January 18, 2017

AFCON 2017 - Referee Appointments for Matchday 2

These are the officials appointed for MD2 at AFCON 2017. Among others, Bernard Camille from Seychelles will control the tie between Algeria and Tunisia, while Zambia's Janny Sikazwe will officiate his second game in the tournament. Missing assignments will be added in due course. 

M9, Group A
18/01/2017, 17:00 CET, Libreville
Gabon - Burkina Faso
Referee: GASSAMA Bakary Papa (Gambia)
Assistant Referee 1: BIRUMUSHAHU Jean-Claude (Burundi)
Assistant Referee 2: ABO EL SADAT BEDYER Tahssen (Egypt)
4th Official: TESSEMA WEYESA Bamlak (Ethiopia)

M10, Group A
18/01/2017, 20:00 CET, Libreville
Cameroon - Guinea-Bissau
Referee: ESSRAYRI Youssef (Tunisia)
Assistant Referee 1: HMILA Anouar (Tunisia)
Assistant Referee 2: MAHAMADOU Yahaya (Niger)
4th Official: DEMBELE Denis (Côte d'Ivoire)

M11, Group B
19/01/2017, 17:00 CET, Franceville
Algeria - Tunisia
Referee: CAMILLE Bernard (Seychelles)
Assistant Referee 1: BABA Abel (Nigeria)
Assistant Referee 2: IBRAHIM Mohammed Abdallah (Sudan)
4th Official: LEMGHAIFRY Ali (Mauretania)

M12, Group B
19/01/2017, 20:00 CET, Franceville
Senegal - Zimbabwe
Referee: JIYED Rédouane (Morocco)
Assistant Referee 1: ACHIK Rédouane (Morocco)
Assistant Referee 2: AHMED ALI Waleed (Sudan)
4th Official: GRISHA Ghead (Egypt)

M13, Group C
20/01/2017, 17:00 CET, Oyem
Ivory Coast - DR Congo
Referee: SIKAZWE Janny (Zambia)
Assistant Referee 1: DOS SANTOS Jerson Emiliano (Angola)
Assistant Referee 2: RANGE Aden Marwa (Kenya)
4th Official: BENNETT Daniel (South Africa)

M14, Group C
20/01/2017, 20:00 CET, Oyem
Morocco - Togo
Referee: KEITA Mahamadou (Mali)
Assistant Referee 1: MENKOUANDE Evarist (Cameroon)
Assistant Referee 2: DOUMBOUYA Aboubacar (Guinea)
4th Official:

M15, Group D
21/01/2017, 17:00 CET, Port Gentil
Ghana - Mali
Referee: ABID CHAREF Mehdi (Algeria)
Assistant Referee 1: ETCHIALI Abdelhak (Algeria)
Assistant Referee 2: MARENGULA Arsénio Chadreque (Mozambique)
4th Official:

M16, Group D
21/01/2017, 20:00 CET, Port Gentil
Egypt - Uganda
Referee: DIEDHIOU Malang (Senegal)
Assistant Referee 1: CAMARA Djibril (Senegal)
Assistant Referee 2: SAMBA El Hadji Malick (Senegal)
4th Official:


  1. Strange that the whole Senegalese team has been out of all appointments so far. Neither Diedhiou nor his assistants appeared so far.

  2. OT

    FIFA Technical Director Marco van Basten would see offside abolished and sin-bins introduced. "Among Van Basten's other ideas is one to replace extra-time and penalties with ice hockey-style shootouts involving players dribbling towards the goalkeeper from "25 metres out."

    No comment...


    1. They seem to want to make offside more simple and replace the YC with a sin-bin for 2 or 3 mins.

  3. I thought Bakary Gassama should have been given Algeria v Tunisia... Looks a possibly heated clash and Gassama would have been ideal for it in my opinion!!

    1. Probably CAF wants to keep him alive for the most important games (semifinals). Camille seems to be a good choice, too.

