Thursday, 12 July 2018

2018 FIFA World Cup - Referee Appointments - Néstor Pitana and Alireza Faghani to officiate finals

Argentina's Néstor Pitana will be the man in the middle for the masterpiece between France and Croatia, while Iranian Alireza Faghani will get the honor of Third Place game.
Match #63
Saint Petersburg, 14 July 2018 16:00 CET
Belgium - England
Referee: Alireza Faghani (IRN)
Assistant Referee 1: Reza Sokhandan (IRN)
Assistant Referee 2: Mohammadreza Mansouri (IRN)
Fourth Official: Malang Diedhiou (SEN)
Fifth Official: Djibril Camara (SEN)
VAR: Mark Geiger (USA)
AVAR1: Bastian Dankert (GER)
AVAR 2: Joe Fletcher (CAN)
AVAR 3: Paolo Valeri (ITA)

Match #64
Moscow, 15 July 2018 17:00 CET
France - Croatia
Referee: Néstor Pitana (ARG)
Assistant Referee 1: Hernan Maidana (ARG)
Assistant Referee 2: Juan Pablo Belatti (ARG)
Fourth Official: Björn Kuipers (NED)
Fifth Official: Erwin Zeinstra (NED)
VAR: Massimiliano Irrati (ITA)
AVAR1: Mauro Vigliano (ARG)
AVAR 2: Carlos Astroza (CHI)
AVAR 3: Danny Makkelie (NED) 

29 comments:

  1. Italian representation in World Cup final :D

    ReplyDelete
  2. %100 agree for your early comment soham,FIFA couldn't trust him even for sf,if you appointment Cunha for sf instead of faghani it's the shame .and giving him 3-4 match( real useless match on this tournament) this is the biggest shame,,I am sure faghani will be so sad on this match we will see it clearly

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Faghani will complete his excellent presentation with another one...doesn't matter what gamd is.....is World Cup game....

      Delete
    2. As I told......solid presentation by Faghani.....

      Delete
  3. One political comment: great to see Faghani from Iran and Geiger from USA appointed together. Great message from committee that football doesn't care about politics and that only football is important :)

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I think it's a good way for Geiger to end his World Cup career as well! :)

      Delete
  4. Such a strange appointment for the final match while he is competent he had already been given the opening and other KO stage matches. There were at least two or three other officials who had performed equally well if not better. Also this is a testimony to how weak AFC is. While for the first time in the history of the game an AFC referee deserved to be in the final he was not even given a 1/4 or 1/2 final game.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Perfect analysis... Exactly what I feel about the Pitana appointment... He is overappointed, at least one of the R16/QF match of Pitana should've gone to some other referee... I would say Cunha should have got Croatia v Denmark R16, Faghani should've got France v Belgium SF and Diedhiou should have got the 3rd place match and then Pitana for Final is all good! All these in an ideal world :)

      Delete

  5. Kuipers, Faghani,´Çakir and Ricci are better referees
    that Pitana.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I would rate them as more or less at the equal level... It's basically a matter of taste and perception as different people prefer different styles... So accordingly the choices vary from person to person!

      Delete
  6. I think the appointment is completely political and not performance-principle based. I mean, Pitana has been good in this WC, but has he been that good to get so many matches (5)? Or a better way to ask: has he been so much better than other referees with less appointments? I think the answer is clearly not. Then why has this happened?

    For me, the obvious reason has to do with the fact that CONMEBOL is the second biggest confederation… which has been completely destroyed by UEFA in the last two rounds. No representation has been left afer quarterfinals. So it was obvious that they could not be left behind, and refereeing teams was the answer. Two CONMEBOL refereeing teams will have handled 50% of the last 4 matches, with 25% each UEFA and AFC. A CAF 4th official in 3rd place match and another UEFA referee with another 4 appointments as main official as 4th in the final. CONCACAF represented as VAR in 3rd place match. The only confederation left out was OFC.

    So I think all of this make clear that last appointments have been political. As I said, Cunha's was undeserved IMO, as is the fact that Pitana has got 5 matches. Maybe, someday, what you do in the field of play will have its fair reward. Someday, I hope.

    ReplyDelete
  7. My question is, was there a chance that match for the 3rd place could go to UEFA referee? I know at least 2 of them at the end of their referee careers and that deserved not to be left behind. Djamel Haimoudi was in charge 2014.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Could've easily gone to Rocchi or Mazic but Faghani for sure deserved it more!

      Delete
  8. Small note for Chefren :
    Belgium - England is played at 16:00 CET, not 17:00

    And I wonder why the finals are played this year in the afternoon while during the previous WC, they always took place in the evening?

    ReplyDelete
  9. He had the opening and closing!!! Last world cup no ref had five matches. He was in charge of 5 matches!!! Is there a shortage of quality ref in this world cup??? It is more like a political decision than a well throughout fair one. Faghani for the third place!!! Sure he deserves a final providing that his performance was spot on.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Shame for diedhiou he deserved at least a 1/4 place, as for cakir , yes he generally is a good referee , but his performance was last night, very average

    ReplyDelete
  11. Pitna 5 matches unbelievable!!! Opening and closing!!! Last WC no ref had five matches.

    ReplyDelete
  12. Why use Zeinstra (AR2) for the Fifth Official Role and not Van Roekel(AR1)?

    Why again Irrati? He got all the important matches this world cup; why not Makkelie for example? The role of Collina is important in this case; im surprised Rocchi isn't involved in the last matches.

    Geiger should go home after his QF; but politics...


    I cant understand the SF appointments after this. Ricci, Kuipers, Faghani all performed better this tournament then Cunha and Cakir..

