May 2, 2016

Damir Skomina in charge of Champions League semifinal Real Madrid vs Manchester City

After the double appointment of Cüneyt Çakır, another particular assignment has been made by UEFA Referees Committee: Slovenian Damir Skomina will handle the return leg of Champions League semifinal involving Real Madrid and Manchester City, after having officiated 1st leg semifinal in Europa League (Villarreal - Liverpool). 





04/05/2016
20:45 CET - Estadio Santiago Bernabéu, Madrid (Spain)
Real Madrid
http://img.uefa.com/imgml/TP/teams/logos/64x64/50051.png
-:-
Manchester City FC
Manchester City

Referee: Damir Skomina (SVN)
Assistant Referee 1: Jure Praprotnik (SVN)
Assistant Referee 2: Robert Vukan (SVN)
Additional Assistant Referee 1: Matej Jug (SVN)
Additional Assistant Referee 2: Slavko Vinčič (SVN)
4th Official: Bojan Ul (SVN)
UEFA Referee Observer: Hans Reijgwart (NED)
UEFA Delegate: Markus Stenger (GER)
Referee Liaison Officer:
The 3rd Team Referee Observer: Niclas (GER)

43 Comments:

  1. It'll be hard for him.

    ReplyDelete
  2. So the question arises why Cakir for BAY-ATL? If UEFA trust Skomina to handle a semifinal, why not keep Cakir out? Mazic, Atkinson, Kassai or Brych would have been perfect choices for the remaining semi-finals (Mazic for the other CL leg so he could handle the EL final). Really bizarre appointments. It seems PLC follows more and more the performance principle (Cakir and Skomina had decent seasons tbh) but why then have a pool of 25+ Elite officials?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The disappointment is a small word for what I feel. Skomina deserved CL semifinal, no doubt, but don't you tell me there was neither one referee to observe EL semifinal in Villareal? Oh, come on, of course there were (I am telling in general, don't get me wrong, Maxi). What now? Does Committee have only a few refs on which can rely? Cakir, Skomina, Clattenburg, Marciniak, Eriksson, Velasco for sure and who else? Rizzoli was there, but... Brych? Well, 3rd team gave him 8,5 but there were several problematic decisions and who knows what Collina saw (he observed Brych then). Mazic? We'll see about him as well. There were 3 50:50 situations in Paris, so hm. Kuipers and Kassai? Who knows. If Eriksson is a safe bet for CL final (is he?), then he might be in one EL semifinal. Kassai, Mazic? Who for the final? If Liverpool is out - Clattenburg? If both Spanish teams are out - Velasco? If Liverpool-Sevilla is the final (or in any case? Cakir, Brych or Mazic... Only Cakir is out, I believe - two semis, Olympic Games - more that enough, even PFC is in love with him :-)

      Delete
    2. EL final Sevilla-Liverpool
      Referee:Mazic
      CL final: Bayern - City
      Referee: Carballo
      :)

      Delete
  3. Deserved for Skmomina. This time I agree with committee decision, but indeed it is again someting new and never seen before this season. A referee with two semifinals: in CL and EL.
    The sensation is that referees for these last matches were not originally planned and everything can happen, following performance principle.
    Following this pattern, I must say that Marciniak would deserve another game: Liverpool - Villarreal is possible for him, if not directly EL final (but I don't think so). A name for EL final is Clattenburg, even though Atkinson was in the middle one year ago, well, this can happen.
    A totally new policy by Collina, the problem is that just a few referees get important matches, while on the paper you have 29 Elite officials to be valorised.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Based on what we have seen, Clattenburg in Sevilla and Marciniak in Liverpool. Skomina for EL final and Eriksson for CL final.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Deserved appoitment. But yet again there are other referees in Elite group that either deserved this game or one in Villareal. So again even if we look on performance principle there are surely two other names that could take this two games (Kuipers and Mazic). All in all they put presure on few selected referess and forget on others.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Mazic has match in national league tomorow.

      Delete
  6. What do you think about the EL SF 2 legs?

    ReplyDelete
  7. Olympic Football Tournaments: Men http://resources.fifa.com/mm/document/tournament/competition/02/78/92/54/refereesoftriomen_neutral.pdf
    Women http://resources.fifa.com/mm/document/tournament/competition/02/78/92/62/refereesoftriowomen_neutral.pdf

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Cakir is a man in demand...

      Delete
    2. Cakir is the second Collina :D

      Delete
  8. Fully deserved by Skomina ! I'm happy for him. But, most of you said, the question is: why are there 29 officials in the elite category if only few of them are always appointed and two of them get two semifinal matches ?
    It seems that elite category list is just a political document, but really committee fully trusts only on few of them (Cakir, Eriksson, Mazic, Velasco, Rizzoli, Kuijpers and Brych)

    ReplyDelete
  9. Decision of UEFA executive Committee

    The mandates of the refereeing officers Pierluigi Collina, Marc Batta and Hugh Dallas were renewed for a further four years until the summer of 2020.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. http://www.uefa.org/about-uefa/executive-committee/news/newsid=2359634.html#uefa+executive+committee+decisions+made

      Delete
  10. Well, after those two unexpected appointments (unexpected after last week appointments), I can make my predictions. I believe there is no chance to see Mazic in Basel. I expect his name tomorrow for the match in Sevilla. There are 4 names for the finals: Eriksson, Clattenburg, Velasco and maybe Brych. Eriksson is safe for one of the finals, and the second name will depend on results. If Bayern is out, Brych could be the choice for CL final, Eriksson for EL final. If final is Bayern-City then Velasco could be the choice. If Bayern-Real/City then Eriksson. Clattenburg is candidate only for EL final, if Liverpool is out. If final is Liverpool-Sevilla then Brych, and if Liverpool-Donetsk then Velasco (it would be second EL final for Velasco or Brych, but this is not unexpected anymore from PFC. I believe those are solutions. In the same time, this kind of nominations are so bad message for the most of the refs, just before the Euro, because the Committee says that doesn't believe to them!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Mazic with game in national league, tomorrow...

