October 19, 2014

Champions League 2014/15 - Referee Appointments - Matchday 3 (Tuesday)

UEFA has appointed Danny Makkelie to oversee his first Champions League match of his career at Stamford Bridge. Furthermore UEFA's Vice Officer of Refereeing will observe Sergei Karasev in his third match with Schalke 04 involvement, while committee member Jozef Marko will assess Ovidiu Hategan in Nicosia.


21 October 2014, 18:00 CET
Group E, Arena Khimki, Moscow (RUS)
CSKA Moskva - Manchester City
Referee: István Vad (HUN)
Assistant Referee 1: István Albert (HUN)
Assistant Referee 2: Peter Berretyán (HUN)
Additional Assistant Referee 1: Sándor Szabo (HUN)
Additional Assistant Referee 2: Zsolt Szabó (HUN)
Fourth Official: László Viszokai (HUN)
UEFA Referee Observer: Francesco Bianchi (SUI)
UEFA Delegate: Michal Listkiewicz (POL)
Blog Referee Observer: Edward (GRE)

21 October 2014, 20:45 CET
Group E, Stadio Olimpico, Roma (ITA)
AS Roma - FC Bayern München
Referee: Jonas Eriksson (SWE)
Assistant Referee 1: Mathias Klasenius (SWE)
Assistant Referee 2: Daniel Wärnmark (SWE)
Additional Assistant Referee 1: Michael Lerjeus (SWE)
Additional Assistant Referee 2: Markus Strömbergsson (SWE)
Fourth Official: Mehmet Culum (SWE)
UEFA Referee Observer: Athanassios Briakos (GRE)
UEFA Delegate: Andrei Medintsev (BUL)
Blog Referee Observer: Gitzlo (AUT)

21 October 2014, 20:45 CET
Group F, Camp Nou, Barcelona
FC Barcelona - Ajax Amsterdam
Referee: William Collum (SCO)
Assistant Referee 1: Damien Macgraith (IRL)
Assistant Referee 2: Graham Chambers (SCO)
Additional Assistant Referee 1: Robert Madden (SCO)
Additional Assistant Referee 2: John Beaton (SCO)
Fourth Official: Stuart Stevenson (SCO)
UEFA Referee Observer: Ryszard Wójcik (POL)
UEFA Delegate: Milovan Djukanovic (MNE)
Blog Referee Observer: Mike (AUT)

21 October 2014, 20:45 CET
Group F, GSP Stadium, Nicosia (CYP)
APOEL - Paris SG
Referee: Ovidiu Alin Hategan (ROU)
Assistant Referee 1: Octavian Sovre (ROU)
Assistant Referee 2: Sebastian Gheorghe (ROU)
Additional Assistant Referee 1: Pavel Cristian Balaj (ROU)
Additional Assistant Referee 2: Sebastian Colţescu (ROU)
Fourth Official: Radu Adrian Ghinguleac (ROU)
UEFA Referee Observer: Jozef Marko (SVK)
UEFA Delegate: Jean-François Crucke (BEL)
Blog Referee Observer: Chefren (ITA)

21 October 2014, 20:45 CET
Group G, Veltins Arena, Gelsenkirchen (GER)
FC Schalke 04 - Sporting Lisbon
Referee: Sergei Karasev (RUS)
Assistant Referee 1: Anton Averianov (RUS)
Assistant Referee 2: Tikhon Kalugin (RUS)
Additional Assistant Referee 1: Aleksei Nikolaev (RUS)
Additional Assistant Referee 2: Vitaly Meshkov (RUS)
Fourth Official: Nikolay Golubev (RUS)
UEFA Referee Observer: Hugh Dallas (SCO)
UEFA Delegate: Jim Stjerne Hansen (DEN)
Blog Referee Observer: Emil (CAN)

21 October 2014, 20:45 CET
Group G, Stamford Bridge, London (ENG)
Chelsea FC - NK Maribor
Referee: Danny Makkelie (NED)
Assistant Referee 1: Patrick Langkamp (NED)
Assistant Referee 2: Mario Diks (NED)
Additional Assistant Referee 1: Kevin Blom (NED)
Additional Assistant Referee 2: Ed Janssen (NED)
Fourth Official: Rob van de Ven (NED)
UEFA Referee Observer: Matteo Trefoloni (ITA)
UEFA Delegate: Jaroslav Dudl (CZE)
Blog Referee Observer: Niclas (GER)

