Bayern offside is latest Champions League controversy for ref Marciniak after cup final successes

GENEVA (AP) — It has been a challenging season in the Champions League for the 2022 World Cup final referee Szymon Marciniak and his support officials from Poland.

Two stoppage-time decisions by Marciniak and his team — affecting Bayern Munich in the semifinals on Wednesday and Newcastle in a group-stage game in November — have fueled referee controversies that are rare in the elite-level competition.

Both times, Marciniak's and his team’s interventions seemed to go against the widely understood advice UEFA gives match officials for its games: Don’t stop play immediately for tight offside calls and don’t award a penalty for handball when the ball has deflected off a player’s own body.

A “disastrous decision,” Bayern coach Thomas Tuchel said of the assistant’s flag quickly raised and Marciniak’s whistle quickly blown for a possible offside in a last-chance attack in the 13th minute of stoppage time. Bayern needed one goal to force extra time against Real Madrid.

Matthijs de Ligt then shot into Madrid’s net that, if allowed, would have tied the score at 2-2 and kept Bayern in with a chance to reach the final.

In Marciniak's previous controversy, Newcastle coach Eddie Howe spoke of a “poor decision ... hugely frustrating” when Paris Saint-Germain converted a spot kick eight minutes into stoppage time to salvage a 1-1 draw at Parc des Princes.

A win would have lifted Newcastle above PSG into second place in the group standings, behind leader Borussia Dortmund, with one round left. PSG ultimately advanced to the semifinals and was eliminated this week by Dortmund.

Marciniak awarded the penalty for handball against Newcastle defender Tino Livramento only after being urged by his video review specialist to look at the pitchside monitor. That official, Tomasz Kwiatkowski, was stood down by UEFA from his subsequent Champions League game.

Kwiatkowski also was on duty on Wednesday in Madrid but never got a chance to advise on the marginal offside call against Bayern because Marciniak whistled to officially stop play before De Ligt could shoot.

“It feels almost like a betrayal in the end because of that decision,” Tuchel said. “The referee does not have to whistle. He sees that we win the second ball, he sees that we get the shot away. To whistle is a very, very bad decision. It’s against the rules and it’s a bad decision from both of them.

“The linesman said sorry. That does not help.”

De Ligt said the assistant apologized to him, saying, “I’m sorry, I made a mistake.”

“If it’s offside or not, I don’t know, VAR can check it,” the Bayern defender said. “But if you don’t check it, how can you see it? This is a shame.”

UEFA did not comment on Thursday in line with its policy on field-of-play rulings.

In November, Marciniak’s video review specialist was removed from duty when UEFA’s chief of football was Zvonimir Boban, the Croatia great who won a Champions League with AC Milan. Boban left UEFA in January in a dispute with its president Aleksander Čeferin about governance standards.

Marciniak and his team were already out of contention for handling the Champions League final on June 1 — when Madrid plays Dortmund at Wembley Stadium in London — because they officiated the showpiece game last year. They were widely praised for handling Manchester City’s 1-0 win over Inter Milan, and their work at the World Cup final in Qatar.

Controversy flared days before that Champions League final when Marciniak spoke at a business rally in Poland run by a far-right politician.

Under pressure from a Polish anti-discrimination group that works in soccer, and later UEFA, Marciniak made a statement to “express my deepest apologies” for being involved in the event. He said he was misled about its true nature.

“I humbly request an opportunity to make amends and regain your trust through my future actions,” the referee said last June.

Still recognized as among the world’s best, Marciniak will return to UEFA duty at the European Championship, where Bayern’s stadium is one of 10 venues for the June 14-July 14 tournament.

It will be a surprise if UEFA sends Marciniak and his team to work in Munich so soon.

AP soccer: https://apnews.com/hub/soccer

Bayern's goalkeeper Manuel Neuer, left, talks with referee Szymon Marciniak during the Champions League semifinal second leg soccer match between Real Madrid and Bayern Munich at the Santiago Bernabeu stadium in Madrid, Spain, Wednesday, May 8, 2024. (AP Photo/Jose Breton)

Bayern Munich players argues with referee Szymon Marciniak at the end of the Champions League semifinal second leg soccer match between Real Madrid and Bayern Munich at the Santiago Bernabeu stadium in Madrid, Spain, Wednesday, May 8, 2024. (AP Photo/Manu Fernandez)

Bayern's Thomas Mueller reacts during the Champions League semifinal second leg soccer match between Real Madrid and Bayern Munich at the Santiago Bernabeu stadium in Madrid, Spain, Wednesday, May 8, 2024. (AP Photo/Jose Breton)

Bayern's Thomas Mueller, centre, reacts with referee during the Champions League semifinal second leg soccer match between Real Madrid and Bayern Munich at the Santiago Bernabeu stadium in Madrid, Spain, Wednesday, May 8, 2024. (AP Photo/Jose Breton)

LONDON (AP) — WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange faced a hearing Monday in the High Court in London that could end with him being sent to the U.S. to face espionage charges, or could provide him another chance to appeal his extradition.

