© The Third Team –footballrefereeing.blogspot.

com

The 3rd Team – Referee Observer’s Report

UEFA Under-19 European Championship

Group Stage, MD2

(NED) Netherlands 1:4 Portugal (POR)

23/07/2013, 15:30 CET – Alytus (LTU)

Goals scored: 0:1 Guedes 32‘, 0:2 L. Silva 77’, 0:3 Horta 87’, 0:4 Guedes 89’, 1:4 Vloet 90+1’

Match Officials Name NAT Mark Mark* Difficulty

Referee Michael Oliver ENG 8.4 0.0 Normal
Assistant Referee 1 Dermot Broughton IRL 8.3 0.0 Normal
Assistant Referee 2 Stelios Nikita CYP 8.3 0.0 Normal
Fourth Official Sergejus Slyva LTU 8.0 0.0 Normal
UEFA Referee Observer Kyros Vassaras GRE
UEFA Delegate Christian Teinturier FRA
Blog Observer Niclas E GER * mark without crucial mistake (7.8/7.9)

Evaluation Scale (applicable for referee and assistant referees only)* Level of Difficulty
9.0 – 10.0 Excellent. Normal: Normal match for the officials, few
8.5 – 8.9 Very good. Important decision(s) correctly taken. challenging situations

8.3 – 8.4 Good. Expected level. Quite Challenging: Difficult match with some
8.2 Satisfactory with small areas for improvement. difficult decisions for the officials

8.0 – 8.1 Satisfactory with important areas for improvement. Very Challenging: Very difficult match with
7.9 One clear and important mistake, otherwise 8.3 or above. many difficult situations for the officials

7.8 One clear and important mistake, otherwise 8.0 – 8.2.

Below expectation, poor control, significant point(s) for Additional Time
7.5 – 7.7
improvement.
Disappointing. Below expectation with one and clear important First half 1 Second half 3
7.0 – 7.4 mistake or a performance with two or more clear and important
mistakes. *Expected level for fourth official: 8.0
6.0 – 6.9 Unacceptable.

Disciplinary Home Team Disciplinary Away Team

Minute Card Player Misconduct Classification Minute Card Player Misconduct Classification
35 YC 17 Unsporting behaviour (UB) 34 YC 5 Unsporting behaviour (UB)
42 YC 10 Unsporting behaviour (UB)
54 YC 8 Unsporting behaviour (UB)

Description of the match:

Second matchday at the finals of 2013 UEFA Under-19 European Championship staged in Lithuania. Netherlands and
Portugal met each other in to fight for an optimum position in the standings of Group A prior to the last group stage
matchday deciding on the teams that will qualify for the semifinals. Although Portugal gained advantage by a deserved
goal in the first half rewarding the Iberian team for their offensive alignment, the Netherlands came back but found no way
to score a goal in the early second half. The final result of 1:4 therefore is no real mirror of the match or relative strength of
both sides.
The match was characterized by a decent level of fairplay so that the match officials faced a difficulty that can be classified
as normal.
 © The Third Team –footballrefereeing.blogspot.com

REFEREE

1 Application and interpretation of the Laws of the Game / match control, tactical approach and management of the
game with the special situation(s) of the minute(s):

Comments:
The referee of the game, English Michael Oliver, showed a strong application and interpretation of the Laws of the Game.
Foul detection and line of decision-taking were both good and fully met the requirements of the match. The referee
whistled 24 fouls, a number that was enough for this match and represents the decent level of fairplay in the match.
His awareness for rather technical Laws of the Game became visible when he insisted on the appropriate application of
th
Law 16 in the 14 minute.
The referee chose a passive approach at the beginning of the match and offered the players some room to prosper play.
When infringements occurred, he showed no hesitation to punish them with the suitable means (free kicks etc.). His
tactical approach hence suited to the match and was well accepted by the players – he had full control for 90 minutes.
th
The referee dealt with the advantage rule in a very good fashion. One must highlight an incident in the 24 minute where
he detected an infringement, applied the advantage rule and whistled to award a free kick with some delay as soon as he
had recognized there would not be a promising or profitable advantage.
Additional time was by the way well chosen in both halves.

Minute Description of the situation

Correctly advised the Dutch goalkeeper to repeat the goalkick, because a team-mate had touched the ball
14
before it left the penalty area. He well insisted on Law 16 here.
Correctly applied the advantage rule when POR #8 was fouled by NED #25 – first waited for an advantage and
24 when the ball reached an unprofitable position close to the corner flag, he awarded a free kick with some delay.
Good management.

2 Disciplinary control, management of players and team officials (bench) with the special situation(s) of the
minute(s):

Comments:
Based on a well-chosen tactical approach (see in 1), the referee had a clear line in terms of his disciplinary control. He did
not tolerate tactical fouls and issued all four yellow cards for this reason. POR #5 had committed a tactical foul around the
midfield circle and received a mandatory caution due to that. Same goes for NED #17 who stopped a counterattack in a
too reckless manner. Also in minute 42, POR #10 was booked for the same offense. A rougher challenge happened in the
th
54 minute when POR #8 tried to gain the ball with a (mistimed) sliding tackle from the front and solely hit the opponent.
Reckless and dangerous foul. That was a very clear yellow card which was really necessary also as kind of signal that the
referee does not accept such tackles. He undermined this call by a small verbal warning so that he seemed to be aware of
the danger this tackle could have aroused.
th
The referee however missed a mandatory yellow card for delaying the re-start of play in the 77 minute: POR #18 kicked
the ball away shortly but clearly after a whistle for a free kick. The scoring line was 0:2 so it was clear this was a method to
waste some time. He did not even talk to the player and should show more alertness here in his coming matches.