21 October 2014, 20:45 CET
Group H, Borisov Arena, Borisov (BLR)
BATE Borisov - Shakhtar Donetsk
Referee: Ivan Bebek (CRO)
Assistant Referee 1: Tomislav Petrović (CRO)
Assistant Referee 2: Miro Grgić (CRO)
Additional Assistant Referee 1: Domagoj Vuckov (CRO)
Additional Assistant Referee 2: Goran Gabrilo (CRO)
Fourth Official: Dalibor Conjar (CRO)
UEFA Referee Observer: Sergey Zuev (RUS)
UEFA Delegate: Rudolf Zavrl (SVN)
Blog Referee Observer: Howard M. (GER)

21 October 2014, 20:45 CET
Group H, Estádio do Dragão, Porto (POR)
FC Porto - Athletic Club
Referee: Damir Skomina (SVN)
Assistant Referee 1: Jure Praprotnik (SVN)
Assistant Referee 2: Robert Vukan (SVN)
Additional Assistant Referee 1: Slavko Vinčić (SVN)
Additional Assistant Referee 2: Roberto Ponis (SVN)
Fourth Official: Manuel Vidali (SVN)
UEFA Referee Observer: Eugen Strigel (GER)
UEFA Delegate: Wolfgang Thierrichter (AUT)
Blog Referee Observer: Nikitas (GRE)

139 Comments:

  1. What expactations do you wait from Skomina for this season(with new assisatants)?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. That he recovers to old strength. The best tool to achieve that and form a new, more experienced team is, in my opinion, putting much trust into Matej Jug, giving him bigger matches than last season (this will create some extra positive pressure on Skomina) and giving Skomina less important matches this season (to allow his young ARs to get used to UCL, to allow Skomina to re-find his old shape he had in 2012/13).

      Delete
    2. 1) Will he get UCL or UEL final at his career?
      2) Chances for UE2016 and FWC2018?

      Thanks for answer

      Delete
  2. The Dutch-Italian connection Uilenbeerg/Collina has done good job....

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Not a case that Trefoloni is there as observer!

      Delete
  3. Where is Kassai? Why always Vad?

    ReplyDelete
  4. Great to see all these First Group referees getting a crack at the CL. He's probably further down the pecking order, but hoping Oliver gets a chance in the near future as well.

    ReplyDelete
  5. MORE PREDICTIONS
    A.Madrid-Malmoe:Marciniak
    Olimpiakos-Juve:Clattenburg
    Ludgorets-Basel:Aytekin
    Liverpool-Real:Çakir
    Monaco-Benfica:Mazic
    Leverkusen-Zenit:Undiano
    Anderlecht-Arsenal:Kassai
    Galatasaray-Dortmund:Proença

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Marciniak again with Malmoe! Not possible.

      Delete
    2. Probably Ludogorets or Anderlecht.

      Delete
    3. MY PREDICTIONS
      A.Madrid-Malmoe:Jug
      Olimpiakos-Juve:Rizzoli
      Ludgorets-Basel:Turpin
      Liverpool-Real:Kuipers
      Monaco-Benfica:Velasco Carballo
      Leverkusen-Zenit:Undiano Mallenco
      Anderlecht-Arsenal:Stark
      Galatasaray-Dortmund:Lannoy

      Delete
    4. Not likely that Rizzoli gets to ref. an Italian team :)

      Delete
  6. Cakir is for Liverppol Real

    ReplyDelete
  7. Good appointments for Vad. Also interesting appointment for Makkelie. Amazed the Karasev gets such a match and with a committee member as observer. A good set of appointments.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Damien McGrath (IRL) changed from team Thomson to team Collum.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. This could mean that Thomson will not be appointed again in Champions League, at least for this group stage, after Ludogorets - Real Madrid.
      It is always more and more difficult to see Scottish officials at high level in Cl or El, including both referees and assistant referees.
      I hope that Hugh Dallas is aware.

      Delete
  9. Who will in Slovan-Sparta?

