UEFA EURO Analysis: Day Five (HUNPOR, FRAGER)
A great day of EURO action! Both Cüneyt Çakır and Carlos del Cerro Grande's respective teams contributed to that with good, expected-level pieces of officiating - performances we will look deeper into during this post.
8' - there is some kind of holding, but it is relatively minimal and the attacker falls of his own accord, so correct for Çakır to give the go on.
26' - fair tackle, defender pushes the ball away regularly with his leg, good call.
54' - perhaps you can even make the case that the technically correct decision is a (S)YC here! But at the EURO, on this level, it is clear that UEFA want (much) more to eject a player than that, so either wise to turn a blind eye to it by the Turkish ref, or simply missed incident.
61' - let's just say it is a good job that the Portugal player jumped; nobody cared about this tackle though.
76' - actually a very borderline decision, when you remember that at least for IFAB, distance is immaterial in assessing handling scenes (if of course common-sense still says otherwise). The defender's arm is still tucked in to his body, not extended, and did come from a very close distance. Correct decision to play on.
80' - "better safe than sorry", even if this delayed flag could perhaps have been avoided, I don't think it is fair to blame Tarik Ongun for playing it on the safe side.
86' - penalty + yellow card is the decision which arouses the least attention from this situation. One can make credible cases that the holding was not really that much (no penalty), or that the body contact was just incidental (red card, deliberate DOGSO), I suppose.
The defender does clearly hold the attacker's arm for some seconds as the attacker is about to shoot, so penalty is the right call I think. Then, given that a body contact is involved, in addition to the match context, I myself would have decided the same as Çakır, yellow card.
Mark Clattenburg, 'winner' of the last EURO amongst referees, said it himself - self-preservation is the name of the game! But in this case, a yellow card is technically defendable (at least) too.
+92' - world class onside by Bahattin Duran, well done.
Foul detection and especially simple restart calls (33', 46', 63', 67') don't really count in his favour; the incident at 61' encapsulated a wider point - his control of the players' actions was actually relatively loose, even if it all worked out okay in the end.
So: all-in-all, certainly a good performance and convincing impression, but this was not the sparkling showing of this EURO so far, in my eyes at least. That being said, Cüneyt Çakır certainly passed the test in a mostly convincing way, and would deserve a top second appointment.
Let's work in reverse chronological order, starting with the mostly Spanish officiating crew.
Carlos del Cerro Grande's team in France - Germany
Big Decisions
Incidents:
40' - Potential second yellow card (challenge) / red card (VC) to Germany no.6
44' - Potential red card to Germany no.2 (violent conduct)
57' - Penalty area incident
66' - Offside call by Roberto Alonso Fernández
78' - Potential penalty to France (tripping)
85' - Onside call by Roberto Alonso Fernández, corrected by VAR intervention
---
40' - Potential second yellow card (challenge) / red card (VC) to Germany no.6
44' - Potential red card to Germany no.2 (violent conduct)
57' - Penalty area incident
66' - Offside call by Roberto Alonso Fernández
78' - Potential penalty to France (tripping)
85' - Onside call by Roberto Alonso Fernández, corrected by VAR intervention
---
The two calls in the most focus made by del Cerro Grande involved Kimmich, and then Mbappé-Hummels.
Sending the Germany defender off by either of the possible combinations at 40' would have been technically defendable; I don't think we could conclusively say that this categorically was not an act of violent conduct.
But, by the same token, I don't think you can conclusively say that this was not a disorientated attempt to kick the ball with unfortunate consequences but careless means. We are referees, not mind-readers - given the evidence we are presented with, especially the context (soft first YC, keeping 11 v 11 in a huge EURO tie, unclear nature) I am strongly in favour of no sanction here, probably with a strong warning.
It was noted here and elsewhere, quite reasonably too, that del Cerro should have been more attentive to Pavard's potential injury; after all, he was kicked in the head! However, I think that was a consequence of guidelines to be as forgiving as possible - if the Spanish ref acted very visibly, then he would have been under more pressure to send Kimmich off. That should explain del Cerro's underscored reaction.
Sending the Germany defender off by either of the possible combinations at 40' would have been technically defendable; I don't think we could conclusively say that this categorically was not an act of violent conduct.
