June 12, 2016

Refereeing Analysis - Matches 2-4: Velasco (ALB-SUI), Moen (WAL-SVK) & Rizzoli (ENG-RUS)

Refereeing in Matches 2-4: After four matches, we have to conclude that the overall level of refereeing cannot satisfy UEFA and has not conveyed the best, first impression that is so important. The three performances of yesterday in detail!



Carlos Velasco Carballo's Team in Albania vs Switzerland

The 45-year old Spaniard commenced the 2nd day at EURO 2016. Overall, his performance was below the expected level from my point of view both on a technical and on a tactical level. But let's focus on the most important situations at first. VIDEO

Important Situations:

1| 2nd Yellow Card against Albania's Cana for deliberately handling the ball and thus stopping a promising attack.

The defender slipped on the ground without being fouled by the attacker. Having fallen to the ground and recognizing that the Suisse player would be free in front of the goal, he deliberately handles the ball. Carlos Velasco, after short conversation with AAR2, decides to caution the offender with a Yellow Card. As it is his second caution, he is sent off.

In such situations it is important to freeze the exact moment of the offence.



At the moment of the handball, the likelihood was extremely high that the attacker would get the ball. He would have clearly had it under his control and only had to make a 45° turn to shoot the ball into the goal. If we imagine - for a moment - that Cana had not been cautioned earlier, a yellow card would have been far too little from my point of view. The view that the 2nd Yellow Card looks acceptable at first glance is, in my opinion, kind of co-produced by the circumstance that Cana had to go anyway. But this may not play any role. A missed Red Card does not become better if a wrong (2nd) Yellow Card is given. Admittedly, it has the same effect, so that most fans will hardly care.

2| Penalty Area Decision Lichtsteiner vs Lenjani

Difficult situation and definitely in the area of what we call a 50:50 situation. There are two contacts, one at the top (relatively clear holding by Lichtsteiner) and one at the bottom (knees are colliding). In my view, Lenjani mostly loses his balance and falls to ground due to the contact at the bottom for which Lichtsteiner is not really guilty. And, even though this is no really relevant criteria in the Laws of the Game (but in terms of common sense it is even more): Lenjani fell too easily. I think this made Velasco waive the situation away. Acceptable decision for me.

3| Penalty Area Decision Goalkeeper vs Seferovic

This situation is easier. If the goalkeepers hits the attacker, a penalty should most probably be given. But he did not touch him. Considering the delayed thought "I could start to fall!" the attacker surely had, his hands outstretched to the front and landing like a dying albatross on the pitch, he actually should have been cautioned for simulation (AAR1 responsibility). No penalty for sure, that's the most important thing.


Positive Points:

1| Velasco kept the match under his control, even though there was some temperature in it.

2| He consistently identified cases of SPA and took them out of the game with Yellow Cards.

3| Preventive warnings at set pieces such as free-kicks that were supposed pro-actively avoid offences like holding or pushing at corners, free-kicks or alike.


Points for Improvement:

1| Stepwise Tactical Approach and Disciplinary Control: In 3' and 7', as you can see in the video, there were two ideal chances to issue verbal warnings: At first, a discreet warning could have been given with a calm down gesture. In 7', he could have increased his level of sternness a bit by a more public verbal warning. Suddenly in 13', he sorted out an incorrect and generally too harsh and unpredictable Yellow Card. On the other hand, an offence which actually required a Yellow Card (32') went unpunished and of course also did not result in a warning.

As you can see, his disciplinary measures were limited to either doing nothing or to issue a card. In 75', he gave a good warning with strong body language... Why not earlier?!

2| Advantage Rule: Differ between team benefit (game advantage) and ball advantage. In 65', an Albanian was fouled at the left sideline, clear case of SPA, maybe even of reckless nature. If you want to send a clear signal and keep control, you stop play, caution the offender and re-start play with the direct free-kick. Velasco did not do so but applied an advantage which made no sense at all (2 attackers vs 6 defenders approximately). Albania lost the advantage (which did not exist) and Switzerland almost scored the 0:2 goal. Velasco had MUCH luck that they did not use that chance.

