EAR Ache

The following incident occurred during the Europa League Round of 16 2nd leg match between Chelsea and Steaua Bucharest on Thursday 14 March 2013. The match finished 3—1, with Chelsea winning 3—2 on aggregate. There were 4 YCs.

In 73', Fernando Torres (blue 9) is tripped in the PA by defender Szukala (red 4) right in front of EAR1 Antony Gautier. Szukala has slid in and cannot control the momentum of his body and therefore clips Torres, who goes down. Referee Stéphane Lannoy gives nothing and EAR1 does not assist.

This blog reiterates that additional assistant referees or EARs are ineffective. Uefa's Michel Platini, via Pierluigi Collina, continues to advocate the use of EARs. The evidence is, and has been, mounting against the beneficial presence of EARs despite Collina's cherrypicking.


Similarly in the Champions League Round of 16 2nd leg match between Manchester United and Real Madrid on Tuesday 5 March 2013, there were several incidents where the EARs could have helped the Referee … but again the EARs proved ineffective.


The Europa League match officials were:
Referee    Stéphane Lannoy (FRA)
Assistant referees    Frédéric Cano (FRA), Michael Annonier (FRA)
Fourth official    Eric Dansault (FRA)
Additional assistant referees    Antony Gautier (FRA), Ruddy Buquet (FRA)


UPDATE

The following incident occurred during the EPL match between Aston Villa and Liverpool on Sunday 31 March 2013. The match finished 1—2.

Referee Lee Mason—without any help from EARs—correctly awards a penalty for a foul on Liverpool's Luis Suarez (black 7) in the penalty area.

 

Aston Villa's Nathan Baker (claret 32) lunges in. Pics courtesy Sky Sports.

The foul inside the PA is almost exactly the same as that experienced by Fernando Torres (above) … the only difference is that Torres did not benefit from the added presence of an EAR or from the "competence" of the Referee (Lannoy).

A Slovenly AR

The performance of one AR from Slovenia in UEFA matches continues to be 'slovenly', if you excuse the word play. This post is Part 2 of the previous post UCL: Strange Impressions of FIFA ARs and UEFA EARs, which elicited some interesting comments from readers. Thank you everyone for your comments.

Since this blog first commented on the slovenly AR1 from Slovenia (who looks slightly similar to ex-Arsenal and ex-England defender Tony Adams), UEFA has appointed this team of match officials to officiate in at least two relatively-important European matches such as the:

AR1 from Slovenia using a basic AR Flag with a wooden handle (Note: the flag is not the problem)

1) Champions League quarterfinal second-leg match between Chelsea and Benfica on 4 April 2012. The match finished 2—1, with Chelsea winning 3—1 on aggregate.

and the:

 

 AR1 from Slovenia and his 'slovenly' way in holding the flag with his right hand as he runs along the touch line towards the goal line

2) Europa League semifinal second-leg match between Valencia and Atletico Madrid on 26 April 2012. The match finished 0—1, with Atletico winning 2—5 on aggregate and progressing to the Europa League final.


One would think that the relevant UEFA Referee Assessors would have politely advised these match officials from Slovenia, on more than one occasion, to follow UEFA and FIFA guidelines. Who is at fault here?

Impressions count and professional impressions count professionally. Upcoming Referee Damir Skomina (who still needs to improve to fully convince as a top international Referee) would be better served by team members who take their duties seriously and professionally. In the seasons ahead, will the Tony Adams AR1 look-alike improve his slovenly image or will his attitude continue to mark him out as a stubborn non-team player?

On a related issue, the informative and extensive World of Football Refereeing blog has a post about the U17 EURO Referees in Slovenia. It highlights UEFA Referees Committee members Vlado Sajn and Kyros Vassaras who have a Q&A session with the media. What they say, although predictable, is important because the objective of the UEFA Referees Committee is to teach well so that these upcoming Referees from all over Europe will "achieve as much consistency and uniformity in these [UEFA] tournaments as possible".  In particular, I hope the young Referees from Slovenia will not copy the slovenly attitude of some of their senior colleagues.