But, by the same token, I don't think you can conclusively say that this was not a disorientated attempt to kick the ball with unfortunate consequences but careless means. We are referees, not mind-readers - given the evidence we are presented with, especially the context (soft first YC, keeping 11 v 11 in a huge EURO tie, unclear nature) I am strongly in favour of no sanction here, probably with a strong warning.
It was noted here and elsewhere, quite reasonably too, that del Cerro should have been more attentive to Pavard's potential injury; after all, he was kicked in the head! However, I think that was a consequence of guidelines to be as forgiving as possible - if the Spanish ref acted very visibly, then he would have been under more pressure to send Kimmich off. That should explain del Cerro's underscored reaction.
Regarding the latter scene, if I may, I'll borrow the analysis of former Elite Development Category Mario Strahonja, kindly translated by our user Forlan below:
"The first impression looks like a penalty kick, however, chronologically if you look, the biggest contact happened outside the penalty area, which ordered the coordination of Mbappé's movements. Later Hummels had the intention to go for the ball and the back of his foot was a little touched, definitely the intention was the ball. If you have minimal contacts, this is a situation where you have given support to the referee. It is definitely not a clear and obvious mistake. There will be discussions about that now. The tendency is not to whistle penalty kicks lightly. For me, it was not a penalty kick."
I essentially agree entirely with Strahonja - the first contact Hummels made with Mbappé in his tackle did not alter his stride, his balance, and the second was a fair one when challenging for the ball. The Spanish referee was excellently up with play, and after a moment's ponderance, took the correct decision.
By the way - a 'potential penalty kick' was not even mentioned during the fulltime analysis of this scene by the former football players on British television for this match, for what that is worth to us. Play on was the widely expected decision from non-refereeing people, at least from what I've seen anyway.
---
Vis-à-vis the decisions of assistant referee no.2 - I saw that some people criticised Alonso Fernández for not immediately raising the flag, which surprised me. Mbappé, without needing to pass to a teammate, managed to convert that chance into a goal (and it was not surprising that such a skilled player could do that) - that is reason enough to support a common-sensical delayed flag, surely!
We should be careful to criticise too much an assistant referees for not having the sprint speed to keep up with one of the fastest players in world football right now, but given that there was no crossover at 85', we could still expect the AR to get that one right in real time. A clear mistake, corrected by the video match officials.
---
"The first impression looks like a penalty kick, however, chronologically if you look, the biggest contact happened outside the penalty area, which ordered the coordination of Mbappé's movements. Later Hummels had the intention to go for the ball and the back of his foot was a little touched, definitely the intention was the ball. If you have minimal contacts, this is a situation where you have given support to the referee. It is definitely not a clear and obvious mistake. There will be discussions about that now. The tendency is not to whistle penalty kicks lightly. For me, it was not a penalty kick."
I essentially agree entirely with Strahonja - the first contact Hummels made with Mbappé in his tackle did not alter his stride, his balance, and the second was a fair one when challenging for the ball. The Spanish referee was excellently up with play, and after a moment's ponderance, took the correct decision.
By the way - a 'potential penalty kick' was not even mentioned during the fulltime analysis of this scene by the former football players on British television for this match, for what that is worth to us. Play on was the widely expected decision from non-refereeing people, at least from what I've seen anyway.
---
Vis-à-vis the decisions of assistant referee no.2 - I saw that some people criticised Alonso Fernández for not immediately raising the flag, which surprised me. Mbappé, without needing to pass to a teammate, managed to convert that chance into a goal (and it was not surprising that such a skilled player could do that) - that is reason enough to support a common-sensical delayed flag, surely!
We should be careful to criticise too much an assistant referees for not having the sprint speed to keep up with one of the fastest players in world football right now, but given that there was no crossover at 85', we could still expect the AR to get that one right in real time. A clear mistake, corrected by the video match officials.
---
I don't really think the 44' potential biting incident is worthy of great discussion - the pictures are hardly conclusive and to initiate a review because of them would have shown a "lack of football understanding" in my opinion. 57' is simply a correct call, regular save by the goalkeeper followed by a normal-footballing-contact.
Summary
Contrary to an apparent majority in our discussion section, I thought this was a good performance by Carlos del Cerro Grande.
It was visible that he was slightly nervous during the first half, but that doesn't automatically mean that this was a bad performance - the only thing I can really reproach him for is a wrong freekick at 11' (maybe angry reaction at 26'?). Late whistles at 24', 26' for instance did not give the most confident impression, but replays showed both decisions were spot on.
