For the Integrity of Soccer: EURO-2012: Mixed Bag in 3rd Group-stage Matches (from Ed)

July 2014

Sun	Mon	Tue	Wed	Thu	Fri	Sat
		1	2	3	4	5
6	7	8	9	10	11	12
13	14	15	16	17	18	19
20	21	22	23	24	25	26
27	28	29	30	31

We had a mixed bag as far as our predictions went in the third group-stage matches.

Portugal/Netherlands turned out not to be the foul fest that many of us feared. Perhaps the fact that the Dutch left out two of their tough defenders, van Bommel and Heitinga had something to do with it. Anyway, it was a very wide open match, and Ronaldo did not come in for special attention, in fact they seemed afraid to tackle him most of the time. The result was that he was allowed to display his skills and scored two goals from the many chances that came his way. One interesting point for referees was when Ronaldo complained to the referee after his team mate was fouled. The referee had played advantage as the ball had ran to another Portugal player. Ronaldo wanted the free kick, even though the incident was about 30 yards out. The message for referees is to know the players. In cases like this the free kick would be the most advantageous situation, as a player with the skills such as Ronaldo possesses would have a reasonable chance to score from a direct free kick and should be given the opportunity. The corner kick for Netherland at 18 minutes was interesting. It seemed as though one player had kicked the ball out of the quadrant in an apparent “trick” play, but the Portuguese defender spotted it and ran in to intercept, whereupon the next Dutch player just bent over and picked the ball up and took the kick again. Should this have been hand ball foul by the Dutch? Technically probably so, but a tough one to give.

Germany/Denmark surprisingly was a quiet affair, with only 14 fouls and no cautions. The Spanish referee obviously changed his approach after his very strict officiating in his first match. Perhaps he was advised to relax a little.

Stark was clearly well prepared for his match between Spain and Croatia. He cautioned Srna for persistent infringement before half-time, and although this did not entirely stop the fouling tactics of Croatia, it may have kept their foul count down to 21. He had to issue six cautions, three in the final three minutes, as the frustrations of the Croatians who knew that they were eliminated began to bubble to the surface. The AR should be praised for keeping his flag down on two very close offside decisions leading up to the lone Spanish goal.

There was a possibility of a PK to Croatia when Ramos tackled Mandzukic with a flying studs-up challenge, but he probably just got to the ball first. I doubt if there would be much complaint (except from Spain) with a yellow and PK given here, but the decision was a corner.

In the Italy/Ireland match, Italy scored a goal with the ball just over the line before being booted away by a defender. The AAR was right there to see it but AR could have seen it also since it originated from a corner and with a defender on the goal line anyway, the AR would have been standing at the corner flag.

The signal that the Turkish referee gave to indicate the goal was unfortunate given the problems with neo-Nazis and racial abuse of players at soccer matches these days. This signal is not recommended.

The England-Ukraine game was probably the most difficult of the eight, and accordingly the referee was Kassai of Hungary, considered one of the top referees in Europe. He was very confident, and very strict as far as admonishing players for protests. But his yellow cards were uneven. He cautioned Cole for time-wasting at a throw-in but it occurred during a stoppage for a substitution anyway. Shevchenko was cautioned for a really bad foul that might have been a red card on another player in another place. In between these Gerrard was cautioned for a simple foul during an aerial challenge. His discrimination between these incidents needed to be better. However these incidents were overshadowed by probably the biggest error in the tournament so far. Ukraine got the ball over the goal line, but it was cleared away by Terry. The AAR did not indicate that the ball had completely passed over the line, and no goal was given. Furthermore, the AR had missed a very obvious offside on the build-up to this “goal.” These were game-critical decisions, but did not have an effect on qualification since even if the goal had been given, making the score 1-1, Ukraine would still have been out.

There was a very unexpected result in the Sweden-France match, a 2-0 win to Sweden, but as expected, it was a fairly quiet game for Proenca, the Portuguese referee.

On to the quarterfinals, with the survivors in both competitions!

Comments

You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

Thanks for your analyses!
I didn't notice Ronaldo wanting a free kick instead of the continuing play. Very interesting, and yes, it would be a bonus if a ref took the players skills and preferences into account. OTOH, it may not always be possible to know these for all situations.

About Spain/Croatia: I can't find any videos of the difficult scenes -- seems like UEFA is very quick with pulling these from Youtube.
But anyway... I think the Ramos/Mandzukic situation was a very close call. Could be justified both ways.
Apart from that, there was a scene where Mandzukic elbowed a Spanish player (Pique?) in the neck inside the Croatian penalty area. I don't remember the position of the ref at that time, but I thought it was an ugly deliberate foul deserving a red and a penalty.
And then, quite late, another claim for PK for Croatia when after a corner a Spanish player pulled one of the Croatians down, using both hands to hang onto the arm and shoulder. It was only visible in replay, in the middle of the usual pushing and pulling during a corner.

[Reply from Ed: Yes there were lots of incidents in this match, which may be one reason why Herr Stark and his crew will not be appointed to any more games.]

Posted by: visiting | June 20, 2012 at 03:55 PM

You have to wonder why UEFA would continue to go through the additional expense of supplying AARs to games when there is no apparent improvement in goal-line decisions.
Can't agree on the comment that the decision in the England - Ukraine game didn't have an effect on qualifying as a goal certainly could have changed the momentum of the game. (Of course you may argue that justice was served as an offside decision should have been made just prior to that.)
Any reason why AAR and AR are positioned on the same side? Seems that this technique blocks the vision of the AR. The "extra pair of eyes" is now just converted to replacing one set of eyes with another.

[Ed says: I agree about the momentum issue. we made the exact point for the Germany-England match in WC2010!
I have no idea about anything regarding the AARs. Someone felt that having him on the left interfered with the referee's mechanics; I don't see it that way. It seems that ARs may not be instructed to be concerned about the goal line between the posts, so blocking his vision makes no difference.]

Posted by: Wolfram | June 20, 2012 at 04:20 PM

Eh gads! Cakir's arm position is horrible.

Can we stop this AAR thing now?

The thing that really jumps out at me is the consistent inconsistencies. If Stark, Kuipers, and Kassai are being sent home for their (or their crew's) missing things, shouldn't Eriksson being joining them? He missed a couple of off-the-ball Dutch shots on Germans and didn't sanction Ozuil's ankle/achilles whack (for which I would have sent him off because of the risk of grievous injury) plus the Greece:Russia problems. Shouldn't Velasco Carballo still be here? He might have erred on the side of harshness, but no one's said he's missed much—not like others. Other referees let very heavy challenges go. Aerial challenges seemed to be sanctioned inconsistently.

As harshly as Velasco Carballo was pilloried in the refereeing world, I wonder if some of that or UEFA comments to the officials caused some of the leniency seen later?

I suppose there's some limitations to having so few referees present at the tournament. You have to keep most to cover the elimination rounds. Two-thirds of the officials will get 3 games. The focus level for such intense matches has got to be incredible. Can you really do that many that well that quickly? A few can. For example, Archundia in WC2006. But can most? Would a few more referee crews help matters?

Will be interesting. Keep up the good work.

Posted by: Leigh W. Davis | June 20, 2012 at 06:32 PM

Doesn't it make more sense to have goal line tech and video review of those incidents and goals for offsides, instead of the extra officials?
[Reply from Ed: I expect we will see GLT soon now that Herr Blatter has decided to accept it, but no video review for anything else. I would not be in favour of video reviews of other incidents because these are judgement calls, not absolute facts.]

Posted by: A. | June 20, 2012 at 08:28 PM