You are on page 1of 8

Unofficial Referee Observers Report Unofficial Referee Observers Report

The Third Team (footballrefereeing.blogspot.com)

UEFA Under-21 European Championship 2013 (ISR) Israel 2:2 Norway (NOR)

05 June 2013, 18:00 CET Netanya Stadium, Netanya, Israel


Match Officials Referee Assistant Referee 1 Assistant Referee 2 Additional AR 1 Additional AR 2 Fourth Official UEFA Delegate UEFA Referee Observer Blog Referee Observer
1 2

Name Pawel Gil Vencel Tth Ivo Kolev Miroslav Zelinka Ivan Kruliak Johann Gudmundsson Tervel Zlatev Hugh Dallas Niclas E.

Origin POL HUN BUL CZE SVK ISL BUL SCO GER

Mark1 7.9 8.3 8.3 8.1 8.1 8.0

Mark2 8.3 -----------

Difficulty3 Challenging Challenging Normal Normal Normal Normal

Final mark according to evaluation scale. Expected level for AARs and fourth official is 8.0, crucial mistake 7.7! Mark if the final mark had not been influenced by a crucial mistake (only in case of a crucial mistake, to be let empty if no crucial mistake occurred). 3 Difficulty has to be integrated into the final mark. Levels of difficulty are: normal, challenging and very challenging . 4 Blog-Referee Observer =Inofficial referee observer appointed by the blog administrator.

Evaluation scale
(for referee and assistant referees only)

Description of the Marks Excellent. Very good. Important decision(s) correctly taken. Good. Expected level. Satisfactory with small areas for improvement. Satisfactory with important areas for improvement. One clear and important mistake, otherwise 8.3 or above. One clear and important mistake, otherwise 8.0 8.2. Below expectation, poor control, significant point(s) for improvement. Disappointing. Below expectation with one and clear important mistake or a performance with two or more clear and important mistakes. Unacceptable.

9.0 10.0 8.5 8.9 8.3 8.4 8.2 8.0 8.1 7.9 7.8 7.5 7.7 7.0 7.4 6.0 6.9

Unofficial Referee Observers Report


The Third Team (footballrefereeing.blogspot.com)

1) Description of the match: Opening game of Under-21 European Championships final tournament on Israeli ground. Due to the fact that it is the first official tournament ever played in Israel, the crowd comprising approximately 10.000 supporters created a good and enthusiastic atmosphere naturally favouring their home side but never showing a lack of respect or fairness towards the Norwegian team. Good football level and a lot of tension until stoppage time. Both teams aspired to win and had many chances, although Norway clearly dominated this tie. They did not use many big chances to score and Israel were lucky to take the lead twice. A really challenging match for the referee team headed by Pawel Gil, whose decisions influenced the match in some ways.

Referee
2) Knowledge, Application and Interpretation of the Laws of the Game, Disciplinary Control and Technical Management of the game with special reference to the situations and the minutes when they occurred. (Crucial decisions, if available, have to be mentioned in the grid and highlighted). Comments: The referee revealed an expected level in terms of knowledge and application of the Laws of the Game with a couple of exceptions though. After the correct but nonetheless hard red card for dogso (correctly recognized that the other defender would have been unable to intervene; also very prudent to caution the fouled player for demanding a RC to his opponent!) in 44, he lost the track a bit and became kind of unpredictable. Exaggerated yellow card to ISR #14 before the half-time break for alleged diving. He should not take such decisions to satisfy each side here and there. One got the impression he set this signal after some Israeli players fell a bit easily. But in this case a YC was not needed. Borderline yellow card to ISR #10 immediately after the start of the second half, his studs-up foul onto his opponents shinbone could have been red-carded. Crucial mistake though even before all those scenes mentioned above: wrong penalty kick leading to Israels 1:0 goal in minute 16. NOR #6 allegedly fouled ISR #20 who immediately fell and seemed to be hurt. There was however, as many replays unveil, no contact. The referee took the decision swiftly and probably without consultation of his AAR. The whole scene should not have come into existence by the way wrong corner kick leading to this scene awarded by the referee and specially AR1 (ISR #14 touched the ball last). Good management apart from that. Advantage rule could be applied more often, specially when goalkeepers are fouled in their area but are ready to play on and initiate a promising counterattack. Minute 16 44 Description of the situation Penalty Kick to Israel. NOR #6 did not touch his opponent ISR #20, therefore a wrong decision and a crucial mistake. Red Card for DOGSO against NOR #5, correct decision, even though the forward waited for the contact. Criteria for DOGSO was totally fulfilled.

