April 11, 2013

2013 UEFA Under-17 EURO Slovakia - Referees

UEFA has unveiled the sixteen match officials who will take charge of this year's edition of UEFA Under-17 European Championship. The competition is to be played in Slovakia from 5 to 17 May 2013.

Dutch referee Serdar Gözübüyük (c) ZIMBIO
Group A: Slovakia, Austria, Switzerland, Sweden
Group B: Italy, Russia, Croatia, Ukraine

Referees
Neil Doyle (IRL) 29/04/1978
Nerijus Dunauskas (LTU) 26/06/1978
Serdar Gözübüyük (NED) 29/10/1985
Anastasios Sidiropoulos (GRE) 09/08/1979
Ivaylo Stoyanov (BUL) 28/03/1981
Slavko Vinčić (SVN) 25/11/1979

Assistant referees
Gregory Crotteux (BEL) 21/09/1979
Silver Kõiv (EST) 24/02/1983
Dejan Kostadinov (MKD) 01/12/1978
Milan Minić (SRB) 20/07/1978
Birkir Sigurdarson (ISL) 18/09/1985
Richard Storey (NIR) 20/04/1986
Sergei Vassyutin (KAZ) 01/06/1986
Dmitry Zhuk (BLR) 22/04/1986

Fourth officials
Peter Královič (SVK) 05/06/1983
Vladimír Vnuk (SVK) 23/11/1978

UEFA Referee Observers 
Jan Fasung (SVK)
Nikolay Levnikov (RUS, member of the referee committee)
Jozef Marko (SVK, member of the referee committee)
Kyros Vassaras (GRE, member of the referee committee)

30 Comments:

  1. Serdar Gözübüyük made me an excellent impression in Malta-Italy, good appointment. I don't know so much about the other officials, while among the assistant deserved appointment for Kostadinov, UEFA surey noticed his excellent performance in all the CL matches refereed by Stavrev.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Vincic and Doyle have already collected experiences as AARs with Skomina/Jug and Kelly. For Zhuk it's his second mini-tournament after u19 2011.
    I saw Crotteux once, quite ok impression.

    ReplyDelete
  3. If someone knows the referee observers/committee members being present there, we would appreciate to know them ;)

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Jozef Marko will be there for sure but I'm not sure if he is going to assess the referees officially ;-)

      Delete
    2. Anonymous11/4/13 21:25

      Ususally there are at least one observer from home country in UEFA's U-17, U-19, U-21 tournaments. And if that observer is also member of Ref Committee, he'll sure be there.

      Delete
  4. 4th official correct name: Peter Kráľovič, not Petr
    Petr is czech name, Peter is Slovak

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Anonymous12/4/13 11:32

      an important clarification of the front name. Who cares about this kind of national thinking?

      Delete
    2. Anonymous12/4/13 12:03

      for sure not such ignorant as you...

      Delete
    3. I just copied it from UEFA....

      Delete
  5. Anonymous11/4/13 21:33

    Niclas, is this officially posted anywhere or you got it through your UEFA sources?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Its official on the UEFA website.

      http://www.uefa.com/under17/season=2013/finals/matchofficials/index.html

      Delete
  6. Anonymous11/4/13 23:40

    Can you find out the refs appointed for the UEFA Women's Euro?

    ReplyDelete
  7. Anonymous13/4/13 01:32

    OFFICIAL OBSERVER MARKS FOR REFEREES IN CL ARE AS FOLLOWS: 7.7 FOR CLATTENBURG, 8.3 FOR ERIKSSON, 7.0 FOR MOEN AND 8.1 FOR STARK. SECOND LEG: 8.1 FOR VELASCO CARBALLO, 8.2 FOR THOMSON, 8.3 FOR LANNOY AND 8.4 FOR KUIPERS.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Anonymous13/4/13 11:36

      8.2 for Thompson is a strong piece! The Assis should never be used.

      Delete
    2. 7.0 for Moen? Funny approaches... Maybe randomly generated randoms, I may send you some C++ codes to converge more accurately.

      Delete
    3. Anonymous13/4/13 13:46

      First: it is forbiden to reveal official marks so I don't believe anybody when he sais official marks. Same counts for Cakir when it was written he got 8.2 for Man.UTD-Real. No way Cakir or anyone from his team would risk suspension and reveal their marks, and there is not even 1% chance Collina revealed marks, he is one who said marks must be known just to referee and nobody else. 7.7 for Clattenburg ??? It would mean he made at least one crucial mistake that influenced final score, did he? I don't think so. 7.0 for Moen ??? It would mean he missed at least THREE penalties or he whistled wrong THREE penalties and he influenced final result. did he? NOT. For one crucial mistake you get 7.8/7.9, for two or more your mark is going down and then it depends if your wrong decision influenced the final result. Thomson could get 8.2, but his assistants not, they made one crucial mistake, but Dortmund's third goal influenced on final result, so AR2 should get 7.4-7.7. Velasco made some minor mistakes, and his card for Mandzukic was wrong, but 8.1, I don't think so, 8.2 or 8.3. I watched Lannoy, for me 8.4 at least, maybe 8.5 because it was very brave to give red card in CL QF for inapropriate gesturing. Kuipers also very good, could get the final. All in all, don't tell lies about official marks and I agree with statement Niclas wrote bellow.
      My whishes for semis and final:
      CL: Bayern-Barcelona (Lannoy, Kassai), Dortmund-Real (Proenca, Webb), final: Skomina;
      EL: Fener-Benfica (Rizzoli, Brych), Basel-Chelsea (Moen, Undiano), final: Collum.
      *Collum: Based on his performances this season he absolutely deserves EL final, great form, this season, great, great, great...