3| Communication: No words with the players, little explanations and hardly any warning. Communication is a key strength of good referees and Velasco did not show anything of that yesterday. Same goes for his card presentation: Raising cards for only a tenth of a second is not ideal and does not express the necessary confidence and certainty.


Our Observers' Mark Proposals




Ø
Artur (SUI)
Carter (AUS)
Chefren (ITA)
Detelin (BUL)
Edward (GRE)
Harry
(ENG)
Niclas
(GER)
RayHD (POL)
Rik (NED)
Ref: Velasco
7.83
n.a.
n.a.
7.8
7.4
n.a.
n.a.
7.8
8.3
n.a.
AR1: Alonso
8.40

---
---


8.4
8.4

AR2: Yuste
8.40

---
---


8.4
8.4

AAR1: Gil M.
8.40


---
---


8.3
8.4

AAR2: Del Cerro
8.15


---
---


7.9
8.4

4OF: van Boekel
8.35


---
---


8.3
8.4












TEAM AVERAGE
8.08









 


Svein Oddvar Moen's Team in Wales vs Slovakia

The Norwegian showed the probably worst performance so far. He had a completely disappointing outing with no line and little accuracy in his foul detection and disciplinary control. And, he and his AAR1 also made a clear and important mistake. VIDEO

Important Situations:

1| Missed penalty in 32':

Williams (WAL#20) entered the penalty area and Slovakian defender Škrtel tried to shield the ball. But he did more than that: He used his arm as a weapon and deliberately made strong contact with his opponent's facial area while the ball was in play. Clear penalty and missed red card for serious foul play, maybe even violent conduct.

AAR1 Johnsen was standing some metres away and deemed this as nothing. Hard to understand. Moen must be blamed as well though. Watching replays from bird perspective proof that Moen stopped his run and did not enter the penalty area. He became slower and surely relied on his AAR1. Therefore, he has to assume responsibility as well. It cannot be that offences which can be seen much better from 10-15 m distance (there are even scientific studies proving that..) are fully shifted to the AAR1's shoulders, who a) looked at the bottom rather than to the top where the offence occurred and b) is having a suboptimal angle and position: he is too close.

2| Violent Conduct by Kucka on Williams?

Having fouled him, Kucka maybe deliberately tramples over Williams' head. I leave that open for discussion. But I would find a red card for violent conduct more than sympathetic.

3| Penalty Appeals later in the game:

In both cases, not enough. Specially the one involving Gareth Bale is not enough for me. Yes, the defender just looked at the attacker and maybe impeded his progress (which would be an indirect free-kick by the way). But such contacts normally do not make an almost 100kg man fall...


Positive Points:

1| Fitness and Athleticism: as usual, Moen's stamina was great.

2| Advantage Rule and Delayed Whistle: He used that quite well, e.g. in 62'.


Points for Improvement:

1| Foul Detection. Huge huge problems in that. (lack of acceptance due to that).

2| Tactical Cleverness and sensible Disciplinary Management. Even huger problems in that. (lack of acceptance due to that) - you can see that he contributed to a match which was more difficult that necessary by a wrong and unnecessarily lenient approach in the early minutes..

3| Don't rely on your AARs by 100% in cases where you have to assume responsibility yourself! Enter the penalty area despite the presence of AARs!


Our Observers' Mark Proposals



Ø
Artur (SUI)
Carter (AUS)
Chefren (ITA)
Detelin (BUL)
Edward (GRE)
Harry
(ENG)
Niclas
(GER)
RayHD (POL)
Rik (NED)
Ref: Moen
7.86
8.1
n.a.
7.8
7.8
7.8
8.1
7.8
7.8
n.a.
AR1: Haglund
8.40
---
---
---
---
8.4
8.4
 ---
---

AR2: Andas
8.40
---
---
---
---
8.3
8.5
 ---
---

AAR1: Johnsen
7.90
---
---
---
---
7.9
7.9
 ---
---

AAR2: Edvartsen
8.40
---
---
---
---
8.4
8.4
 ---
---

4OF: Kulbakov
8.30
---
---
---
---
8.2
8.4
 ---
---












TEAM AVERAGE
8.07









 