    ReplyDelete
  10. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MG3rfNVsedQ&list=UUXhTZKHJ8tIn5izMfEyT2wA

    Damir Skomina (SVN) at 3:00 sent off (second yellow card) Maribor player Mitja Viler for diving. Please, comment it.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. A bit harsh in my opinion. There was a contact neither worthy of a free kick nor a diver. Play on would be better I think

      Delete
  11. I find it ridiculous to see so many UEFA First Category Referees at UCL stage. I understand UEFA has to put some promising officials to the test but this is an exaggeration. One looks at these appointments and immediately thinks of Europa League level. I have never appreciated Collina's designations but this season he's taking the cake. There are so many Elite referees being left out once again...Collina should consider they need to rest. Pathetic!

    ReplyDelete
  12. IMO these are nice appointments. Especially for Karasev, Hategan and my favourite Makkelie.

    ReplyDelete
  13. In my eyes the appointment of Makkelie comes too early. The political reasons probably dominate here.
    He is talented, no doubt. But his UEL matches actually did not indicate and are no basis for handling a UCL match with José Mourinho at Stamford Bridge immediately. I sincerely hope that he'll do well and that PLC and co did not underrate this match. Maribor showed they can be strong opponents in away matches. Ask Celtic and Schalke. This match needed Elite in my opinion, even though Maribor are not the biggest team on earth.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Niclas, you are reasons solids
      as always.

      Delete
    2. Every match at this point, at this particular competition, is extremely important irrespective of the status of the teams involved. I could easily understand this cornucopia of First Category Referees in the last but one or in the last round of UCL group stage. Right now, it's an outright absurd! Collina is borrowing trouble by all means. Anyway, best of luck for all the officials out there!

      Delete
  14. Very nice appointment for Makkelie. Also very nice for AR2 Mario Diks. He is FIFA AR for only 10 months! Also big respect for Kevin Blom; been on the elite list, but now he is AAR at a level he used to referee. Strong personality!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I agree on the rest, specially as there are Dutch referees who consider themselves as too good for that role...

      Delete
    2. I think you mean Nijhuis. Well; there are other reasons then feeling too good for the role. He has his own business, he gives lectures.

      The right conclusion is that Nijhuis doesn't want to give all his time into refereeing, and therefore doesn't deserve the Elite status. But you can't say he is to arrogant, that he find himself too good for the role.

      Delete
  15. Btw; i agree on Blom; strong personality! Same counts for Nikolaev. Maybe a weird question; but Markus Strombergsson; he gave up his Fifa status because he wants to have more spare time? Why is he always in team Eriksson then?

    I agree on your first statement Niclas, i believe its too soon for Makkelie.

    ReplyDelete
  16. I don't understand the age issue. When a referee is talented and already some years in UEL, why he can't have a match in CL? With young promising football players it's exactly the same. It's about quality and not about age in my opinion. I read here in a previous topic that Makkelie was observed by Herbert Fandel. So I think they are convinced to take this risk.

    ReplyDelete
  17. Some interesting situations from Norwegian 2nd division. This is an example of an extremely promising referee who is in a poor physical condition, without that holding him back.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3_h54Q-yehY

    3:25 penalty
    5:10 RC for SFP
    7:20 Handball by GK + quick restart + penalty

    Your opinion?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. 1) Penalty looks a bit soft
      2) No doubt, definitely SFP
      3) I don't see a penalty here

      Delete
    2. 1) Very soft penalty. Maybe even simulation.

      2) Correct.

      3) Handball by GK: YC. Even if no YC, no quick restart, because he clearly whistles to stop the play and insists for the ball, and even something explains to the GK.
      Handball: not a good angle but probably no penalty (handball).

      Delete
  18. Is Vad perhaps a candidate for Elite soon?

    ReplyDelete
  19. I would like to remember to all the users of this blog that they take always the responsibility of what they wrote. In case of request, they will respond to allegations .
    So, prior to write certain things, it would be wise to report the sources.
    Without that, we will always delete each comment with unchecked statements against a referee.

    ReplyDelete
  20. UEFA seems late with the appointments for Wednesday, maybe they are still arranging or checking visas? ;)

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Mateu got one to Istanbul.....

      Delete
    2. Matéu is another caprice of Collina
      when I think that Matéu has one
      particular method of arbitrate. He
      only signal the 60% of faults.

      Delete
  21. And Rizzoli one to Liverpool :)

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Mazic Piraeus, Aytekin Sofia, Marciniak Brussels (?)

      Delete
    2. Kuipers Leverkusen-Zenit

      Regards Phil

      Delete
  22. AR2 Berretyán missed a tight offside by Zabaleta in the action leading to 0-2.