      Delete
    4. Anonymous13/4/13 14:18

      I think other way round, those marks are very probable. Have you watched Clattenburg? Missed red to Ribery and many other minor(?) mistakes. Moen... I see he has many fans here. As I've said, I think he was very poor. To me at least two, but even three possible penalties were missed by him. Then, there were heavy problems with cards. Carballo was influenced by players - it's unacceptable at this level to show a card based on shouting lads.

      Since, I think those marks can be 100% correct and it's no such need to post comments like cagatay did... Care about friendly discussion, no attacks.

      - - - - -

      JAE PARKINSON

      Delete
    5. Let me clarify things:
      -We have all of our respect of whom has his attitudes on performances of referees which we may agree or not. But, just writting down the marks with "Anonymous" title is a way trying to abuse this blog in my point of view.
      -Every performance has its positive/negative points. We write 10pgs of reports for each match. This is a way of discussion. It is the core stand up point for us. Trying to depict what UEFA observer things about performance (which is totally fuzzy since we cant know it exactly) becomes nonsense.
      -Well caring about friendly discussion is of course welcomed, but, no way for an undefined/unclarified points.
      -Btw, I really dont think Moen could get a 7.0. Yes, you may say there were two penalties lacking, cards and so on. But still 7.0 is a backhaul. Lets remember what Turkish media has enforced for Stark:6.9 at GS-ManU. He stayed one match out and afterwards CL QF. Then really, 6.9?

      Delete
    6. Anonymous13/4/13 17:48

      Right, but we can't say those marks are someone's fantasy as well as we can't say they are true, so comments like 'Funny approaches... Maybe randomly generated randoms, I may send you some C++ codes to converge more accurately' only make discussion an endless battle surely without a winner.

      In opposite, I think 7.0 for Moen is probable. For me, there are even three clear penalties missed that could have had a big impact on final outcome. Only imagine that observer report about two, maybe three missed penalties and big points for improvement. Then, 7.2 is maximum due to those points for improvement. And therefore, I suppose, the 7.0 can be a true mark.

      Turkish media have said that Stark got 6.3. It was also possible, but I would give him 7.3 personally. I can say what have said my friend who is a FIFA referee. The final mark depends from observer. They are strict, normal and lenient. There is not consistency with the marks and it's an overall impression (not only from last match) that really matters - so we can see Stark in semi although he had poor season. Why? Due to his experience and personality.

      In a sum, the maximum mark for Moen is for me 7.4 as I said before. So, 7.0 is also possible. The rest of marks are also that, so don't criticize this comment. If someone don't believe, let keep his bad comments to himself, to good of discussion.

      And one small remark. Is it written anywhere, that getting e.g. 7.4 means demotion or lack of further promotions in current season? I think it's not, so don't get angry when someone post in your opinion low mark for performance which you count as good one. Maybe UEFA is lenient in respecting marks...?

      - - - - -

      JAE PARKINSON

      Delete
    7. I have the info that at least 2 of the marks mentioned are different.

      Delete
  8. What should we do with this information. Every day someone comes to claim he knows the official marks :/ I have also the "official" information that Eriksson got 8.4 and not 8.3....so whom should I believe now? :D

    ReplyDelete
  9. The Newcastle - Benfica report is actually Rubin Kazan - Chelsea.

    ReplyDelete
  10. For the observers. I could imagine a mixture of four observers, e.g. like that: Jozef Marko (SVK), Jan Fasung (SVK), Herbert Fandel (GER) and someone like Vítor Melo Pereira (POR). I do not know the names, but in the past there were two local observers, one committee member and one further important observer.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Observers for U-17
      Levnikov and Vassaras,Marko,Fasung

      Delete
    2. Thanks a lot. Interesting, three committee members.

      Delete
    3. Vassaras is there even though there is a Greek referee.

      Delete
  11. Anonymous19/4/13 01:38

    What about the U21 nomination? We have only seen the main referees, but what about the others? Any news anyone??

    ReplyDelete
  12. Unfortunately not. We know that Munukka, Hansen, Spathas, Tohver and Zelinka are said to be AARs at the tournament. But no info related to ARs, I think we have to wait until the start of May.

    ReplyDelete

Copyright © . The 3rd Team
Theme Template by BTDesigner · Powered by Blogger