Nicola Rizzoli's Team in England vs Russia

The Italian multi-final-referee from Mirandola performed quite well and elegantly as usual. Really pleasant to watch. Good performance from the 1st until the last minute in terms of the big picture and management of the game. But: There were 2-3 problematic situations including the free-kick leading to England's goal. VIDEO

Important Situations:

1| Free-kick leading to the 1:0 goal

These types of situations are difficult for referees and that's why they have to pay extra attention on taking the right conclusions and decisions! Dele Alli passed the ball through Shchennikov's feet and collided with the latter. The defender did nothing except standing in the way (for which he cannot be blamed though as he made no movement towards Alli and did not make himself bigger either). In traffic, you would call that rear-end-collision for which the one is guilty that produces the collision. In this case, I think Alli wanted nothing else. Rizzoli should have waived play-on in my opinion - a Yellow Card there was incorrect at any rate as there was no clear promising attack.

The free-kick was directly converted into a (beautiful) goal so that it is a significant mistake for me (-0.2). UEFA will most likely back Rizzoli as these situations are a matter of interpretation in most cases and as no Russian really complaint. But, always keep in mind that acceptance is not = correct decision. Eastern European players usually don't complain as much as their Western colleagues which mostly has sociopsychological roots.

On the whole: In the reality of the game, an accepted and maybe acceptable decision. As a referee observer interested in highlighting what would be correct, this is a significant mistake for me. But also here: Opinions might differ. I think Rizzoli showed - apart from the free-kick - that he should get big games at this tournament.

2| Disallowed goals for offside 

Both situations were clear and relatively easy to take. Good performances of the assistant referees in general.


Positive Points:

1| Full Control.

2| Good dose of authority. He chose a suitable approach to the game, whistling what was needed (except the free-kick in 72'), but also being tolerant at times. Excellent preventive warning in the middle of the first half (against a Russian attacker) - this was a key situation for keeping match and players under his good leadership.

3| Many brave free-kick decisions in penalty area proximity. Only in one case, he was wrong to my mind - and this was in 72'..


Points for Improvement:

1| Identify situations where attackers seek contact and produce collisions with "innocent" defenders.

2| Issue mandatory Yellow Cards after having applied an advantage at the next stoppage. He failed to do so in 48' - the same offender made a tough foul (without even a free-kick) some minutes later again.

3| Positioning: at times, he slightly impeded play without interfering with the ball.


Our Observers' Mark Proposals



Ø
Artur (SUI)
Carter (AUS)
Chefren (ITA)
Detelin (BUL)
Edward (GRE)
Harry
(ENG)
Niclas
(GER)
RayHD (POL)
Rik (NED)
Ref: Rizzoli
8.30
8.3
n.a.
8.4
n.a.
8.4
n.a.
8.2
8.2
n.a.
AR1: Di Liberatore
8.40
---
n.a.
---

8.4

---
8.4
AR2: Tonolini
8.40
---
n.a.
---

8.4

---
8.4

AAR1: Orsato
8.40
---
n.a.
---

8.4

---
8.4

AAR2: Damato
8.40
---
n.a.
---

8.4

---
8.4

4OF: Sidiropoulos
8.40
---
n.a.
---

8.4

---
8.4












TEAM AVERAGE
8.35









 

* Team Average: Referee's Average Mark 50% + Marks of AR1, AR2, AAR1 and AAR2 50%
** The highest and lowest average marks are eliminated to control deviations (statistical reasons), but only if 5 or more observers have submitted their marks.

24 Comments:

  1. My predection for MD2
    RUS-SVK Collum (SCO) FO:Sidiropoulos (GRE)
    FRA-ALB Sergey Karasev (RUS) FO: Kulbakov (BLR)
    ROU-SUI Královecz (CZE) FO:Oliver (ENG)
    ENG-WAL Brych (GER) FO: Orsato (ITA)
    GER-POL Kuipers (NED) FO:Taylor (ENG)
    UKR-NIR Skomina (SVN) FO:Grujic (SRB)
    ESP-TUR Atkinson (ENG) FO: Bognár (HUN)
    CZE-CRO Moen (NOR) FO: Sidiropoulos (GRE)
    ITA-SWE Velasco Carballo (ESP) FO: Kulbakov (BLR)
    BEL-IRL Turpin (FRA) FO:Dankert (GER)
    POR-AUT Rizzoli (ITA) FO:Johanesson (SWE)
    ISL-HUN Marciniak (POL) FO: Ardeleanu (CZE)