      Delete
    2. Well, then we will see Mazic next time in Euro. I hope I am wrong and that Eriksson and Mazic have already been chosen for the finals (I wrote that last week), but with latest appointments all options are opened. It could be possible if we see tomorrow Kuipers and Kassai here. You never know with Collina...

      Delete
  11. Typical Skomina so far. Far away from action, 'lazy' style, assistant's mistake.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I don't see the 'far from action'. However, I see the typical Skomina in the "don't mess with me" chat with De Bruyne ;)

      Delete
    2. He is glued to his diagonal, doesn't correct his position to be more centrally positioned if needed.

      First key match incident - Real penalty appeal (handball) rightly waved away, natural position, short distance, no chance to avoid contact.

      De Bruyne's foul could have been dealt with a stern warning (only careless, too far away to be SPA, unsporting behaviour maybe).

      Second key match incident - rightly disallowed goal due to offside (AR1).

      Delete
    3. It would be interesting to see how many km run Cakir or Mazic, and on the other side referees like Skomina.

      Delete
    4. Good question! :D

      However, I have no problem with being 'lazy' on the pitch as long as it doesn't impact referee's decisions making. Better to be sensibly lazy than to run silly.

      Delete
  12. Missed YC for Ramos ?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Only careless foul but one can argue about YC for a tactical foul preventing Aguero gaining possession of the ball.

      Delete
  13. First half. Skomina didn't impress me. PK appeal due to handball correctly denied. Correct decision from AR1 to disallow second goal. But, both AR1 and AR2 have one offside mistake each. Skomina missed YC after foul on Kroos (elbow). Also, IMO Sagna foul on Ronaldo was more YC than De Bruyne's (Marcelo acting made Skomina give YC). Also, missed obvious foul on Jesse (about 20 meters from the goal line). Not impressive performance so far, but have to say that two important decisions were correct.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Now excellent onside decision from AR2 (Modric).

      Delete
  14. Top Class onside decision on Modric at 52'!

    ReplyDelete
  15. Serious foul play by Lucas Vázquez. No doubts. Even without replay, it was clear that the player used excessive force in his tackle. In addition, opponent was hit with studs up.

    ReplyDelete
  16. IMO Vázquez should be sent off for his foul near the goal line.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. http://postimg.org/image/ni02vb141/

      Delete
  17. Unfortunately an unconvincing performance by Skomina including a crucial mistake. The difficulty of this match was absolutely normal - no difficult situations in the penalty area. First yellow card was shown to De Bruyne in 29' for a foul near the sideline. I would declare this yellow card as soft. A verbal warning would have been suitable, however I still accept Skomina's decision.
    In 31' one can reflect whether Ramos would have deserved a YC for his use of the elbow, in this case I agree with the referee, the head of the opponent was really low. Just careless.
    On the other hand a YC against Fernandinho in 34' would have been mandatory as he hit Kroos with his shoulder. Missed YC.
    Positioning and running ability can be improved, Skomina was rarely sprinting. Most time he slowly walked and stood. Maybe that's what other users call 'lazy style'.
    In 82' Skomina missed a SFP committed by Vazquez, who just received a YC. Crucial mistake, excessive force was used and studs were up. No doubt.
    The YC against Otamendi in 93' was again a soft one, which I nevertheless still accept.
    Overall Skomina missed a YC for Fernandinho, showed two soft YCs and didn't really convince with his running ability. Conflicts like in 77' were well solved, strong body language except in 46' (in which he was really strange gesturing). Unfortunately missed RC for SFP in 82' and thereby with a crucial mistake. 7.8 (8.2)

    AR1 applied a good 'wait and see technique' (2') and correctly decided to keep the flag down before 1:0. Correctly disallowed goal in 36', great decision. The offside flag in 39' was wrong - otherwise a good performance. 8.4
    AR2 also with one wrong offside decision (12'), fantastic onside in 52'. Modric was really close not in an offside position. Correct offside flags in 46' and 62'. 8.4

    Other Slovenian officials on expected level.

    ReplyDelete
  18. What about the situation when Ronaldo grabbed the ball before he was cautioned for offside? Ok, not to give a YC?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Of course. Chronology of events. The first was offside, so Ronaldo can't be cautioned for trying to score by hand because there was no further possibility to score.

      Delete
    2. Well, allow me to disagree. If Ronaldo had made a reckless challenge while being in offside position, he should have been given the yellow card. So in this case, if he tries to deceive the referee by trying to score a goal with his hand, he should also receive the while card, despite being in offside position. The thing is that I don't think he tried to deceive Skomina and score the goal, that's why IMO Skomina made the correct decision by not booking him.

      Delete
    3. Reckless challenge has its impact on the opponent, as well as, for example, kicking the ball away after whistle (delaying the restart or dissent). Ronaldo's behaviour had no impact neither on the play nor on the opponent. The goal could have not been scored. A player can handle the ball deliberately after whistle.

      Delete
    4. But was it really (clearly) after the whistle?

      Delete
    5. When AR detects the offside, it is already effective, there isn't the need to wait for referee's whistle, which of course comes with a small delay due to the necessary time to signal it.

      Delete
    6. Speaking generally, it's the referee's whistle which decides and not the AR's flag.

      Delete
    7. You are right, my mistake. But then rules are not so clear.
      I think that in such situations, it is common habit to punish players by issuing cards only in case of a punishable offense by itself (for example, violent conduct) not related to play's dynamics.

      Delete

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