    ReplyDelete
  23. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Not sure about the penalty awarded to CSKA - theatrical from Doumbia to say the very least...

      Delete
    2. It was Doumbia and not Musa, Nur.

      Delete
    3. Thanks, amended ;)

      Delete
    4. But, I agree with you about this penalty. I think it is a quite blatant mistake. There is a little contact between the attacker and the defender. I would go for play on. What about you?

      Delete
    5. It is nothing. Crucial mistake.

      Delete
    6. Agreed, never a pen for me. Very, very soft...

      Delete
    7. I agree.. even from the live perspective it was clear that that was definitely nothing. Doumbia even seemed to smile..

      Delete
    8. Doumbia won the position and got pushed , correct penalty. Watch caerefully!

      Delete
  24. Bebek and Makkelie: correct penalty

    ReplyDelete
  25. Correct 2nd YC by Karasev. Very good decision.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. That's as well what I think. Reckless tackle in the air from no. 3 LIS and the correct decision taken by Kasarev.

      Delete
  26. Was John Terry onside for the third Chelsea goal? I thought it looked slightly offside from the replay? Anybody else see this?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Indeed. AR2 was way out of line.

      Delete
  27. Handball penalty by Eriksson. Difficult, especially the caution.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Not pen imo, the arm is in a natural position, he can't do anything else with it really...

      Delete
    2. My opinion too.

      Delete
    3. Yes, clearly no penalty. This type of handball penalties is exceptionally often wrongly decided, even though enough videos exist that clarify that this is no deliberate act.

      Delete
    4. Same situation in MD2,even the same player.Kuipers didn't whistle it.

      Delete
    5. I agree it should never have been a penalty there.

      /Swedish observer

      Delete
  28. was the third goal from Donezk maybe offside?

    ReplyDelete
  29. Bebek:
    19' Missed YC for a late tackle.
    27' Correct Penalty + YC
    28' Players enter area shortly before the kick, o.k.
    33' Collision between Adriano and gk. For me 2nd YC and another pen
    35' Tight offside/onside
    40' Once again (active) offside?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. What about 2nd half?

      Delete
    2. 80' Ghost penalty call. One harsh YC and one for the ghost foul.

      Delete
  30. makkelie with two correct penalties

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. the 3rd is very soft

      Delete
  31. Correct penalty for Sorting, very clear foul. No card is questionable.

    ReplyDelete
  32. Total chaos in Bebek. A ghost penalty for Donetsk and play is stopped now.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. My opinion was the same but last reply clearly shows it was a clear penalty...good work AAR

      Delete
  33. What did Karasev do to Sporting? That's ridiculous!! So so bad and cruel!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Karasev, say BY BYE to Elite! The most ridiculous penalty of the season! The ball hit the HEAD!

      Delete
    2. From one replay it looked like PENALTY and from another one clearly like NO PENALTY. Being empathic with AAR2 I can fully understand this mistake even though it is the most crucial of the season so far. The different perceptions from different visual angles explain why Karasev allowed play to flow (so of course NOT his crucial mistake) but why AAR2 intervened.

      To all those anonymouses, don't even think about starting to harrass this official.

      Delete
    3. Very bad day for Sergey Karasev and his teams.

      Delete
    4. Of course, Karasev should be demoted! It's too too blatant!

      Delete
    5. If Collina and comitte still have eyes and decency, NO WAY for this referee to go to Elite. It would be a scandal! He must end up like Martin Hanson. No alternative. As simple as this!

      Delete
    6. committee*

      Delete
    7. His performance was excellent despite a mistake made by his additional assistant. So why should he be demoted and end up like Martin Hansson?

      Delete
    8. It's too too blatant, he heads up a team! Let's see what happens...

      Delete
    9. Ok. Teamleaders can be measured by the team performance. But a mistake of a 2nd/3rd cat referee on the goalline cannot prevent a referee from reaching the top if he is excellent in the rest.

      Delete
    10. Hmm...let's see how things play out but at UCL stage mistakes like this usually become eternal.

      Delete
    11. I think Karasev is in a tight spot because the tremendous mistake simply decides the winner of the match. And it occurs at UCL. By the way, why are you so sure the faulty call stems from AAR2? Either way, Karasev is the leader of the team and we all know he was not obliged to take such a touchy decision in extra time when he was not certain of the situation. Well, what's clear is that a lot of people would get very dissatisfied with the Russian being promoted.