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Mine are
      RUS-SVK Collum (SCO) FO: Johannesson (SWE)
      FRA-ALB Sergey Karasev (RUS) FO: Kulbakov (BLR)
      ROU-SUI Brych (GER) FO: Sidiropolous (GRE)
      ENG-WAL Skomina (SVN) FO: Eriksson (SWE)
      GER-POL Kuipers (NED) FO: Rizzoli (ITA)
      UKR-NIR Kralovec (CZE) FO: Orsato (ITA)
      ESP-TUR Atkinson (ENG) FO: Turpin (FRA)
      CZE-CRO Kassai (HUN) FO: Bastien (FRA)
      ITA-SWE Hategan (ROU) FO: Kulbakov (BLR)
      BEL-IRL Moen (NOR) FO: Sidiropolous (GRE)
      POR-AUT Clattenburg (ENG) FO: Collum (SCO)
      ISL-HUN Marciniak (POL) FO: Madden (SCO)

      Delete
  2. I have one question to the observers who marked Rizzoli's perfomance with a 7,9: didn't the call of the offence in 72' came from Damato? So, should Damato not also get 7,9?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. This is very possible, but we cannot know that (which is different to Velasco and AAR2, as both definitely had eye-contact and Velasco slightly nodded into his direction).

      Delete
  3. The Carballo video is not working.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Video is working now. An invalid URL.

      Delete
  4. Why can Cherfren observer ENG -RUS with Rizzoli? He from Italy, not?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. He may be, but his mark is erased and as a result doesn't count on the referee's average.

      Delete
    2. The highest and lowest marks are eliminated as soon as 5 observers have submitted their marks (see **). So one of the 8.4s had to be deleted.

      Delete
  5. Great work guys, especially so quick after the matches

    ReplyDelete
  6. Appointments on UEFA.com:
    RUS - SVK: Skomina (FO: Eriksson)
    ROU - SUI: Karasev (FO: Kulbakov)
    FRA - ALB: Collum (FO: Oliver)

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Here: http://www.uefa.com/uefaeuro/season=2016/standings/round=2000448/group=2002441/index.html

      Delete
    2. http://www.uefa.com/uefaeuro/season=2016/matches/round=2000448/match=2017888/match-info/index.html

      And so on for the other two matches... Golubev confirmed in Karasev's team
      Kralovec still not appointed

      Delete
    3. Now it is clear that Brych has ENG - WAL.
      Kuipers GER - POL. Kralovec UKR - NIR.

      Delete
  7. I think Brych will get ENG-WAL. Kuipers and Kralovec are left. Kralovec for UKR-NIR and Kuipers GER-POL

    ReplyDelete
  8. Sorry to correct you, but the assitants were faultless, keeping the standard set by the previous Rizzoli team from WC2014.

    No reason to raise the flag when you are a flash-lag expert:
    http://postimg.org/image/idoac4phn/

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Don't be sorry, good that you correct us! Excellent decision then.

      Delete
    2. I agree there is no offside in that scene but the line you drew is wrong.

      Delete
  9. Guys, I was wondering how did you manage to create all this videos? How did you put all the actions behind each other? I would be really grateful if you could answer this question. Thanks in advance!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I create all the videos. It's a really time-consuming work. I download the game, use Bandicam to record scenes I'm interested in. Then, I use movie maker to create a video.

      Delete
    2. At this moment, there is the opportunity to say that your thanks for our work, these analyses and portraits should also go to my colleagues. Videos, strengths and weaknesses, some statistical data - all that is only possible thanks to them.

      Delete
  10. Can retrospective action be taken in the Euros? Not that Skrtel will face any because it was clearly seen.

    ReplyDelete
  11. First of all great work with these analyses and videos. They are a good service for all referees :)
    I want to correct something which I think is wrong about this analyses. In the penalty appeal in Moen's game concerning Gareth Bale, you mention that if a foul is whistled (in which I think it is a foul but I accept the decision concerning other factors) that an indirect free kick should be given. Well since there is contact between players, the indirect free kick can never be given.

    ReplyDelete

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