    2. Camille is also among the pre-selected referees for 2018, isn't it?? If so, then this can be considered as an important test for him!!

  4. Minute 65' in ALG - TUN: very controversial situation!
    After a wrong backpass by a player from ALG, TUN had a clear chance to score, player was fouled (pushing) from behind by the player who had previously lost the ball. Camille decided for YC and penalty.
    I think it was a double mistake: a replay showed that the contact occurred just a few outside the box, and it was a clear DOGSO, so I would say free kick and RC!
    I think AR1 could have helped referee about the position of the foul.
    Waiting for your analysis, RayHD! This was very crucial because TUN scored the 2-0.

    1. I am just watching Cameroon - Guinea-Bissau at the moment but will provide the video of this particular situation as soon as possible. Thanks for reporting it.

    2. Thank you so much. I want just to add: can't find explanation for YC instead of RC.

    3. https://youtu.be/qZxVXGl7d6U?t=1m39s

      The only explanation: He punished the tripping in the box and not the pushing outside the box. After some replays, this might be the correct decison.

    4. Difficult to find the real infringement on the basis of replays. If there is a foul, one must back the decision to award a penalty. But, to be honest, I can't see a 'genuine attempt to play the ball' in this scene. So, yes, RC should follow anyway.

    5. However, it was a challenge for the ball in which the defender unfortunately tripped the attacker. I believe in such cases a yellow card is wanted, but I agree that the wording "genuine attempt to play the ball" also allows alternative interpretations (there have been similar videos where UEFA said "yellow").

    6. After many replays (especially the camera from behind) IMO the offence occured inside the penalty area. But I totally agree that the RC should be given.
      But for my is interesting what about the referee mark if the situation will be folow - offence as fact was not in the penalty area, but referee awarded the penalty and YC?

  5. OT: German sports magazine kicker has published the current referee salaries in the European top leagues

    Germany: Base salary: UEFA Elite: 75000€, FIFA referee and/or 5 Bundesliga years: 65000€, other referees: 50000€, FIFA assistants: 15000€, other assistants: 10000€
    Per Match: Referees: 3800€, Assistants: 1900€, 4th official: 900€

    Spain: Base salary: unknown, but allegedly up to 10000€/month
    Per Match: Referees: 3631€, Assistants: 1521€, 4th official: 890€
    + bonus for image rights

    England: Base salary: up to 73900€
    Per Match: Referees: 1705€, Assistants+4th officials: 1250€

    Italy: Base salary: up to 80000€, >25 Serie A matches: 40000€, newbies: 30000€, Assistants: 23000€
    Per Match: Referees: 3800€, Assistants: 1080€, 4th officials: 800€


  6. GABON - BURKINA FASO (Bakary Papa Gassama - Gambia)

    Key Match Incidents:
    37' - GAB's penalty kick and YC for SPA to the BFA's goalkeeper; it was a quick counterattack, so thumbs up to the referee for spotting it as well as to AR2 for good onside call, but YC is totally wrong, in my opinion (no SPA, no reckless tackle)
    86' - BFA's penalty-appeal waved away by the referee; borderline, but at least acceptable decision, too easy fall

    Other issues:
    - the referee, apart from the YC issued in the penalty incident, chose a lenient line regarding potential SPA offences (see: 07', 41' - even no foul, 47', 52', 55', 69') but along with his friendly radiation visible through the game and tolerance of physical play being much higher than in another games, it was well accepted by players
    - small riot at the end of the first half solved well by the fourth official, maybe the referee should offer more anticipation and prevention in this case? (45+3')
    - why did the referee ordered to retake free kick in 45+1'?
    - studs-tackles and no cards (02', 44', 67')
    - dissenting behaviour (29', 90+3')
    - fouls or not? (15', 28')

    Difficult to categorize this performance - it was neither very good nor bad - but I would go with an expected level mark, most likely with 8.3.

    1. IMO agree that the situation on 37 min only penalty (no YC). The main reason- the speed of the ball and ball direction.