      Delete
    12. I can understand Karasev taking that decison, even though it is awful! If a colleague of yours tells you it is penalty, you've got no reason to ignore the indication. By the way, is Meshkov a FIFA referee? If so, he should be the first one to be demoted. Will Karasev have Collina's mercy?

      Delete
    13. Just seen the controversy again...Meshkov's decision is unforgivable, he's one meter away with nobody standing in front of him!!!!!! Unbelievable!
      Should lose his FIFA badge.

      Delete
  34. Karasev with a crucial mistake again, two matchdays in a row. Yellow for diving when it should've been penalty + possible dogso in Malmö - Olympiakos and now a last minute penalty for handball when the ball hit the face.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Btw, if he gives this handball penalty, he must caution the "offender". He did not do that. So somehow this decision was definitely inconsistent.

      Delete
    2. I totally agree with you, very sad because the rest of the match he had been very consistent and predictable when he issued bookings which was good I think. I wonder why he missed this one...

      Delete
    3. Well he probably saw it. But if, in the 3rd minute of added time, your AAR2, on whom you must rely, shouts "PENALTY! PENALTY! PENALTY!" into your ear via micro, what do you do? You probably trust him and question your own perception, as it is an automatic process. So Karasev is, imo, not at fault and the mistake must be completely assigned to Meshkov.

      Delete
    4. (Although one can doubt whether you have to follow your assistants if they jump from the 10th floor just because they tell you to do so...)

      Delete
    5. Yep, it is only human to make this mistake. Referees have to rely on their assistants and sadly Meshkov got it wrong somehow.

      Delete
  35. About Hategan: a very fair match in Nicosia. Low number of whistled fouls, the most important situation was a penalty appeal by home-team at 83', my first impression is that play on was correct. The choice to end the match without cards was suitable, there were not more than 2 situations, in which anyway a warning was acceptable.
    Both assistant referees without real involvements, just two or three (not difficult) onsides but never offsides. Overall, in case of correct assessment of the penalty appeal this should be expected level. Report will follow soon.

    ReplyDelete
  36. On Kasarev: in my opinion he was very good throughout the game; consistent in detecting fouls and correctly issued cautions. Thanks to his calm manner he had 100% acceptance over 90 minutes and showed a lot of fortitude by sending off 3LIS. The late penalty is very sad because from Kasarev's angle there was no visible offence. The match deciding mistake was the result of an error in perception by AAR2. Thus, of course, the mark will be lowered, still I think Kasarev showed that he can keep full control on a match which was easy to handle to be honest. My words of wisdom on this.

    ReplyDelete
  37. http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x28dsiw_schalke-4-3-sporting-all-goals-highilights-ch-ligue-21-10-2014_sport
    Starts from 02:30.
    In my opinion exclusive mistake by AAR2 here. Karasev was not in the best position to evaluate the situation. A touch by hand was absolutely possible.
    On the contrary, AAR2 had in my opinion a free (and almost all the best possible one) view on the header. I think he was deceived by the speed of the action.
    Human mistake, yes, perhaps even excusablee. But one must say that when you are there just to check that, and you fail in a so blatant situation, deciding a match in favor of a team, this results one of the most blatant mistakes in CL.
    Said with all the respect for Meshkov.
    Karasev can't have responsibility and in my opinion the mark should be not affected by this situation, he was forced, as Niclas explained, to follow AAR2 advice.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yeah you are absolutely right. By "lowering the mark" I meant AAR2, you cannot blame Kasarev I understand.

      Delete
    2. It's a match decisive mistake, in this case with some millions in cash on the line so is not fair to say Karasev didn't have some part in the final outcome. I agree he had a good match but this was a decisive event and he got it wrong. All match he was assertive with calls and cautions but in this moment he was the exact opposite. First he was in a pretty reasonable position and he had a correct first impression, of course we win has a team and we go down has a team... He decided to follow aar2 judgment... so why no caution in an eventual goal scoring opportunity?
      As a team, Karasev and Co were not ok on this one. Of course both aar2 and Karasev should have a lower mark than usual (if we compare the other 90 and some minutes)... the fair mark would be some arround 7.9 (and this in a constructive point of view... Karasev knows that in the end he wasn't neutral has he should and receive some 8.3 or above with the perfect knowledge something went wrong wouldn't be fair for Karasev, in my opinion). A constructive 7.9 (8.4).