Unofficial Referee Observers Report


The Third Team (footballrefereeing.blogspot.com)

3) Tactical approach and its Degree of Consistency, Personality, Match Control and Management of the Teams and Players with special reference to the situations and the minutes when they occurred. Comments: The referee actually had a good and suitable tactical approach. He did not whistle every contact but cannot be called lenient either. He worked with many verbal warnings on both sides before cautioning the first player in 38. So the players got some room to behave in the early minutes. Then he changed it radically and became more pedantic, whistled more contacts and duels and cautioned more players as a reaction on some unfair behaviour. He maintained the full match control from the start until the final whistle. Mutual respect existed, the players mostly accepted his decisions without protests, also in the RC situation. He could improve his communication with the players on the pitch and apply a bit more personality despite merely executing the Laws of the Game. Summary of 2) and 3): Positive Points 1. 2. 3. Not meeting requirements, points that need improvement Flexibility in adapting his line to the requirements of the match. Consistency in punishing misconduct, such as demanding a RC to the opponent. Courage to take brave decisions, even though some of them went wrong and mostly favoured the hosting team. He must stay more predictable in his card and decision management during the full match time. More personality and communication could lead to better results and could avoid some cautions in a proactive fashion. Alertness was missing in the penalty scene. He overreacted and took a wrong call. A more central positioning could have helped perhaps. Advantage rule could be applied more often, specially when goalkeepers are fouled in their area but are ready to play on and initiate a promising counterattack.

1. 2. 3.

4. Minute 10

Description of the situation ISR goalkeeper was fouled by a Norwegian forward but it was clear he was able to play on. He was ready to initiate a good counterattack of his own team but was stopped by the referees free kick call. The referee should wait a bit longer to see whether there will be an advantage that is worth to allow.

4) Physical Shape, Stamina, Positioning, Movement as well as Mental Awareness, if needed, with reference to the minutes when they occurred, always in case of a -. Physical Condition (very good, good, average, poor): Good

Unofficial Referee Observers Report


The Third Team (footballrefereeing.blogspot.com)

Further Aspects: + Expected X X X Minute 16 Always close to play, follows play at all times with a flexible diagonal system and impedes interference with play Efficient positioning (at set pieces e.g.) and movement to be ready to take a (crucial) decision (specially in the box; be able to enter the box in some cases when it is necessary) Shows awareness and is able to anticipate the action

Description of the situation His positioning was the one you expect from a referee in corner kicks. The problem was that in this specific situation, it made it even more difficult to take an adequate decision. Perhaps he could be more flexible in it, but it s no real point of criticism as he followed the instructions.

5) Teamwork (co-operation with (A)ARs and fourth official with reference, if needed, to special situations and the minutes when they occurred) Comments: At this tournament teamwork could turn out to be the biggest problem. Six match officials from six different countries who mostly have never worked together before. At least a huge challenge for all the involved officials. Also in this match there seemed to be some form of cooperation, but leading to unsatisfying calls. Wrong suggestion by AR1 to award a corner kick before the penalty incident. In the situation itself, AAR1 was probably not involved but should have had a quite good angle to see it better than the referee. Good remarks though by AAR2 and later by AAR1 to not award other penalty kicks (5 and 28).