    2. 37': wow, what a rapid counterattack! it was very challenging for the referee to follow the play! correct decision to whistle the penalty, we must praise Gassama, but I agree with you that YC was not needed, player from Gabon kicked the ball before the contact, without the foul, nothing would have happened (very likely goal kick), but this was quite difficult to spot, however I wouldn't penalize too much the referee in this case for having issued the YC. Not easy to read from his position.
      86': Agree with you, supportable decision to play on there, not a clear foul in my opinion.
      Later I will try to answer on the rest :) Thanks again for your work.

  7. CAMEROON - GUINEA-BISSAU (Yusuf As-Srayri - Tunisia)

    Key Match Incidents:
    44' - CMR's penalty-appeal waved away by the referee; good decision, CMR player was looking for a contact
    54' - very good use of wait-and-see technique by the AR1 leading to an OGSO
    77' - GNB's penalty-appeal waved away by the referee; there is a significant holding that is however not occurring withing playing distance but the player held would be able to get active; penalty should have been whistled, in my opinion; would we assign a crucial mistake for that?

    Other issues:
    - the referee appeared calm and not communicative / not having good rapport with players (arrogant radiation) - 'card or nothing' approach
    - possible YCs not issued: 01' - SPA?, 16' - studs-tackle after being previously fouled, 35' - illegal use of arms, 75' - careless-reckless tackle from behind, 87' - studs-tackle, 90+2' - dissent
    - I have my doubts with regard to the YC issued in the 30th minute (alleged reckless challenge)
    - free kick execution in 3rd minute
    - use of advantage was possible at offside offence in the 6th minute

    Most likely an 8.3 performance without assigning a crucial mistake for the incident from the 77th minute.

    1. 44': Agree with you, player looked for a contact, the original tackle was not a foul.
      54': Indeed, AR1 must be really praised, most of ARs would have raised the flag there!
      77': holding is really significant there, it has clear effect, no matter that ball is elsewhere, referee had in my opinion to whistle penalty! a more accurate prevention and control of penalty area at set pieces would have helped, for me crucial mistake.

  8. M15, Group D
    21/01/2017, 17:00 CET, Port Gentil
    Ghana - Mali
    Referee: ABID CHAREF Mehdi (Algeria)
    Assistant Referee 1: ETCHIALI Abdelhak (Algeria)
    Assistant Referee 2: MARENGULA Arsénio Chadreque (Mozambique)
    4th Official:

    M16, Group D
    21/01/2017, 20:00 CET, Port Gentil
    Egypt - Uganda
    Referee: DIEDHIOU Malang (Senegal)
    Assistant Referee 1: CAMARA Djibril (Senegal)
    Assistant Referee 2: SAMBA El Hadji Malick (Senegal)
    4th Official:


    M17, Group A
    22/01/2017, 20:00 CET, Franceville
    Guinea-Bissau - Burkina Faso
    Referee: TESSEMA WEYESA Bamlak (Ethiopia)
    Assistant Referee 1: BABA Abel (Nigeria)
    Assistant Referee 2: IBRAHIM Mohammed Abdallah (Sudan)
    4th Official:

    M18, Group A
    22/01/2017, 20:00 CET, Libreville
    Cameroon - Gabon
    Referee: BENNETT Daniel Frazer (South Africa)
    Assistant Referee 1: SIWELA Zakhele Thusi (South Africa)
    Assistant Referee 2: DOUMBOUYA Aboubacar (Guinea)
    4th Official:

    M19, Group B
    23/01/2017, 20:00 CET, Libreville
    Zimbabwe - Tunisia
    Referee: DEMBELE Denis (Ivory Coast)
    Assistant Referee 1: TAN Marius Donatien (Ivory Coast)
    Assistant Referee 2: SAFARI KABENE Olivier (DR Congo)
    4th Official:

    M20, Group B
    22/01/2017, 20:00 CET, Franceville
    Senegal - Algeria
    Referee: BONDO Joshua (Botswana)
    Assistant Referee 1: DOS SANTOS Jerson Emiliano (Angola)
    Assistant Referee 2: MARENGULA Arsénio Chadreque (Mozambique)
    4th Official:

  9. Predictions for rest of MD3:
    MAR-CIV: Gassama, Birumushashu, Samba
    TOG-COD: Camille, El Sadat, Camara
    EGY-GHA: Alioum, Mekouande, Nguegoue
    UGA-MLI: Lemghaifry, Ali, Hmila

  10. ALGERIA - TUNISIA (Bernard Camille - Seychelles)

    Key Match Incidents:
    03' - wrong offside call from AR1 and denied OGSO
    09' - free kick for shirt-pulling in favour of TUN; usually we whistle such kind of offences in the place where they stopped, here both players were leaving the penalty area, the holding started in the box and lasted outside; FK or PK should be given in such circumstances?
    45' - sequence of events: dubious but acceptable free kick in favour of ALG, YC for encroaching closer than the 9.15 m from the ball during a free kick, the booked player claps at the referee - should he be sent off for a 2nd yellow card (dissent by action)?, then ALG players suggest a possible violent conduct in the box, but no evidence for that
    58' - ALG's penalty-appeal waved away by the referee; good call as the holding is slight if not non-existent
    58' - TUN's penalty-appeal waved away by the referee; I am not sure where exactly the alleged infringement had place but in my opinion it's still not enough to whistle FK or PK
    60' - TUN's penalty-appeal waved away by the referee; potential handball of #13 ALG but replays are not clear enough, even in slow-motion...
    64' - TUN's penalty kick; after carefully watching many, many replays, I am sure the crucial contact had place exactly on the line of penalty area, so yes, the penalty kick was rightly awarded, well done!; the problem is with DOGSO - can we say about a 'genuine attempt to play the ball' in case of defender runs clearly behind the attacker, previously losing the fight for the ball, and create a careless contact from behind with the attacker? In my opinion, no. It's not an attempt to play the ball and therefore it should be a red card for me.
    76' - another sequence of events: the referee tries to play an advantage but goes back to the foul, he positions the defensive wall exactly on the penalty area line (unbelievable at such level!), there is a handball in the wall which is not sanctioned by the referee (he whistled a handball in the 20th minute (you can check this in another video) and in this case it was surely more harmful to the attacking team than that one and should have been whistled)
    90+3' - wrong offside call from AR1 and denied OGSO
    90+5' - wrong offside call from AR1 and denied OGSO (where the hell was the AR?!)

    Other issues:
    Surely it was the most demanding game to the referee crew at this tournament. Bernard Camille reminds me Szymon Marciniak in terms of presence, athletic body structure, being very firm and natural in rapport with players, having natural authority, etc. The number of key match incidents the referee faced in this game is enormous. We can judge them isolatedly and even assign him some crucial mistakes but it was almost impossible to handle that game being 'undamaged'. The referee kept the things under control and it's a real success. Of course, there were some points for improvement: never position the defensive wall exactly on the penalty area line!, choose better positioning at set pieces (07', 20', 89').
    - possible YCs not given: 17' (SPA), 19' (studs-tackle), 45' (dissent - would be a 2nd YC), 67' (kick in the head), 82' (illegal use of arms).

    The assistant referee #1 was really poor. I would assign him three crucial mistakes and important points for improvement. Shouldn't get a further game if you ask me.