Minute Description of the situation

Kicking the ball away (POR #18) went unbooked. Mandatory yellow card missed for delaying the re-start of
77
play. The referee should at least have warned the player verbally.

3 Physical Condition:

Very good

Positioning and Movement:

+ Expected -

X --- --- Always close to the play, follows play at all times, and does not interfere with play
--- X --- Flexible diagonal system
 © The Third Team –footballrefereeing.blogspot.com

--- X --- Able to anticipate the action

--- X --- Enters the penalty area when necessary
--- X --- Efficient positioning at set pieces / dead ball (e.g. corner-kick, free-kick, goal-kick)

Please describe any special situation(s) with indication of the minute(s) – mandatory if you tick “-“ (negative point) in one of
the above boxes:
Minute Description of the situation
The referee showed a very good level of fitness displayed in various quick counterattacks. The match was not
that demanding under the physical aspect though, but he really made the impression he can easily deal with
Full time
more challenging matches in future. He had a very good positioning on the basis of a good and anticipative
footwork.

4 Co-operation with assistant referees, additional assistant referees (where applicable) and fourth official:

The referee relied on his assistant referees in some moments and situations that occurred in their immediate area of
vicinity. However, the match did not reveal remarkable incidents that could have demanded some obvious teamwork. It
seemed all right.

5 Personality:

In this particular match, the referee did not have to apply very much personality as the number of verbal warnings was
quite low. He presented himself as focused official who does not smile that much (also becoming visible at the coin-toss or
shake-hands after the national anthems). He could be a bit more relaxed here – on the other hand, this might have also
supported him in keeping the match control high.

6 General comments, advice on performance and personality:

He was not so much challenged so that real points for improvement were not visible, some minor things should be
improved though. One of them is the way how he issues cards. It is unnecessary to first write the offenders down in the
book and to then raise the card aloft. More swiftly showing the card may avoid protests or conflicts e.g. with players who
demand a yellow card to the opponent.
Overall a really good and promising performance in this sonorous but in the end totally fair match. He may have a lot of
hopes to handle a third match at this tournament.

7 Points discussed in the report:

Positive points: 1) Application (Law 16) and interpretation (foul criteria) of the Laws of the Game.
2) Consistency in punishing tactical fouls with necessary cautions.
3) Advantage rule.
4) Positioning play.

Points for improvement: 1) Awareness for mandatory cautions due to delaying the re-start of play.
2) The way how he issues yellow cards can be improved (see 6).
He might deploy a slightly more friendly and relaxed body language and player
3)
management.
 © The Third Team –footballrefereeing.blogspot.com

ASSISTANT REFEREE 1

8 Assistant referee’s performance (please mention some important decisions with reference to the minute):

Positioning and Movement:

+ Expected -

--- X --- Correct offside decisions and good application of the “wait and see” technique
--- X --- Good positioning and movement
--- X --- Adequate alertness and good co-operation with the referee
--- X --- Reaction to incidents within his vicinity
--- X --- Efficient control at set pieces / dead ball (e.g. corner-kick, free-kick, goal-kick)

Comments:
The first assistant referee, Irish Dermot Broughton, made a mentally alert impression as long as he was captured by the
TV cameras. A lack of replays in minute 89, but an onside call made preceding the 0:4 goal in this minute was the only
remarkable call I can report. Good performance in an easy match for him.
Please describe any special situation(s) with indication of the minute(s) – mandatory if you tick “-“ (negative point) in one of
the above boxes:
Minute Description of the situation

ASSISTANT REFEREE 2

9 Assistant referee’s performance (please mention some important decisions with reference to the minute):

Positioning and Movement:

+ Expected -

--- X --- Correct offside decisions and good application of the “wait and see” technique
--- X --- Good positioning and movement
--- X --- Adequate alertness and good co-operation with the referee
--- --- X Reaction to incidents within his vicinity
--- X --- Efficient control at set pieces / dead ball (e.g. corner-kick, free-kick, goal-kick)

Comments:
Overall Stelios Nikita had a more challenging match than his team-mate on the other sideline. Good onside decisions
facilitating two goal attempts by the Portuguese team in minutes 25 and 30. Some confusion in minute 56 (see below), a
point to improve became visible here. Apart from that correct throw-in decisions and everything on expected level.
Please describe any special situation(s) with indication of the minute(s) – mandatory if you tick “-“ (negative point) in one of
the above boxes:
Minute Description of the situation
Acceptable to abstain from a free kick following an intense duel close to the sideline and to allow play to go on,
56 since the Portuguese defender touched and played the ball first with his sliding tackle. However, then the AR
should have signalized a corner kick – goal kick was the wrong decision.
 © The Third Team –footballrefereeing.blogspot.com

FOURTH OFFICIAL

10 Comment on the fourth official:

Sergejus Slyva from the hosting nation Lithuania was appointed as fourth official in this match – he dealt with all technical
procedures in the appropriate way.