6) If needed: General comments or advices for improvement; explanation of the chosen mark; further matters (can be let empty). Comments: The wrong penalty kick does not allow more than 7.9. On the other hand, there were many things to improve but also several positive things in a challenging match. Apart from the penalty error, the mark would have been still an 8.3.

Unofficial Referee Observers Report


The Third Team (footballrefereeing.blogspot.com)

Assistant Referee 1
7) Assistant Referee 1s performance (please mention some important decisions either by integrating them into a coherent comment or mentioning them in the grid below; mandatory if a - (negative point) is selected) Relevant Aspects: + Expected X X X X X Correct offside decisions by means of a good application of the wait and see-technique Good positioning and movement Mental alertness and reaction to incidents in his area of vicinity Reasonable degree of co-operation with referee (not flagging too much / too little; being able to support referee in crucial decisions) Efficient control at set pieces

Comments: Overall a good performance by AR1. Excellent and very difficult decision to let the flag (no offside) before the foul leading to the red card. High pace but perfectly detected. Also besides that some normal onside situations to solve, all correct. However, he wrongly suggested to give a corner kick in favour of Israel preceding the penalty kick. No crucial mistake of course, but one which reduces his mark a bit (-0.1/0.2). Minute Description of the situation

Unofficial Referee Observers Report


The Third Team (footballrefereeing.blogspot.com)

Assistant Referee 2
8) Assistant Referee 2s performance (please mention some important decisions either by integrating them into a coherent comment or mentioning them in the grid below; mandatory if a - (negative point) is selected) Relevant Aspects: + Expected X X X X X Correct offside decisions by means of a good application of the wait and see-technique Good positioning and movement Mental alertness and reaction to incidents in his area of vicinity Reasonable degree of co-operation with referee (not flagging too much / too little; being able to support referee in crucial decisions) Efficient control at set pieces

Comments: Overall good performance also shown by AR2. Absolutely brilliant movement on the sideline, always on level and ready to take a decision. A model behaviour by an AR. Correct decisions in some moments regarding offside, but once he failed to apply the waitand-see-technique. Two forward players were able to receive the ball, one was offside and one was legally positioned. Latter got the ball, the other player who had been offside did not interfere with play or opponent. No offside in the 2:1 goal correct. Minute 66 Description of the situation Failed to apply the wait-and-see-technique, but no big error and no relevant situation.

Unofficial Referee Observers Report


The Third Team (footballrefereeing.blogspot.com)

Additional Assistant Referee 1


9) Additional Assistant Referee 1s performance (please mention some important decisions either by integrating them into a coherent comment or mentioning them in the grid below; mandatoryif a - (negative point) is selected) Relevant Aspects: + Expected X X X Good positioning and movement Mental alertness and reaction to incidents in his area of vicinity based on a reasonable degree of co-operation with referee Efficient control at set pieces

Comments: The first additional assistant referee seemed alert on the goalline, was not involved in the corner kick decision leading to the penalty kick and did not seem to have made the penalty kick decision itself either. Correct decision to not advice the referee to give another one in 28. Apart from that regular performance. Minute Description of the situation

Additional Assistant Referee 2


10) Additional Assistant Referees performance (please mention some important decisions either by integrating them into a coherent comment or mentioning them in the grid below; mandatoryif a - (negative point) is selected) Relevant Aspects: + Expected X X X Good positioning and movement Mental alertness and reaction to incidents in his area of vicinity based on a reasonable degree of co-operation with referee Efficient control at set pieces

Comments: Normal performance without many situations to solve. Correct decision, no penalty in minute 5. Regular movement on goalline and not so challenged in this match. Minute Description of the situation

Unofficial Referee Observers Report


The Third Team (footballrefereeing.blogspot.com)

Fourth Official
11) Fourth Officials performance (reference to technical management like substitutions or signalling of additional time, dealing with benches in case of conflicts) Comments: Normal performance, nothing to report.