    The question worth of 100 pts: what would be your mark? :D

    1. 3' Strange mistake because the AR was very well positioned and he had to see the player ONSIDE. Luckily, a goal was not scored.
      9': I would back the referee, very likely the holding had a real effect outside the box. To be added, before the execution of throw-in, play was of course still stopped, so this can be another reason for backing the referee.
      45': Very soft free kick but no mistake in whistling it (reported by AR1). Correct decision by referee to book the player for encroaching, even though this is quite rare. About the clapping, I don't know if referee noticed it, video is not clear, however AR1 could have informed him. Of course, a clear YC. Player had to be sent off, but this remains just on LotG. I mean, very difficult to see a so harsh decision on the pitch :) The subsequent violent conduct is difficult to detect, we can say nothing.
      58': I would back the referee there, not enough for a penalty.
      58': Player from TUN was perhaps looking for this contact, however it can be not enough for a penalty and I share your doubts, absolutely impossible to understand whether it was inside or outside the box. It seems on the line but no evidence.
      60': not clear, it is possible that the touch occurs by shoulder, so referee should be backed.
      64': well, good if the contact was inside the box, however, the missed RC, as I already said, has no explanations, it wasn't a genuine attempt of playing the ball, at any rate, missing RC for DOGSO. I think we can agree that in such scenario it was a DOGSO, given the fact that the player was alone in penalty area against keeper. Would be very strange if the officials assessed a SPA there.
      76': given the kind of the foul and the direction of the ball, the attempt to give advantage was not well spent, referee could have whistled immediately the foul, however, that's not a big problem. Not a good idea to position the wall exactly on the line, and I think that this handball could have been whistled. Arm is not close to body, the touch by elbow surely stops the shot by increasing body's volume. Camille made it difficult by himself. I also watched the video regarding the situation in 20' minute, in that case whistling is an OK decision. So, more consistence in such situations would be expected.
      90'+3: it looks a wrong call, we can't be 100% sure, but a NO FLAG would have been OK, it was not easy, given the movements of attacker and defenders, but still a mistake for me.
      90'+5: well, I have no words there, I could also back the AR for having flagged OFFSIDE, situation can be difficult because defender was trying a tackle, however the attacker was ONSIDE, but I share your question, where the hell was the AR? It is for certain aspects shocking.
      Two OGSO denied by AR1. The fact that Tunisia won the game can make this perhaps more acceptable but...
      Now, some considerations: very challenging game for the referee, in almost every crucial decision to be taken there is something not clear, so an observer, in these cases, should always back the officials. For me, a clear mistake is surely the missed RC at 64', and of course the decision to position the wall exactly on the line, but as for the rest, it is impossible to assign a mark. We have some penalty appeals correctly waved on, we can't be sure about a possible violent conduct.
      So for me impossible to determine a mark that could include everything. One must analyze situation by situation and then give isolated marks.
      Really, I never experienced a so challenging and demanding game.
      Finally, about AR1 Abel Baba from Nigeria, he has been appointed again for Guinea Bissau - Burkina Faso, which is crucial for qualification in group A.
      CAF is really strange: based only on one game they assign three-months bans to officials, for one or two mistakes, then at this tournament, with so many important games, they allow such mistakes (and positioning) by an AR, appointing him again. Well, if you find something logical there... just let me know.

    2. The mark is simple: 7,9
      You can surely find a crucial mistake and the rest justifies a mark above 8.2 at least due to the high difficulty.

    3. My prolem with the videos is either the referees whistle or the way he blows it. It sounds like a 1 dollar whistle.

    4. The whistle sounds like a fox 40, only the ref blows it like an amateur, look this video how to do not..... and what Camille does do....

    5. Since we are talking about whistles and whistling techniques. I've always thought that Clettenburg's whistle and technique sound cheap.

  11. SENEGAL - ZIMBABWE (Ridwan Jayid - Morocco)

    Key Match Incidents:
    17' - SEN's penalty-appeal waved away by the referee; wasn't there a dive?
    57' - SEN's penalty-appeal waved away by the referee; by the book it could be a penalty for careless action but in real life surely not
    65' - ZIM's penalty-appeal waved away by the referee; #2 SEN was surely not aware of the presence of an opponent, however technically it's a clear foul (careless kick), so a penalty should have been given even if it's not commonsensical; crucial mistake for me
    72' - SEN's penalty-appeal waved away by the referee; good call

