Friday, 22 March 2013

Was Cuneyt Cakir Conscious Of Colluding With Collina?

Some readers have asked for an account on this blog regarding the highly-publicized fallout (see BBC Sport, The Telegraph) from Turkey Referee Cuneyt Cakir's decision to send off Nani in the UCL Round of 16 2nd Leg match between Manchester United and Real Madrid on Tuesday 5 March 2013. The match finished 1—2, with Real Madrid progressing 2—3 on aggregate. There were 5YCs and 1RC.

Referee Cuneyt Cakir sends off Manchester United's Nani (red 17). Pic courtesy of PA.

It is noticeable that many Referees (see here) have sided with Cakir's decision, claiming that it was a send off for serious foul play, while other Referees did not think the incident warranted a red card (see Dermot Gallagher). Also, with the exception of Roy Keane, the majority of players, ex-players and fans thought Cakir's decision was harsh. Here's HKRef's take on the incident:


First Consideration
Cakir sent off Nani for serious foul play, which means a player is dismissed for using "excessive force or brutality against an opponent when challenging for the ball when it is in play". The laws further state: "A tackle that endangers the safety of an opponent must be sanctioned as serious foul play."

The Nani—Arbeloa challenge. Pic courtesy of EPA.

Following these Laws to the letter, it is easy for everyone to understand why Cakir was not wrong to send off Nani. Cakir's view is Nani endangered the safety of his opponent.


Second Consideration
However, only a few days earlier in the English Premier League match between Stoke City and West Ham United on 2 March 2013, Stoke's Peter Crouch launched into a bicycle kick and connected flush with Matt Taylor's face, and knocked him out for a few seconds.

Stoke's Peter Crouch (red/white 25) connects with West Ham's Matt Taylor's jaw. Pics courtesy of PA.
West Ham's Demel (maroon 20) reacts in anger towards Crouch

Referee Jon Moss awarded a free kick to West Ham and was wrong not to caution Crouch.

To many referees this was a reckless challenge. "Reckless" is defined as a player who has "acted with complete disregard to the danger to, or consequences for, his opponent. A player who plays in a reckless manner must be cautioned."

The Laws state: "A scissors or bicycle kick is permissible provided that, in the opinion of the referee, it is not dangerous to an opponent."


Further Considerations
The Crouch—Taylor scenario also technically fits the criteria of serious foul play because the offender endangered the safety of his opponent. But Crouch's action had no malice or any intent to injure. Plus players react to and accept bicycle kicks all the time; we know this because such kicks are used frequently by players.

It is these two definitions — one for a sending-off, the other for a caution — that appear to contradict each other. For bicycle kicks, players intuitively know it is reckless because there is no intent to kick an opponent, only a complete disregard to, since the offender does not look at his opponent before executing the kick.  
Q: Did Crouch's bicycle kick endanger the safety of an opponent? If yes, then RC.


Now consider the Nani—Arbeloa challenge; was it reckless or serious foul play? Did Nani intend to kick Arbeloa with his studs exposed and was Nani looking at Arbeloa? Also, the reactions of the players told us that, at most, it was a reckless challenge. Had Cakir cautioned Nani for being reckless, he would not have been wrong.  
Q: Did Nani act with complete disregard to the danger to, or consequences for, his opponent? If Yes, then YC.



Conclusion

The problem perhaps lies with the Laws and the way different competition organisers interpret them. The argument that "Nani deserves a red card on the continent and only a caution in England" is ignorant.

We can see from the reaction of Real Madrid's players that in Spain Nani would not have expected to be sent off either. The respective Football Associations in England, Spain, Germany, France and the Netherlands would likely interpret Nani's challenge to be reckless.

But UEFA is the competition organiser of the Champions League. Its referees committee, headed by Pierluigi Collina, manages its interpretation of the Laws and relies on top FIFA match officials from Europe to implement them publicly. Apparently, Collina and his Committee view this type of challenge as serious foul play.

Therefore, Cakir had an incentive to exhibit boldness and send off Nani at Old Trafford because he knew Collina was assessing him, probably with May's Wembley final in mind. Collusion?


A Final Note
Looking at the slow motion replays, did anyone detect Nani apparently straightening his right leg in the split-second after the coming together of both players? In real time, it is hard to detect, but this could be Cakir's proper justification in issuing a straight red (providing, of course, that Cakir saw it in real time).





Monday, 18 March 2013

McManaman: Mistimed or Malicious Tackle?

The following incident occurred during the EPL match between Wigan Athletic and Newcastle United on Sunday 17 March 2013. The match finished 2—1; there were 2 YCs.