The opening yellow card was a good, even great, decision for my money. On the one replay shown, we are on the blind side of the contact, so we can't satisfactorily assess whether this challenge was actually reckless or not.
However, Kimmich does go in high on his opponent, runs off without apologising, and this all took place in a nothing area of the pitch. Do we actually want to chastise a referee who wishes to take such plays out of the game in potentially thrilling match between these two teams, or rather see a game with less play and more heavy fouls?
Look, I'm not saying a verbal warning wouldn't have been appropriate too, but I don't really see how this was an awful decision either - it was, at worst, a tactically valuable call in a game with a much different 'feel' to all the EURO games before it. Unlike the eleven games before it, it would have done, and did, benefit from the ref clamping down early.
The opening yellow card was a good, even great, decision for my money. On the one replay shown, we are on the blind side of the contact, so we can't satisfactorily assess whether this challenge was actually reckless or not.
However, Kimmich does go in high on his opponent, runs off without apologising, and this all took place in a nothing area of the pitch. Do we actually want to chastise a referee who wishes to take such plays out of the game in potentially thrilling match between these two teams, or rather see a game with less play and more heavy fouls?
Look, I'm not saying a verbal warning wouldn't have been appropriate too, but I don't really see how this was an awful decision either - it was, at worst, a tactically valuable call in a game with a much different 'feel' to all the EURO games before it. Unlike the eleven games before it, it would have done, and did, benefit from the ref clamping down early.
Personally, I can't get that upset about no cards in the scenes in three further scenes:
34' - you can see del Cerro mis-assessed the duel, because he tells Müller to get up, but the stud-to-foot contact would be on the lighter side of reckless for me anyway, Müller did get up straight away, advantage benefitted the game well, and so on.
44' - given that Pogba might have just been bitten (we don't know for sure!), a caution here would have just inflamed everything; that being said, the lack of respect he showed Yuste Jímenez's personal space, whilst still being friendly (enough), would easily have justified a yellow card which I would have easily praised.
59' - sure the thigh-hit is a bit ungainly, and a yellow card would have been a good signal against such play, but the contact is not a hard knee or something like that (in which case, yellow mandatory, red possible), so I am slightly struggling to see the clear difference between that and a regular, late, potential yellow card charging foul honestly.
His technical accuracy even late in this end-to-end game was quite impressive in my estimation. It capped a good performance (8,3 level for me), still with some areas for development. Ultimately, Carlos del Cerro Grande rewarded and repaid the trust that Roberto Rosetti and UEFA had in him.
34' - you can see del Cerro mis-assessed the duel, because he tells Müller to get up, but the stud-to-foot contact would be on the lighter side of reckless for me anyway, Müller did get up straight away, advantage benefitted the game well, and so on.
44' - given that Pogba might have just been bitten (we don't know for sure!), a caution here would have just inflamed everything; that being said, the lack of respect he showed Yuste Jímenez's personal space, whilst still being friendly (enough), would easily have justified a yellow card which I would have easily praised.
59' - sure the thigh-hit is a bit ungainly, and a yellow card would have been a good signal against such play, but the contact is not a hard knee or something like that (in which case, yellow mandatory, red possible), so I am slightly struggling to see the clear difference between that and a regular, late, potential yellow card charging foul honestly.
His technical accuracy even late in this end-to-end game was quite impressive in my estimation. It capped a good performance (8,3 level for me), still with some areas for development. Ultimately, Carlos del Cerro Grande rewarded and repaid the trust that Roberto Rosetti and UEFA had in him.
Cüneyt Çakır's team in Hungary - Portugal
Big Decisions
Above:
8' - Holding incident involving Portugal no.4
26' - Penalty area incident (tackle)
54' - Potential second yellow card to Portugal no.4 (striking)
61' - Tackle incident
76' - Potential penalty to Portugal (handling)
80' - Offside call by Tarik Ongun
86' - Penalty given to Portugal (holding / tripping?) + YC (DOGSO)
8' - Holding incident involving Portugal no.4
26' - Penalty area incident (tackle)
54' - Potential second yellow card to Portugal no.4 (striking)
61' - Tackle incident
76' - Potential penalty to Portugal (handling)
80' - Offside call by Tarik Ongun
86' - Penalty given to Portugal (holding / tripping?) + YC (DOGSO)
+92' - Onside call by Bahattin Duran
---
My views on those scenes:
8' - there is some kind of holding, but it is relatively minimal and the attacker falls of his own accord, so correct for Çakır to give the go on.
