It was a game well played. Dortmund took control from the first whistle till about the 30th minute when they were leading 1-0. Then Arsenal started to get into the game, equalizing before half-time. The beginning of the second half loked just the same as the beginning of the first, but Dortmund's dominance lasted for just 10 minutes. From then on Arsenal took charge, putting more and more pressure on their opponents and looking ominous. But they weren't able to crown their efforts with a goal, while BVB did what matters in football in a rare attack on the Londoners' goal.
The assistance given to Mr. Eriksson was generally good. However, when there were any doubts about a few decisions made by ars Klasenius an Warnmark, tv didn't provide any clear answer as there was no replay of the incident in question. Aar Strombergsson had no significant role to play, while ar Johannesson was spot on to prevent any argument by by a quick and decisive act to maintain Giroud (Arsenal) was fouled outside BVB's penalty-area and not where he tumbled at the end (22'). So aal was well... but for one crucial mistake, which luckily for the refereeing team didn't end up as an equalizer for Arsenal when the scoreline was 0-1. The mistake concerns the interpretation to Law 11 given by Mr. Collina just a month before: A player is dimmed offside while he was in an offside position when the ball is played to him from a deliberate save by an opponent. The incident concerning this interpretation happened in the 38th minute: Giroud crossed the ball from the left of the Arsenal attack. The ball was cleared from inside the BVB penalty-area towards Rosicky who had a shot on goal. Gk Weidenfeller was beaten but his tem-mate Hummels stopped the ball from crossing the goal-line. The ball was kicked to the right of Dortmund's goal-line (arsenal's left). Giroud, who left the pitch after his first cross - presumably not to be caught offside - returned to the pitch, got possession of the ball and crossed it again into BVB's penalty-area. His return was an infringement of the ruling which disallows an attacking player who left the field to get back onto it thus getting an advantage for his team. Moreover, had he stayed on the field, Giroud had to be penalized for being offside as explained by Mr. Collina. But Mr. Klasenius didn'r raise his flag, nor was there an act of Mr. Johannesson to correct the ar and alert the referee.
It was an encounter perfectly matching Mr. Eriksson's qualities. He has an affable personality, he lets the game flow and uses the advantage rule pretty well. There are players who misuse these characteristics for their own good - interpreting his attitude as lenient and reacting in bad manners when they feel robbed by not being given a free-kick for a foul on them. This didn't happen in London on the night. As for the Giroud infringement (38') described above, I don't think it is fair to burden Mr. Eriksson with the mistake obviously made.