    Other issues:
    - the referee allowed more physical play than in most other games, he made the game flow as much as possible, had good rapport with players, didn't avoid small talks, gave a firm and positive, friendly impression
    - missed illegal use of arms (08')
    - possible YC for persistent infringement for two reckless (?) challenges, depending on the referee's interpretation (35', 37)

    1. 17': No penalty, however simulation and missed YC, play on without stopping the game is a not convenient choice.
      57': Agree with you, difficult to whistle a penalty there, supportable decision by referee.
      65': my first impression is that player from ZIM goes deliberately there to get a contact, and the contact itself is not enough for a penalty, correct decision to play on.
      72': another correct decision, no penalty.

    2. Regarding 65, I followed alleged UEFA interpretation (Z. Przesmycki shared it at Polish federation site) which say that if both players compete for the ball that is in their reach, they may try to shield it and every contact with legs of the player shielding the ball will be deemed as at least careless.

      Thanks, Chefren, for all the replies. It seems that only the two of us are interested in this tournament! Are we hipsters? :D

    3. @RayHD
      I am very interested for your videos - many thanks. I've been busy at the moment but for sure in the next days finally I can analyse
      I hop the final match for Camille what a remarkable performance at ALG - TUN

  12. IVORY COAST - DR CONGO (Janny Sikazwe - Zambia)

    Key Match Incidents:
    30', 47', 90+3' - CIV's penalty-appeals or rather simulations waved away by the referee, especially the third case should be punished with a yellow card and it would have been a second one to that player who was cautioned in the 65th minute
    90+2' - excellent offside call from AR1 disallowing CIV's deciding goal

    Other issues:
    - very lenient line regarding careless borderline to reckless fouls - no verbal warnings is an unacceptable approach (see the first compilation, 48' and 81')
    - what is the difference between the illegal use of arms in the 65th minute and in the 81st minute?

    Overall, an okayish performance but still some points for improvement. Too passive approach for my taste. 8.2?

    1. Compilation of fouls: the foul in 11' (close to sideline) is for me a possible RC for SFP, missed YC is a serious mistake and a clear -0.1 if not more. The ball was already out when the contact occurred, referee had only to book the player without whistling free kick. The challenge in 42' is another clear YC. -0.1.
      30' - 47' - 90'+3: no penalty is an OK decision in all situations, differently from your view, I don't see as mandatory the YC for simulation in 90'+3, but surely the reaction by player was not fair, there was a very very soft contact with the opponent, which is clearly not enough.
      45'+1: Good decision by AR1.
      48': no SPA, in my opinion. No card is correct.
      65' - 81': there are no big differences between the two situations, but you know, sometimes from the pitch you have wrong perceptions, however not that big issue.
      90'+2: very good decision by AR1, tight offside and crucial call.
      So I agree with you, given the extremely lenient approach regarding disciplinary control, resulting in (at least) 2 missed YC, mark could be 8.2
      Good performance by AR1.

  13. MOROCCO - TOGO (Mahamadou Keïta - Mali)

    Key Match Incidents:
    14' - MAR's goal; TOG's goalkeeper shouts for a free kick; correct decision to allow the goal, in my opinion
    18' - MAR's penalty-appeal waved away by the referee; the attacker most likely would have never reached the ball what can make the no-penalty call acceptable, however holding was quite clear
    21' - MAR's goal, did the attacker impede the GK by making clear action in front of him?
    24' - TOG's penalty-appeal waved away by the referee; the push was clear and significant, missed penalty, for my taste
    31', 83' - two cases of illegal use of arms, were they used as tool or as weapon?
    34' - TOG's penalty-appeal waved away by the referee; was there a handball of Moroccan player trying to block the pass? then, it would occur before the offside offence which the game was stopped for
    36', 56' - two studs-tackles close to SFP; were the no-card and YC calls the right choice?
    72' - MAR's goal, was there a foul in the build-up?; I think we must back the referee in this case
    77' - TOG's penalty-appeal waved away by the referee; was there a push in the back? (then, a free kick should have been awarded), was there a handball? (in this case we could discuss about possible penalty)