Double Dutch and the Double Arm Signal

This post is a question about the double arm signal that Referees use.

During the Europa League group match between Tottenham Hotspurs and PAOK on Wednesday 30 November 2011, an incident occurred in the 77' and the Dutch Referee displayed the following double arm signal:

Referee Bas Nijhuis (Netherlands) as mentioned in Incident Two of In one EAR, out the other EAR

During the Europa League group match between Celtic and Atletico on Wednesday 30 November 2011, another Dutch Referee displayed the same signal.

Was this a Foul or an Advantage?

In the 66', Celtic's Samaras (green) is fouled right in front of Referee Eric Braamhaar (Netherlands) who immediately whistles for a DFK. The Referee also makes a double arm signal. Here are the freeze frames:

In fact, had the Referee not whistled then his double arm signal to signify advantage would have been appropriate since it can be seen that Celtic could have continued their attacking move. Hypothetically, after the attacking move is completed and the ball goes out of play, the Referee would then have the right to go back to the offender and caution him before play restarts.

It appears this double arm signal used to signify a free kick is common amongst Referees from the Netherlands. Can someone please confirm? Perhaps Dutch Referee can comment? It is always nice to have some 'cultural exchange', haha!

This double arm signal used to indicate a direct free kick is potentially very misleading because the standard FIFA signal for advantage is also a double arm signal. Why choose to unnecessarily complicate things?

Note: The meaning of the term Double Dutch is "something that is nonsense; gibberish - a language one cannot understand".


The match officials for the Celtic and Atletico fixture were:

Referee
Eric Braamhaar (NED)
Assistant referees
Arend Brink (NED), Wilco Lobbert (NED)
Fourth official
Maarten Ketting (NED)
Additional assistant referees (EARs)
Pol van Boekel (NED), Serdar Gözübüyük (NED)


A correct decision

Also during the Celtic and Atletico match, in the 13' the R had a good view of Celtic player (green 10) using his arms to help climb above an opponent and head the ball into the goal.

Referee Braamhaar spots a foul during a corner kick

The R correctly denied the 'goal' and awarded a DFK to the defending team.

In one EAR, out the other EAR

Finally, in a soccer world full of ineffective extra assistant referees we have found one effective EAR. An EAR who was willing to take a public stand because he knew the R had missed something significant.

The following incidents occurred during the Europa League group match between Tottenham Hotspurs and PAOK on Wednesday 30 November 2011. The match finished 1—2.


Incident One DOGSO Handball Call and an Ineffective EAR

In the 37', Referee Bas Nijhuis (Netherlands) decided a PAOK defender had deliberately used his arm to stop a goal-bound shot on the goal line, thereby deliberately handling the ball to deny a goal or an obvious goal-scoring opportunity. The R therefore sent off the PAOK defender (black 3) and awarded a penalty. Here are the freeze frames:

Just one out of five Spurs players in the area called for handball

Did the PAOK defender (black) deliberately move his arm towards the ball? Was his arm in an unnatural position?
No

This appears to be a harsh decision, even though in real time we must accept what the match Referee sees and decides at that moment. With post-match analysis, the discussion is whether this really was deliberate handball.

From the R's angle (and from one Spurs player's angle who was positioned at the corner of the goal area), it is understandable that they saw the ball hit the PAOK defender's arm. But note, only one of the five Spurs players in the penalty area claimed handball.

From other perspectives, it appeared the PAOK defender had his arm in a natural position and the ball first hit his torso and then deflected on to his arm. The point is the PAOK defender did not deliberately play the ball with his arm. This can be compared with the deliberate actions of Australia's Harry Kewell in the 2010 WC match between Australia and Ghana, and also of AC Milan's Alessandro Nesta in the 2010-11 UCL match between AC Milan and Tottenham Hotspur. Those actions were clear deliberate arm movements towards the ball.

However, the R made his own decision and the EAR on that side of the pitch was ineffective.