The outcome will depend on how much weight judges give to assurances U.S. officials have provided that Assange’s rights won’t be trampled if he goes on trial.

In March, two judges rejected the bulk of Assange's arguments but said he could take his case to the Court of Appeal unless the U.S. guaranteed he would not face the death penalty if extradited and would have the same free speech protections as a U.S. citizen.

The court said that if Assange, who is an Australian citizen, couldn’t rely on the First Amendment then it was arguable his extradition would be incompatible with the European Convention on Human Rights, which also provides free speech and media protections.

The U.S. has provided those reassurances, though Assange's legal team and supporters argue they are not good enough to rely on to send him to the U.S. federal court system.

The U.S. said Assange could seek to rely on the rights and protections of the First Amendment but that a decision on that would ultimately be up to a judge. In the past, the U.S. said it would argue at trial that Assange is not entitled to the constitutional protection because he is not a U.S. citizen.

“The U.S. has limited itself to blatant weasel words claiming that Julian can ‘seek to raise’ the First Amendment if extradited,” his wife, Stella Assange, said. "The diplomatic note does nothing to relieve our family’s extreme distress about his future — his grim expectation of spending the rest of his life in isolation in U.S. prison for publishing award-winning journalism.”

Assange, 52, has been indicted on 17 espionage charges and one charge of computer misuse over his website’s publication of a trove of classified U.S. documents almost 15 years ago. American prosecutors allege that Assange encouraged and helped U.S. Army intelligence analyst Chelsea Manning to steal diplomatic cables and military files that WikiLeaks published.

Commuters emerging from a Tube stop near the courthouse couldn’t miss a large sign bearing Assange’s photo and the words, “Publishing is not a crime. War crimes are.” Scores of supporters gathered outside the neo-Gothic Royal Courts of Justice chanting “Free Julian Assange” and “Press freedom, Assange freedom.”

Some held a large white banner aimed at President Joe Biden, exhorting: “Let him go Joe.”

Assange's lawyers say he could face up to 175 years in prison if convicted, though American authorities have said any sentence would likely be much shorter.

Assange’s family and supporters say his physical and mental health have suffered during more than a decade of legal battles, which includes seven years spent inside the Ecuadorian Embassy in London from 2012 until 2019. He has spent the past five years in a British high-security prison.

Assange’s lawyers argued in February that he was a journalist who exposed U.S. military wrongdoing in Iraq and Afghanistan. Sending him to the U.S., they said, would expose him to a politically motivated prosecution and risk a “flagrant denial of justice.”

The U.S. government says Assange's actions went way beyond those of a journalist gathering information, amounting to an attempt to solicit, steal and indiscriminately publish classified government documents.

If Assange prevails Monday, it would set the stage for an appeal process likely to extend what has already been a long legal saga.

If the court accepts the word of the U.S., it would mark the end of Assange’s legal challenges in the U.K., though it’s unclear what would immediately follow.

His legal team is prepared to ask the European Court of Human Rights to intervene. But his supporters fear Assange could be transferred before the court in Strasbourg, France, could halt his removal.

Judges Victoria Sharp and Jeremy Johnson may also postpone issuing a decision.

If Assange loses in court, he still may have another shot at freedom.

Biden said last month that he was considering a request from Australia to drop the case and let Assange return to his home country.

Officials provided no other details but Stella Assange said it was “a good sign” and Australian Prime Minister Anthony Albanese said the comment was encouraging.

FILE - WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange being taken from court, where he appeared on charges of jumping British bail seven years ago, in London, Wednesday May 1, 2019. Assange faces what could be his final court hearing in England over whether he should be extradited to the United States to face spying charges. (AP Photo/Matt Dunham, File)

London court to decide whether WikiLeaks founder Assange is extradited to the US

London court to decide whether WikiLeaks founder Assange is extradited to the US