      Delete
    3. Few words from me (after I watched some highlights of the game):

      1. I watched Karasev few times in last 2 years and every time he made a good impression. I don't remember something really bad from him except Malmo- Olympiakos.

      2. After Malmo- Oly Karasev should have been kept away from Champions League (at least). It's not normal to have a match in CL next round after that game...

      3. Yesterday the final result was influenced by a huge mistake of referee. That mistake is unacceptable at this level. Probably AAR2 told Karasev it was handball but in the end the one who whistle is Karasev (who had a preety good position).
      I saw also some other discutable situations:
      - 2nd yellow for Mauricio was harsh but acceptable (I'm sure that other referees wouldn't have been so harsh and an energic warning would have been enough also thinking the scene was in 1st half)
      - yellow card for the Schalke's player who made the penalty

      Karasev made me a very good impression in last two years but in last two games the errors were big. He should be put on hold for a while (a promotion in winterbreak should be out of question)

      P.S:
      -in BATE- Shaktar (Bebek) I saw only the goals: offside at 5th goal and an unbelievable penalty at 7th goal (I have also some doubts for minor offsides in 1st and 3rd goals but I didn't see a proper re-play)
      -in Apoel- PSG it seems that Hategan had a game without problems. On highlights I didn't see something special (Hategan didn't show any cards ! )

      Delete
    4. About point 3): the 2nd YC was completely correct in my opinion. There are sufficient videos with instructions in the UEFA R.A.P.s which define such tackles as reckless. A player doing such stuff can go without a YC, but only at WC 2014. I think the approach to consistently punish clearly reckless tackles with the appropiate disciplinary sanction should be praised and promoted and not only "accepted".
      You can discuss about 2 YCs, both at the penalties. You can consider the Schalke defender to stop a promising attack, but the tackle itself was only careless and unlucky for me. The "handball" in 90+2 prevented a header from reaching the goal, so a YC is mandatory here.
      I would also like to underline the acceptable decision by AR2 in the 2:1 goal. It seems to have been minimum offside, but the benefit should go to the attacker as it is almost impossible to see and very thin (if at all) offside.
      The problem about the penalty in 90+2 is that from Karasev's position it was not 100% clear. The defender raised his hand and waived it in a careless manner. It was not evident whether he maybe touched the ball with this hand. If THEN your AAR2 shouts penalty into the micro, you should give it. If AAR2 even confirms 1000% certainty, you must give it even more. Please imagine the opposite: AAR2 is right and Karasev insists on NO penalty being wrong. We would not see Karasev for a couple of weeks in such a scenario. So he was forced to award the penalty. And I still insist on the circumstance that teamleaders cannot suffer from individual mistakes of their teammates. Only teamwork mistakes can result in a reduction of the mark. This was no problem of teamwork but of a wrong perception of AAR2. Of course the political image in the media is completely different and Karasev has suffered from that more than an AAR whose name is not even mentioned in the media, as usual.

      Delete
    5. Niclas is right. You must rely and believe to assistant in these kind of situations. Risk of wrong decision even when responsibility is divided 100% correctly is always possible.

      Delete
    6. Theoretically, it is always better to make a correct decision than wrong. After the decision was made, it is pointless to discuss by principle "if-then-else": if Karasev didn˝t follow the agreed division of responsibility within the team, the decision would be correct.

      Delete
    7. In my previous post I said few words about BATE- Shaktar. I had some doubts last night but I watched few moments ago some situations. I can say it wasn't offside at 1st (great decision of AR1) and 3rd (should't be discussion about offside here, but I had some doubts because I watched only 1 replay lst night) goals.
      On the other hand I still say it was offside at 5th goal and no penalty at 7th goal.

      Delete
    8. I agree about offside at 5th goal. The attacker received it from a deflection, maybe even deliberate save. So the offside position became or rather stayed relevant.

      Delete
  38. Makkelie three correct penalties and nobody says anything? Sorry, I had read many accusations here and now somebody should go hiding himself.
    A very good performance and a brilliant future, away from prying eyes.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Read more carefully. Makkelie's performance was noted above.