In the first half, Wigan forward Callum McManaman (blue) challenges for the ball against Newcastle's Massadio Haidara (yellow). Here are the dynamic frames (courtesy of The Telegraph):



Here is Referee Mark Halsey's position.
Apparently, Halsey did not (or could not) see the incident and actually stopped play moments later with a DFK to Newcastle for an infringement made by Wigan. It is hoped the FA will therefore take retrospective action against McManaman.



The pitch location of the incident means that both ARs were too far away (i.e. in excess of 30 yards) to attain a close view. There have been suggestions that AR2 Matthew Wilkes had a clear view (see here). However, this is likely to be incorrect. In addition, AR2 probably did not have a good angle of view.

AR2's View


The best angle of view (i.e. the X-Factor) is seen from this following dynamic frame:


Looking at this shocking challenge, I suspect there will be a diverse range of opinions.
In one corner, Wigan manager Roberto Martinez defends his 21-year-old player:
Remember it's Callum's full debut in the Premier League. I haven't seen the replay, I believe that he touches the ball and then it's a bad challenge, but it's nothing malicious, he's not that sort of boy.

I can't really comment too much because I haven't seen the action but I can guarantee that Callum McManaman is a young man full of talent and in his debut probably showed the enthusiasm that you expect, but he's not a malicious player.

In the other corner, ex-Referee Graham Poll believes it to be serious foul play:
[McManaman's] straight-legged lunge over the top of the ball, with his studs up, caused his opponent to be stretchered off.


So, was McManaman's shocking challenge mistimed or malicious !!??










Friday, 15 March 2013

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).





Monday, 4 March 2013

Shinpads Guard Against Stupidity From Others


The following observation occurred during the UCL Round of 16 first-leg match between Celtic and Juventus on Tuesday 12 February 2013. The match finished 0—3; there were 6YCs.

Juventus player Martín Cáceres (black #4) and his pithy pathetic shinpads

Related Posts
Shinguards Should Protect Properly
EARs Ineffective Again

Related News
Ronaldinho survives two-footed horror tackle (The Telegraph; Daily Mail)

Arsenal Sarandi player Diego Braghieri lunges at Atletico Mineiro's Ronaldinho (YouTube link)




The match referee only saw fit to award a penalty to Atletico Mineiro ... and nothing else. Does anyone know whether Arsenal Sarandi player Diego Braghieri received any retrospective sanction for his two-footed lunge at Ronaldinho?




Monday, 25 February 2013

EARs Ineffective Again

Once again Additional Assistant Referees, or EARs, have shown themselves up by their ineffectiveness.

The following incident occurred during the UCL Round of 16 first-leg match between Celtic and Juventus on Tuesday 12 February 2013. The match finished 0—3; there were 6YCs.

In the 3', the whole of the ball crossed the goal line between the posts and under the crossbar. Here are the freeze frames:



The goal was given to Juventus player Alessandro Matri (black 32) although it was not clear which match official actually saw the whole of the ball cross the goal line. The EAR did not give a signal, and media reports suggest it was the AR who made the call. However, it is not clear.

If the match officials are not 100% sure then they cannot give the goal. Perhaps in real time the true goalscorer was Juventus player Marchisio (8) who followed up and convincingly put the ball into the back of the net.

Former EPL referee Dermot Gallagher said:
"The problem for me is I don’t think there is any tangible evidence that they [EARs] do anything. But for a Juventus player [Marchisio (8)] following up a shot very, very quickly we could have had another Holocaust last night. I am convinced that the assistant and the guy on the goal line don’t know the ball is in."

HKRef is also convinced that the EAR and AR did not know the ball is in … although HKRef would not be so bold as to use the term "Holocaust" to describe such fallout incidents.

The match officials were:
Referee  Alberto Undiano Mallenco (ESP)
Assistant referees  Roberto Díaz Pérez del Palomar (ESP), Jesús Calvo Guadamuro (ESP)
Fourth official  Raúl Cabanero Martínez (ESP)
Additional assistant referees  Fernando Teixeira (ESP), César Muñiz (ESP)




Note: In this match, the amount of holding, pulling and blocking in and around the penalty area during corner kicks and free kicks was absurd. Remember, UEFA made the claim, without any real evidence, that the presence of EARs helps to reduce the amount of holding, pulling and blocking in and around the penalty area. How ridiculous. If match referees consistently do their jobs properly, then the amount of holding, pulling and blocking will drop because players would be afraid to give away penalties or free kicks at every corner kick.





Friday, 15 February 2013

One Stamp, Not Two, And You're Out

The following incident occurred during the UCL Round of 16 first-leg match between Valencia and Paris Saint Germain on Tuesday 12 February 2013. The match finished 1—2; there were 2YCs and 1RC.



