Refereeing at UEFA play-offs for 2018 WC Qualification

I want to present a short analysis about the level of refereeing at UEFA play-offs for 2018 WC Qualification. Your opinions are of course welcome. 

Northern Ireland - Switzerland (Ovidiu Hațegan, Felix Brych)

First of all, let me say that in this play off I didn't expect the appointment of the Romanian for the first leg. I didn't expect him because I was sure there were other names ahead, but of course one can say he deserved this chance, thank to some good performances he had shown in recent times.In fact, the tie was at the end decided by a major call made by the Romanian referee, a penalty in favor of Switzerland for an alleged deliberate handball. Replay showed that the decision taken was a wrong one. In the specific case, I think that the Romanian didn't have the exact perception of the incident, he tried to re-analyze in his mind what had happened, but at the end this was a wrong choice. Apart from that, even though I didn't watch the full game, there weren't other major issues. Without AARs and/or VAR,  Hațegan had to decide by himself, so he can't be definitely blamed too much. A mistake can happen. Second leg was officiated by Felix Brych: no problems at all for the German crew, with a solid performance and an expected level work. In the last minutes of the match, NIR had the big chance to score but they were unable to do that, thank to a save by a player from SUI. Maybe Hațegan would have liked to see the contrary, in order to make his mistake less crucial. Switzerland reached the World Cup. I can't criticize the Romanian for the reasons I mentioned, and I will add more about that in the last chapter of this post. 

Croatia - Greece (Gianluca Rocchi, Björn Kuipers)

The tie was entirely decided after first leg, with Croatian side dominating the game and especially the first half in Zagreb. It was not an easy game for Gianluca Rocchi, appointed for first leg, but at the same time neither a very difficult one. The penalty in favor of home-team was the most important crucial decision of the evening and the Italian crew got it right. Then, Greece showed to be in real trouble, being unable to make any opposition to Croatia. This made the game, especially in second half, less challenging for the referee. Second leg was officiated by Dutch Björn Kuipers. In the context of a not so challenging match, Greece looked to ba again unable to put in trouble the opponents, it must be reported that the Dutch decided to have a very lenient approach, trying to save cards and whistling only for blatant fouls. This, at first, looked to be even a dangerous choice, but at the end we can say that the game finished without major issues, so Kuipers gained his ticked for WC. However, personally, I would have liked to see a different refereeing in this game, but I can admit that it was an expected level performance.

Denmark - Republic of Ireland (Milorad Mažić, Szymon Marciniak)

In first leg, we saw a "typical" Mažić, he decided to be quite far away from the spotlights, avoiding to issue any single yellow card. At the end he managed it without significant issues. The only appeal, by Denmark, for an alleged deliberate handball inside the box, was in my opinion correctly refused by referee. Apart from that, nothing else. The game was intense, but not difficult regarding potentially crucial incidents. Second leg was handled by Szymon Marciniak. The Polish assured, in my opinion, a good performance. In first half, he correctly played on, following a penalty appeal by Republic of Ireland. Definitely not enough for a so important whistle. A few later, Denmark scored the equalizer and then won the game without problems, a penalty was whistled in the last minutes of second half and it was another correct decision by Marciniak. Denmark gained the ticket for Russia 2018, very likely the same occurred to the Polish crew.

Sweden - Italy (Cüneyt Çakır, Antonio Mateu Lahoz)