      Delete
    2. I don't know where you read accusations. We criticized the appointment itself, compared it to the progress and appointments of more experienced and developed referees and considered motivational factors. We did not say that Makkelie is a poor referee or will make a mess. In my report, I will give my impression about his performance. If you knew this website, you would be aware of that.

      Delete
    3. I think he was more referring to that anonymous user who was always talking about some non-existent Guardian article..

      Delete
    4. Indeed, I meant that. The posts were erased! Well done by admins, thanks.

      Delete
    5. Ok, nonetheless I think such comments do not deserve special attention. They say everything by themselves. We will delete such stuff as soon as we read and evaluated it.

      Delete
  39. Also Skomina had to deal with to penalty appeals in Porto-Bilbao in first half. We can discuss about FCPorto complaint but Bilbao situation to me was penalty.
    Also Skomina with a very wide approach to the match with some dubious foul detection at times.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Two penalties missed by Skomina in Porto. The Slovenian looked lethargic, unconcentrated and demotivated. Weird, all the more so it was quite an intense and challenging match. He needs to step up his shape.

      Delete
    2. Can you give the exact minutes of the penalty appeals?

      Delete
    3. Thanks, the first is surely more penalty than the second.
      I think that the first had to be given, in the second situation correct decision to play on.

      Delete
    4. For me, two clear penalties.

      Delete
  40. It seems team Vad had more problems than Karasev according to these 5 last videos here.

    https://vimeo.com/user13623321/videos

    ReplyDelete
  41. http://livefootballvideo.com/fullmatch/europe/uefa-champions-league/as-roma-vs-bayern-munich

    67:45 Match minute

    Klasenius raises the flag for offisde when Gervinho is still in his half of the field. Terrible mistake at this level...

    ReplyDelete
  42. I studied the replays of the penalty in Schalke multiple times now and want to share one thought / unsure impression with you.

    From one replay angle, I often had the impression that MAYBE after the defender's clear touch with his head or face the ball MAYBE bounced towards his right upper arm or hand and moved towards the corner flag after that (otherwise I also cannot explain why the ball should go there). I have no evidence for that, as the replay quality is rather poor and the camera not the clearest one, not capturing the necessary moment.
    Check the replay at 90+1:57 MATCH TIME: http://livefootballvideo.com/fullmatch/europe/uefa-champions-league/schalke-04-vs-sporting-cp

    I can be completely wrong but this angle confused me just now.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I've also seen the replay multiple times and I don't see the bal touching the arm. What I see is that first the ball is going towards the head/face of the defender, second he moves his head towards the goal (thus looking towards the goal, maybe as to avoid a collission with his face?), third the ball hits his (right) cheek due to his head turning and fourth the direction of the ball is changed such that the ball moves towards the corner flag. Hope this explanation is clear :)

      Delete
    2. That's what I see as well, I just had this feeling...probably you are right. At least I don't think that this mistake is unforgiveable. As Sporting fan I would think so for sure. But even if you can give the often used and populistic argument "this man is standing 3 metres away and had the best view possible!", I don't think that Meshkov had the ideal position and visual angle. I could imagine that from his position the head of the defender was covered by his raised hand and therefore the head contact looked like a contact with the arm in the dynamic of the action. You see I try to understand this mistake and I think there are explanations except "this man is blind and AARs are useless".

      Delete
    3. The replay at 90+1:57 suggests that the ball touched right arm. But at 90+1:28 Meshkov touches his left hand showing where he saw ball touching Sporting player.

      Delete
    4. There is no possible explanation other than the sheer incompetence of Meshkov. He couldn't be better positioned! We could easily use this example to define a football referee blunder. Deeming this decision acceptable means setting a dangerous precedent.

      Delete
    5. Who called this decision acceptable? He could be better positioned. He did not have the best visual angle, that's just a fact. This does not make this mistake better, please don't get me wrong.

      Delete
    6. A fact? I would say your fact. He had everything to get it right. One just needs two eyes to decide duly in that situation. This is not a theory but something quite obvious the entire football world could see. The angle was perfect. When someone sees something that simply did not happen...

      Delete
    7. Who called the decision acceptable? I asked you something.

      It is a mathematical fact. Take a geometry angle and check the angles. Try to look through AAR2's eyes if this does not request too many cognitive ressources from you.