    Other issues:
    Very challenging game for the referee who faced many difficult situations. The referee from Mali was very firm, ignoring small dissents, getting involved only when needed.
    04' - missed handball in attack
    52', 57', 60' - potential YCs not given (2x SPA and careless-reckless challenge)
    69', 88' - two dubious (no-)corner kick decisions
    90+2' - management of mass-confrontation

    1. 14': Agree with you. It is not enough to whistle a foul - even though keepers are very often overprotected, in this can I'm not even sure about a real contact.
      18': Holding is really clear, as you wrote. Almost impossible to reach the ball for the attacker, but this stays as crucial mistake, for me. Difficult to back the referee, stupid action by defender.
      21': this is a very interesting situation, my first impression is that, despite of the attempt to play the ball, the player in offside doesn't impede goalkeeper, who stays focused looking at the direction of the original shot, so for me no punishable offside, even though we can really discuss about that. I would back AR. Situation is very difficult for him because it is not easy to detect this head-butt and then to have in mind the exact frame of the player in offside.
      24': Pushing is clear and attacker from Togo is impeded in his action, penalty had to be whistled. Second crucial mistake. However, in real pace, I think more difficult to catch for referee.
      31' - 83': In the first case, for me still reckless, but very borderline to something more, however YC to be given. If I'm not wrong, player was not booked? In the second case, correct by referee. Reckless.
      34': Situation is not clear. AR doesn't raise the flag, offside is not called. I think referee whistled a foul against attacker, perhaps even a deliberate handball by Togo player. Difficult to say whether before that, Moroccan player had committed the same infringment. I would back the referee, evidence is missing.
      36' - 56': in the first case (36') player had to be booked, it is at least reckless, if not more, however I'm not sure about the real contact, studs are up, it is possible that there isn't a clear stamping, this would play in favor of YC, but still very, very dangerous. You can see AR1 from his position, reporting the foul as well. He was not really close but he spotted it. In the second case, 56', well, for me RC. In this case we have the evidence that player is hit on his leg. Studs are up and that's enough for a RC. This would be another crucial mistake, but, as very often discussed, these situations are very difficult to spot live.
      72': Impossible to say, for me, we back referee.
      77': Watching the video, both situations (push in the back and then deliberate handball) are possible, but again there isn't a clear evidence of something. If referee had whistled free kick, handball wouldn't have happened. Referee must be backed also in this case.
      So, a very difficult and challenging game for the referee. In my opinion the performance was not that good. At least one missed penalty is clear (if not two) and the management of studs-up challenge must be rewatched. Important point for improvements, but again, very challenging on the pitch for the referee from Mali.

    2. 31' - assistant referee signalled a foul of Moroccan player...

  14. GHANA - MALI (Mahdi Ubaid Sharif - Algeria)

    42' - MLI's penalty-appeal waved away by the referee; good call, visible alertness
    54' - MLI's penalty-appeal waved away by the referee; good call, unexpected ball, shot from short distance, no time for reaction, hand doesn't enlarge the body surface
    54' - some kind of dangerous play of the GHA player in his own box; of course, no one would whistle it
    90+2' - MLI's penalty-appeal waved away by the referee; could have been given - GHA player is slightly off the balance and his moves are maybe natural, but it's a trip strictly by the book, I can understand protests after the final whistle, but I can also understand the referee's call - very difficult situation to read in real pace

    Other issues:
    Mr Charef appeared as a very whistle-happy referee. Almost every contact was whistled, the game was constantly stopped for the smallest possible infringements. Not nice to watch.
    He was not so quick with has cards though: 12', 24', 37', 58', 70'
    GHA players present kits with a message to their teammate injured in the previous game (21').
    Time-wasting management: 82', 89'