Surely the most discussed play off, in terms of refereeing. In first leg, Turkish Cüneyt Çakır decided to have a quite lenient approach regarding the physical play by Swedish players. Italian side made some complaints for this reason, but I must admit that the Turkish didn't make any blatant mistake, and therefore his choice to be so lenient regarding some aspects of the game could be still okaysh. However, and I want to underline that again, this approach in my opinion it is not supportable when it leads to clear missed YCs, as the one in the early seconds of the game for a reckless elbow by a player from Sweden. As already said for Kuipers in Greece - Croatia, I must repeat that this kind of officiating is always very risky. You can easily fail and then you will have to face the consequences of such an approach. Luckily, it didn't happen with the Turkish in Solna.  Second leg in Milan, officiated by Spanish Mateu Lahoz, is surely the most controversial game of the entire stage. I will try to give my opinion about the performance of the Spanish, however as first thing I want to say that it is not easy to make it short, because there are many and many aspects to be taken into account. Starting from the early minutes, Mateu Lahoz had to face some crucial decisions in penalty area: he decided to play on following three penalty appeals, the first one by Italy, the other ones by Sweden. I think that this choice can be explained by the fact that he wanted to be sure before whistling a penalty in such a crucial game. Coming to a deeper analysis regarding the incidents, it is true that the first  handball case looked  to be very blatant, and most of the referees would have whistled, but at the same time it is not a 100% wrong decision to play on, and this  could still "save" Mateu in front of the observer. However, the second half presented immediately another crucial situation for the Spanish, and in this case I think it is difficult to support the decision. Replays can't help us in detecting a clear handball. But, if this handball existed, then why not to whistle the previous ones? At least one of the previous situations was a clearer deliberate handball. So, a more than clear penalty was missed following this previous foul whistled by referee.  Without making this analysis too long, I think Mateu can be backed regarding all the other incidents occurred in penalty areas in second half. His disciplinary control was absolutely good in first half, less in second half, when a clear second YC to Italian defender Chiellini was missed (reckless use of arms, even possible intentional hit). The Spanish struggled a bit in the last minutes of the game, but basically all the matter about this game is related to the penalty area incidents. Everybody is entitled to have a different opinion, of course, I just wish, but I'm sure, that the Spanish decided on the pitch according to his feelings, and tried to do the best. This was a very challenging game and many referees would have been in trouble. 

Conclusions

We could split this final chapter in two parts, considering them even as related. First part is of course the answer to the question: was the refereeing good at this stage of the qualifiers? If we point out that 6 games out of 8 were refereed without problems, we would be allowed to say "yes", it was a good officiating for most of the games. However the problem is that in such play-offs every crucial decision is extremely important for a national team with WC aims. So, even in case of only one crucial but absolutely influencing mistake, we must admit that something went wrong. Why? The answer to this question will introduce the second part of these conclusions. Again, the most discussed situations have occurred regarding deliberate handballs, definitely the most difficult incident to assess for a referee on the pitch. Can we really blame Mateu Lahoz and Hațegan? Of course not at all. These mistakes have happened and will happen again always in the history of football, unless, and here I come to the point, technology will be used. Yes, that's the big issue and what we should think about, after having watched these games. Was a goood choice to allow the play in these games without any technological help for referees? Not even GLT? Absolutely unacceptable, if you ask me. Mistakes were, are and will be always at the side of referees, the only chance to avoid the very crucial and significant ones is to use a support. The final decision to officiate these matches without VAR, GLT or at least AARs was definitely a wrong and very poor choice by both FIFA and UEFA. If there is a conflict between the parts, I'm not interested in it. They both failed, the only wish by everybody was to be sure that scenes like France - Republic Of Ireland in 2009 didn't happen anymore. On the contrary, this happened again, and I can't blame the referees. You can be the best among the Elite referees, your name can be Ovidiu Hațegan, Antonio Mateu Lahoz, but this wont make a difference. Difficult decisions will always wait for you on the pitch. And nowadays, with a so quick level of football, played very often with passion, nerves, hysteria, adrenalin and so on, it is almost impossible for a referee to keep under control everything. So, I'm really sorry for what happened, especially for Northern Ireland (as Italian, let me say that Italy can be considered a different question, because the team absolutely deserved to be eliminated), but referees can't be too much responsible there, even if so experienced at this level, a mistake will always happen. My final wish: I hope that now the era of VAR will definitely start and last for a long time, because football at high levell needs that. In other words: it is impossible to go on without a real help, given all the interests in our football.