      Delete
    8. Our friend Anonymous has clearly never been on a football field to deem that what "the entire football world" can see through cameras and slow-motions is equally obvious for a referee with less than a half-second to react...

      Delete
  43. VIDEO BATE Borisov 0 – 7 Shakhtar Donetsk Highlights - FootyRoom - http://footyroom.com/bate-borisov-0-7-shakhtar-donetsk-2014-10/

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I would rather say " excellent decision by AAR2" than ghost penalty but look at 2.17 and place a comment

      Delete
    2. Sorry, penalty is at 1.57

      Delete
    3. I agree. Very clumsy and in many replays it looks like a joke, but the last replay shows that #22 tackles the attacker's heel. Correct and good, AAR2 had the full responsibility as the replays show (movement towards the goalpost, shouting in his micro).

      Delete
    4. The goal for 0:5, can we speak about deliberate action of defender?? He concisely tried to play the ball (but clumsy) so attacker received the ball from defender...

      Delete
    5. IMO it was intuitive and no clearly planned deliberate act. Therefore to be deemed as deflection and not deliberate play.

      Delete
  44. I agree, this is an instinctive attempt to play and he has no chance to play the ball.
    https://vimeo.com/109811940

    ReplyDelete
  45. I anticipate the marks in our report for Team Makkelie. Other reports are already written and will be uploaded asap.
    Makkelie 8.4, Langkamp 8.4, Diks 7.9, Blom 8.3, Janssen 8.4, van de Ven 8.4

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Makkelie 8.4 why?

      Delete
  46. Can you score a mark higher then 8.4 in a normal match or only when it's challenging? What is exactly the criteria to determine the marks?

    ReplyDelete
  47. As you will read in the report, the mark could have been 8.5 but I had to deduce a tenth for missing a mandatory YC in the 3rd penalty. I considered the 3rd penalty as rather soft but absolutely acceptable. However, if you whistle it (suggested by AAR1), you must consider that as stopping a clearly promising attack and therefore a YC was missing.
    The first penalty gave him +0.1, the 2nd penalty was rather taken by (A)AR2. Minus some other rooms for improvement made it 8.4.

    You can also get 8.5 in a "normal" match however you must give good reasons as observer. Either there is a key moment in the game you got correct (e.g. a penalty with a RC for DOGSO), but the rest of the game was easy to handle and YOU as the referee were the reason that things stayed calm, for example by a good approach and personality that calmed down players in important moments. Then 8.5 and normal is possible.

    ReplyDelete
  48. Niclas, don't you think it's a blame culture with this mark system? For example when referees had a perfect performance with good management skills, full control and acceptance bij players, officials and spectators. Took always the correct decision in important situations. But then at the end the reff missed 1 mandatory YC and his mark will be reduced. Imo it's about the total performance and the way he managed the match well. I speak with many referees and they all tell me: it's better to show 1 or 2 (soft) YC cards too much then 1 YC too less. This is weird right?? In this way the referees can't be a personality but being robots by following the instructions and guidelines only.

    ReplyDelete
  49. You have a point for sure. A performance you described could maybe even be 8.6 as starting mark and would be still 8.5 with the YC reduction. However keep in mind that -0.1 only applies for CLEARLY missed YCs. I would not reduce -0.1 from the overall mark as long as the referee has a good argument and as long as there is room for interpretation. I even read real UEFA reports where the observers gave -0.1 for sth like "I think this should be a yellow card". This is indeed weird.

    In the concrete case, Makkelie was tested in many different areas. One of them was interpretation and application of the Laws of the Game, disciplinary control is one of them. If you check the 3rd penalty situation, you could maybe even discuss more about "YC for SPA or RC for DOGSO?" than about "No card or YC?". So this was a clearly missed YC for me and here the system demands -0.1.

    Let me also say that Makkelie's performance was really good in many areas, but this one missed YC was not the only "weakness". There were other technical points to improve so 8.5 would have been a bit much. From what we know the highest mark ever given on UEFA level was 8.7 (el clasico Stark, no guarantee). So you can imagine that most officials marks are in the 8.2-8.4 area.

    ReplyDelete
  50. Thanks. I was speaking in general by the way and on behalf of all referees. Also regarding to the assistant referees. When they have 1 very difficult and important offside decision correctly then their mark can be already 8.5 but comparing this to the referees they must do many things correctly will they score a higher mark.

    ReplyDelete

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