    1. 12': it is clearly a reckless challenge, missed YC.
      21': definitely too much time was wasted for celebrating, I can understand that there was a good reason in doing that, but... it lasted too much.
      24' - 37' - 58' - 70': if one can close eyes in the first case (24'), whistling without card, I think that the YC in 37' was mandatory, blatant tactical foul from behind (perhaps even reckless) impeding a quick counterattack, for me YC. 58' is very borderline to reckless but I think referee could be backed. 70': clear YC, nothing to add. Reckless challenge from behind.
      42': correct decision to play on.
      54': agree with you, the most important criterion in my opinion is that without the touch by arm, the ball would have hit the body as well; so there wasn't, as you correctly explained, an increase of body's volume.
      54': agree with you, nobody expects such call on the pitch, but... :)
      82' - 89': referee's behavior in the first case (82') looks a bit chaotic, I mean that he could have managed everything by using more calm and a gradual approach.
      90'+2: Still agree with you, penalty could have been given, player from Ghana has his reasons but looking at the live situation it was definitely impossible for the referee to see that. We could go for a "theoretical" crucial mistake but nothing more than that for sure :)

      Well, I must say the most important point for improvement for referee in this game is surely card management, and therefore disciplinary control. Some YCs had to be absolutely issued.

  15. EGYPT - UGANDA (Malang Diedhiou - Senegal)

    Key Match Incidents:
    52' - disallowed goal due to offside; good call by the AR2
    57' - UGA's penalty-appeal waved away by the referee; not clear without replay, it could be that an UGA player pushed an EGY player as first

    Other issues:
    Easy-going game for the referee who however appeared as a friendly, positive and communicative person. The best management of the game I have seen at this tournament. Great rapport with players. No big protests even at debatable incidents.

    Some good educational scenes though:
    07', 41' - use of advantage
    09' - handball; deliberate?
    15', 27' - careless or reckless?
    19', 71' - SPA?
    28', 33' - management of holding in the box at set pieces
    42' - the referee sensitive to the studs-tackle
    61' - judging an offside position as not active
    65' - substitution confusion
    66' - defender's foul, nothing or attacker's simulation?
    90+2' - good management of the bench by fourth official

    I hope Malang Diedhiou's second game will be as good as the first and we'll see this referee going far at the tournament.

    1. 52': Correct decision by AR2.
      57': It is very difficult to make an assessment there. Let's back the referee.
      07' - 41': A very good management. Waiting before every whistle to allow a possible advantage.
      9': In my opinion not deliberate, ball was not expected, player thought that he was about to control it by feet.
      15': Basically more careless than reckless, then given also the alertness shown by referee, spending a warning, I think that his decision was very good, he was aware.
      27': In my opinion common sense there allows the decision to whistle without showing card, even though one could argue it was reckless. Both players went fairly for the ball.
      24': reckless and correct decision to issue YC.
      28' - 33': good management by referee!
      21': holding is mutual, difficult to detect who started at first the foul, so I find reasonable the choice to play on.
      42': the player is able to catch the ball, however it is a clear foul, again referee showed alertness in such details, very well, also commentators were praising him.
      19': whistling without card can be OK, not a clear SPA.
      61': no active offside, good decision to let the flag down.
      65': communication's mistake by FO / team officials.
      66': for me nothing, closer to simulation by attacker than foul by defender, at any rate, absolutely OK to play on.
      71': Again, I agree with referee, not a mandatory YC for my taste.
      79': No foul for me is OK.
      90'+2: Excellent Otogo-Castane and his gestures, he recovered from the previous substitution's mistake :D

      Well, so the big point for discussion is the possible penalty, it is a pity we can't judge it more accurately. As for the rest, even though I didn't watch the game, I absolutely share your feelings. It was a very good performance by Diedhiou under the aspect of communication, management with players, prevention, alertness and so on. We didn't see that in most of the previous games, this performance has many positive points and it is what we expect to see at UEFA level... very good. Mark could be 8.5.


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