Incident Two Reckless Challenge and an Effective EAR

In the 77', as a PAOK defender clears the ball from his goal area a Spurs player (Jermain Defoe) makes a reckless challenge and injures the defender. The R appears oblivious to this and play continues for a further 15 seconds until the ball enters the goal. Here are the freeze frames:

The Referee whistles at this point ... when the ball is already in the net

After the ball enters the goal, Referee Nijhuis signals that his assistant or assistants have told him "No Goal". At first, the TV cameras and commentators believe the AR has raised his flag, but later the TV focus on the EAR. There is confusion because the R has also made a strange signal with both his arms.

I say: "No Goal"

I say: "Because he said so!"

Now I say: "? ? ?"

What is this double arm signal?

If we forget the R, we can see that the effective EAR is calmly explaining to the players that there was a foul on the PAOK defender. It takes at least 20 seconds (and certainly longer) to explain this to the players who are approaching the EAR.

From the TV replays, we can clearly see the effective EAR communicating with the R. However, at that time the R has totally ignored his EAR and has allowed play to continue. This is unsurprising since from many observations of UEFA's experiment with EARs starting from 2009, the R typically ignores information from EARs.

SUMMARY

Referee Nijhuis appeared too casual. In many instances he seemed to walk and stroll about the pitch as if he was passing the time away until it was time to go home. Incident Two highlighted how his "casualness" gave the impression of being indecisive even in the face of good assistance from his team. His effective EAR was clearly telling him that there was a foul on the goal line by a Spurs player on a PAOK player. And yet he never whistled until the ball went into the goal 15 seconds later.

It would have been even better had the R cautioned Spurs' Jermain Defoe for his reckless challenge. This would have given the clearest indication to players, coaches, fans and commentators that the R had acted on advice from his team about the reckless challenge. It would also have given the clearest indication to referees, referee assessors and referee chiefs that the R fully took in the EAR's advice and acted accordingly.

For this match, it seems the EAR was the most effective match official of the lot. At one time he even held the magic wand up like a radio or walkie talkie (perhaps inadvertently demonstrating that he prefers to talk and use the CommLink to communicate with the Referee). This EAR gave a good performance.

The match officials were:

Referee
Bas Nijhuis (NED)
Assistant referees
Angelo Boonman (NED), Rob van de Ven (NED)
Fourth official
Jeroen Sanders (NED)
Additional assistant referees (EARs)
Ed Janssen (NED), Reinold Wiedemeijer (NED)

Insightful Camera View Showing The Ineffectiveness of EARs

There was one incident during the Europa League group match between Sporting Braga and Birmingham City on Wednesday 30 November 2011 that provided an insightful camera view of the performance of the EAR.

In the 10', a Birmingham attacker (blue) is hauled down by a Braga defender (red 5) in front of the EAR. This was mentioned in the previous post as Incident Two.

The EAR was in an excellent position and had a near, unobstructed view of the incident.

In such a clear cut incident as this, would you buzz? Here are the freeze frames:

Look closely at the hand holding the magic wand ... is there any sign of clenching?

Looking at the replay, there was no evidence that the EAR used his "magic wand" (the EAR's magic wand first appeared on 12 May 2010 during the Europa League Final). In normal circumstances, if you press the large bleeper button on a radio flag your fingers automatically clench and as a result your grip on the handle becomes tighter. From the freeze frames, there is no evidence that the EAR buzzed because it appears the EAR is still lightly holding the handle.

One could argue that the EAR used the CommLink instead. But was there evidence throughout the match that the officials were talking to each other through their CommLinks during important incidents?

Also, one could perhaps argue that the EAR buzzed a little later (when out of the camera frame). But would that have been decisive enough and helpful to the R who, remember, is still far behind the incident?

The question remains: Who actually made the call? During this quick breakaway we know the Referee was behind play, and the AR and the EAR were close to play.

This was a great opportunity to show that EARs can be effective. However even with this camera view it still seems that EARs are ineffective. Since the start of this "experiment" in 2009, there is very little evidence to show that EARs are useful … however, there is plenty of evidence that suggest EARs are useless. There is even evidence to demonstrate that EARs have a detrimental effect on the performance of the match Referee.