    A positive note to end; the top 3 referees this tournament (Pitana, Faghani and Kuipers) involved in the last 2 matches. And the level of refereeing this tournament is very high; much better than 2014.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Van Roekel was 5th official in Semi-final so Zeinstra for Final clearly indicates that the 2 4th official appointments of Kuipers are like a token gift for the Dutch team for their good performances in the tournament!

      Delete
  13. Does anyone else feel like Danny Makkelie has been stitched up here? Voted overwhelmingly by readers of this blog as the best VAR of this world cup but only gets to AVAR3 on the final. He deserved better!

    ReplyDelete
  14. How much I agree with all the opions on, what which ref should have deserved, in the end it is all based on politics and performance.

    First of all you have to perform good as a ref so you stay in the tournament after r16. And from there you have to perform again in the q4. If and when referees from more confeds perform at the same level comittee can choose and see A which countries are still involved and B which confeds.

    Faghani, Pitani and Kuipers all had a good tournament. Pitana had the luck that both Argentina and Brazil where send home quit soon. Pitana and Faghani managed there matches smooth, had no crucial interventions from VAR like Kuipers with Neymar ( Kuipers should've seen it himself). This intervention could be seen as a small minus point. We're a hard to detect foul wouldn't.

    So for Kuipers the only option to reach the final was a final between Argentina and Brazil. Because Pitana, Ricci and other conmebol referees were most likely out. Thus because of his performance and the fact that the last two finals went to a referee from Europe made his mission impossible. Be the FO in the final is the maximum for him.

    It ws clearly with a complete Uefa SF that the ref would be from Conmebol. Pitana was the best so he deserved him.

    ReplyDelete
  15. As i said in the other post, I think Pitana´s appointment is a recongition for his entire career. He had a very good Copa America 2015 where Ricci failed, a very good Rio Olympics (semifinal), an excellent Confed Cup (semifinal) where Faghani "failed", and this will be his 9th world cup match. He has never struggled at fifa level, and his 8 WC matches (2014 and 18) were very good.
    The FIFA´s (Collina´s/Bussaca´s) way of refereeing works perfect for him. He may not be the best at National and Continental level, where that style doesn´t match at all, but I´m pretty he is for FIFA a clear pair of safe hands

    ReplyDelete
  16. 48 hours before the opening game of this World cup ,on 12 th June , Collina called Pitana a Rock on the pitch after announcing his name for the opening game officiating. It should have probably be seen as dropping of a big hint by Collina that , if Argentina were not playing the FINAL , PITANA was the obvious choice for the final. That was a big hint , but despite of which I predicted that Kuipers just edges Pitana for the FINAL. Also , thre was a need for appointing a FINAL Referee outside UEFA , since the last two world cup FINALS were officiated by Europeans in the form of Howard Webb and Nicolla Rizolli in that order. It would have sent a wrong signal to referees of other Confiderations , if an European had officiated the 3 rd consecutive World cup Final. All said and done Nestor Pitana is a brilliant appointment. He is a top ref of FIFA and among the best if not the best.

    ReplyDelete
  17. In 2010 World cup , at that time young ref Ravshan Iramatov was the best ref of the tournament by far , even brilliantly spotting a very slight controlling of the ball by at that time announcing on the stage 20 year old Thomas Muller of Germany who had a brilliant World cup , in the quarter
    finals , which was his 2 nd yellow card of the world cup ( 2010 World cup yellow card amnesty for single yellow cards at the completion of Quarter finals was introduced to protect players from missing the FINAL , even in case of single yellow in semi) and eventually ruled Muller out of the semi for Germany who went on to lose it to a solitary Carlos Puyol headed goal of the game . But despite of Ravshan Iramatov's Excellent performance , the committee went for the safer option of Experienced Howard Webb who some what saved the FINAL being a one sided game by showing Dutch player De Jong a yellow only for a high Studs stab on the chest of a Spanish player , very early part of the game , when a red card was clearly justified . Ravshan Iramatov , thereafter never reproduced his Excellent performances of 2010 in 2014 and even this World cup of 2018, probably will never get the FINAL of a World cup.

    ReplyDelete
  18. I agree that Faghani, Kuipers and Pitana all had a good tournament. To help distinguish between them, perhaps there is a notable difference in the way they have shown how they have incorporated the use of VAR during their WC matches?

    In the context of Collina's praise to referees who can effectively use VAR, Faghani has a "black mark" against him. Pitana has used VAR effectively (to confirm a decision). Kuipers has used VAR effectively (to overturn a decision). Unfortunately Faghani failed to use VAR (to assist in a decision) in the 19th minute of FRA v ARG Round of 16 match, which should have been a red card and direct free kick outside the penalty area. The fact Faghani did not use VAR could be one of many reasons why Pitana (and Kuipers) are marked higher, according to Collina. The appointments reflect this, maybe?

    ReplyDelete
  19. Here you can also find the best way to watch FIFA world cup final live streaming online from anywhere in the world with bufferless streaming.

    ReplyDelete
  20. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  21. Ask yourself this question: Are any referees outside UEFA and CONMEBOL possible candidates for a World Cup final? I would say no, although Faghani is the best candidate. That means either UEFA or CONMEBOL have the best referees. The final is between two UEFA teams, and UEFA referees have had the last two finals. So now ask yourself: Pitana, Ricci or Cunha? Who had the best tournament? Gentlemen (and any ladies who may be out there), it's clearly Néstor Pitana. I'm sure the "five matches?" issue came up when the committee deliberated, but I don't think it was Pitana's to lose from the beginning. That's just the way it turned out. Just one opinion.

    ReplyDelete

Thank you for writing a comment on our blog!