26' - fair tackle, defender pushes the ball away regularly with his leg, good call.
54' - perhaps you can even make the case that the technically correct decision is a (S)YC here! But at the EURO, on this level, it is clear that UEFA want (much) more to eject a player than that, so either wise to turn a blind eye to it by the Turkish ref, or simply missed incident.
61' - let's just say it is a good job that the Portugal player jumped; nobody cared about this tackle though.
76' - actually a very borderline decision, when you remember that at least for IFAB, distance is immaterial in assessing handling scenes (if of course common-sense still says otherwise). The defender's arm is still tucked in to his body, not extended, and did come from a very close distance. Correct decision to play on.
80' - "better safe than sorry", even if this delayed flag could perhaps have been avoided, I don't think it is fair to blame Tarik Ongun for playing it on the safe side.
86' - penalty + yellow card is the decision which arouses the least attention from this situation. One can make credible cases that the holding was not really that much (no penalty), or that the body contact was just incidental (red card, deliberate DOGSO), I suppose.
The defender does clearly hold the attacker's arm for some seconds as the attacker is about to shoot, so penalty is the right call I think. Then, given that a body contact is involved, in addition to the match context, I myself would have decided the same as Çakır, yellow card.
Mark Clattenburg, 'winner' of the last EURO amongst referees, said it himself - self-preservation is the name of the game! But in this case, a yellow card is technically defendable (at least) too.
+92' - world class onside by Bahattin Duran, well done.
Summary
Cüneyt Çakır reffed this stand-out game well. He kept a cool head amongst the frenzied full stadium and partly more-anxious-than-normal stadium, and used his card(s) astutely in order to keep everyone in check. I appreciated his smiley, relaxed manner; the players did too.
His approach to disciplinary measures was exactly what the players wanted and expected - verbal warning at 23', drawing a line at 38', no cards at 53', 74'; very good calming verbal warning at 58'. That was well-played by the referee from Turkey, well done.
That being said, I wouldn't go further than assessing this performance as "good". Honestly, I didn't see a referee who was trying to positively mould the players' behaviour (58' aside, and that was more reactive anyway). Çakır only reacted to the incidents in front of him, then doing the minimal possible in order to not lose his hand on everything.
He succeeded for sure, but given that on a tactical approach level, this game wasn't actually that demanding (there were harder games thus far in my view), despite the full crowd and so on, it was only good up to a certain point. So I don't think we should lose the holistic picture in praising this performance too much, at least as I see it.
His approach to disciplinary measures was exactly what the players wanted and expected - verbal warning at 23', drawing a line at 38', no cards at 53', 74'; very good calming verbal warning at 58'. That was well-played by the referee from Turkey, well done.
That being said, I wouldn't go further than assessing this performance as "good". Honestly, I didn't see a referee who was trying to positively mould the players' behaviour (58' aside, and that was more reactive anyway). Çakır only reacted to the incidents in front of him, then doing the minimal possible in order to not lose his hand on everything.
He succeeded for sure, but given that on a tactical approach level, this game wasn't actually that demanding (there were harder games thus far in my view), despite the full crowd and so on, it was only good up to a certain point. So I don't think we should lose the holistic picture in praising this performance too much, at least as I see it.
Foul detection and especially simple restart calls (33', 46', 63', 67') don't really count in his favour; the incident at 61' encapsulated a wider point - his control of the players' actions was actually relatively loose, even if it all worked out okay in the end.
So: all-in-all, certainly a good performance and convincing impression, but this was not the sparkling showing of this EURO so far, in my eyes at least. That being said, Cüneyt Çakır certainly passed the test in a mostly convincing way, and would deserve a top second appointment.
Balance
The rave reviews in the wide media for this EURO's officiating only continue! In two very contrasting settings, both del Cerro Grande and Çakır showed technically convincing performances for us in refereeing too.
The first round of group matches has been an unequivocal success for UEFA, great work by all involved which they should be proud of - here's to it continuing in such a positive vain!
){kind=link}
Posting Komentar untuk "UEFA EURO Analysis: Day Five (HUNPOR, FRAGER)"