’t give a penalty for Leverkusen in a similar situation between Can and Palacios, I obviously won’t do that on the other hand either. That’s why the trainer’s statements are incomprehensible to me.
Daniel Siebert and Dortmund’s Nico Schlotterbeck
What: REUTERS
Ask: Terzic’s accusation is that Adeyemi hasn’t received a penalty for a long time because he once made a swallow. Does he have a penalty disadvantage with the referees?
Siebert: I can’t comment on earlier scenes. But Mr. Terzic can’t expect me to compensate for supposedly wrong decisions from other games. Every game starts from scratch again. It wasn’t enough for me to get a penalty on Sunday – and that was the only reason for my decision.
also read
The article was written for the Sports Competence Center (WELT, SPORT BILD, BILD) and first published in BILD.