Incident One: Offside? Foul? What?

In 72', Referee Paolo Tagliavento whistles for an infringement. Here are the freeze frames:







In some media accounts, it was an offside call (even from the commentary on the UEFA website, it stated offside). The way Referee Tagliavento walks over and positions himself indicates that he has called offside. However, this is far from certain because his arm signal is NOT straight up to indicate an IFK. It appears to be angled to indicate a DFK (and therefore, a foul). But if it was for a foul, the Referee's position to indicate restart is wayward.

This is soft-option officiating because there was a more important decision that the Referee did not call.

PSG striker Zlatan Ibrahimovic stamped on his opponent.
Incredibly, Valencia João Pereira (12) did not appear to be affected by the stamp and got up immediately because he was actually protesting the goal. From his perspective, he was the one who was fouled (and incidentally had played the ball forward, which meant technically PSG's Chantôme (20) was not offside). Here are the freeze frames:

How can Ibrahimovic (blue) play the ball forward?
Instead, it was a stamp ... a cynical stamp


No matter how we look at this incident, the actions of the Referee and his assistants do not appear competent or professional.


Incident Two: Stamp Number Two

In the 90'+2', PSG striker Ibrahimovic has been dispossessed of the ball and makes a lunge at an opponent. Here are the freeze frames:


The AR and EAR both have a good angle of view of the foul. Where is the Referee?


AR signals a foul. Where is the Referee?


AR takes action. Is the EAR effective and doing anything useful?



AR puts up his flag up using his right (why?) hand. Why the right hand? Where is the Referee?


At last here comes the Referee ...

Referee Tagliavento with the whistle in his mouth ... does not look very good!






AR did well to signal this serious foul play

That's two studs-up stamps missed by Referee Tagliavento. In the first incident, the match officials' actions did not look good. With the second incident, although the AR did a great job in assisting the Referee, the EAR is not visibly doing anything (except just standing there and staring) and the Referee is nowhere near the incident. The Referee was not near, and did not have a clear view of the incident. His credibility is low and the Referee further cuts down his credibility by keeping the whistle in his mouth as he approached and sanctioned Ibrahimovic. Very poor impression.


The match officials were:

Referee:  Paolo Tagliavento (ITA)
Assistant referees:  Mauro Tonolini (ITA), Lorenzo Manganelli (ITA)
Fourth official:  Riccardo Di Fiore (ITA)
Additional assistant referees:  Andrea De Marco (ITA), Antonio Damato (ITA)





Tuesday, 12 February 2013

Clattenburg's Consistent Crouch and the Usual Encroachment

The following incidents occurred during the EPL match between Aston Villa and West Ham United on Sunday 10 February 2013. The match finished 2—1; there were 5YCs.

These are just some observations of referee Mark Clattenburg.

Incident One: DFK

There is a DFK to West Ham (blue) and Clattenburg takes up the standard recommended position prior to restart.

Incident Two: Penalty Call

In the 73', West Ham's Mark Nobel (blue 16) makes a clumsy challenge and trips Aston Villa's Charles N'Zogbia (maroon 10) in the penalty area. Here are the freeze frames:

 Mark Noble (blue 16) carelessly sticks a leg out and does not get the ball
 
 
 It is an easy call to make


 
 

Mark Noble approaches Referee Mark Clattenburg and begs innocence and pleads leniency

This kind of approach, where one player (the player who committed the offense, in this case Mark Noble) speaks to the referee is perfectly fine and understandable. And a competent, credible and experienced referee like Clattenburg has no trouble managing this situation.

However, when more than two players approach the referee to dispute and challenge the referee's decision (often in an angry, aggressive and intimidatory manner), that is where things will get out of hand. Clubs (i.e. coaches and players) should be reminded of this and to uphold the Respect Campaign.

Incident Three: Penalty Kick

Notice Clattenburg's crouching stance. Also, he does not do anything about encroachment (see related posts here).
 Encroachment at penalty kicks

Incident Four: DFK

In the 77' Clattenburg awards a DFK to Aston Villa just outside the penalty area. Here are the freeze frames:
 

Clattenburg's crouch. Again, there is nothing wrong with his crouching stance except for the fact that it looks odd especially when other people (i.e. players on the pitch) stand "normally" and are ready to react to play.

 
 

Despite Clattenburg's Classic Cowboy Crouch, his positioning is of more concern, since the question to ask is whether this is the optimal position for the referee to stand.
Last week, Clattenburg gave a DFK in a similar location and also stood behind the ball.
Referee Howard Webb does this too and Phil Dowd dawdles. Is this a PGMOL recommendation for positioning at free kicks?


What impression does the referee give by standing like this?
Are impressions important for match officials?