Thursday, 13 August 2020

Champions League 2019/20 - Referee Appointments - Quarterfinals (13 August 2020)

German side of RB Leipzig and Spanish Atlético de Madrid will meet in the second 2019/20 UEFA Champions League quarterfinal, to be played on 13 August in single-tie. This is the referee assignment. 
13.08.2020, 21:00 CET
Estádio José Alvalade - Lisbon (POR)
RB Leipzig (GER) - Club Atlético de Madrid (ESP)
Referee: Szymon Marciniak (POL)
Assistant Referee 1: Paweł Sokolnicki (POL)
Assistant Referee 2: Tomasz Listkiewicz (POL)
Fourth Official: Anastasios Sidiropoulos (GRE)
Video Assistant Referee: Paweł Gil (POL)
Assistant Video Assistant Referee: Tomasz Kwiatkowski (POL)
UEFA Referee Observer: Roberto Rosetti (ITA)
UEFA Delegate: Eugène Westerink (NED)

114 comments:

  1. 2nd UCL appointment for Marciniak observed by Rosetti in a row, also featuring Atlético de Madrid.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The first one was not convincing imo...

      Delete
    2. A good chance for final CL if match ok..... Good luck

      Delete
    3. It seems that Rosetti, Sajn, Dias and Sidiropoulos are based in Portugal for the UCL matches, while Batta, Dallas, Collum and Hategan are in Germany for UEL games.

      Delete
    4. This comment has been removed by the author.

      Delete
    5. Is that a guess or a fact? He still has to do his CL quarter final.

      Delete
    6. I want to thank Dr Emu a very powerful spell caster who help me to bring my husband back to me, few month ago i have a serious problem with my husband, to the extend that he left the house, and he started dating another woman and he stayed with the woman, i tried all i can to bring him back, but all my effort was useless until the day my friend came to my house and i told her every thing that had happened between me and my husband, then she told me of a powerful spell caster who help her when she was in the same problem I then contact Dr Emu and told him every thing and he told me not to worry my self again that my husband will come back to me after he has cast a spell on him, i thought it was a joke, after he had finish casting the spell, he told me that he had just finish casting the spell, to my greatest surprise within 48 hours, my husband really came back begging me to forgive him, if you need his help you can contact him with via email: Emutemple@gmail.com or add him up on his whatsapp +2347012841542 is willing to help any body that need his help. 

      Delete
  2. OT: Segunda to LaLiga promotion play-offs appointments, semifinal 1st legs.

    Thursday 13th August

    19:30 Girona - Almería
    Javier Iglesias Villanueva (1983) - Enrique Ramos Ferreiros, Ricardo Landrove Lago - Iván Caparrós Hernández
    [Alejandro Muñiz Ruiz, Fabián Blanco Rodríguez]

    22:00 Elche - Zaragoza
    Rubén Ávalos Barrera (1987) - Brian Valencia López, Julián Villaseñor Julián - Víctor García Verdura
    [Miguel Ángel Ortiz Arias, Iván Massó Granado]

    ReplyDelete
  3. UCL 1ºEL


    19/08/2020

    19:00

    Ararat-Armenia FC x AC Omónia

    Referee: Sebastian Constantin Colțescu (ROU)
    Assistant Referee 1: Radu Adrian Ștefan Ghinguleac (ROU)
    Assistant Referee 2: Vladimir Urzică (ROU)
    Fourth Official: Radu Marian Petrescu (ROU)
    UEFA Referee Observer: Andrejs Sipailo (LVA)
    UEFA Delegate: Sviatlana Hrynkievič (BLR)

    18:00 CET - Molde (Aker Stadion)
    Molde FK (NOR) - KuPS (FIN)
    Referee: Bryn David Markham-Jones (WAL)
    Assistant Referee 1: Lewiss Ross Edwards (WAL)
    Assistant Referee 2: Johnathon Bryant (WAL)
    Fourth Official: Simon Lee Evans (WAL)
    UEFA Referee Observer: Edgar Steinborn (GER)
    UEFA Delegate: Targo Kaldoja (EST)

    18:30 CET - Tallinn (A. Le Coq Arena)
    FC Flora Tallinn (EST) - FK Sūduva (LTU)
    Referee: Nejc Kajtazovič (SVN)
    Assistant Referee 1: Manuel Vidali (SVN)
    Assistant Referee 2: Tomislav Pospeh (SVN)
    Fourth Official: Asmir Sagrkovič (SVN)
    UEFA Referee Observer: Lassin Isaksen (FRO)
    UEFA Delegate: Ronald Zimmermann (GER)

    19:00 CET - Tel-Aviv (Itztadion Bloomfield)
    Maccabi Tel-Aviv FC (ISR) - Riga FC (LVA)
    Referee: Igor Pajač (CRO)
    Assistant Referee 1: Bojan Zobenica (CRO)
    Assistant Referee 2: Vedran Đurak (CRO)
    Fourth Official: Ivan Vučković (CRO)
    UEFA Referee Observer: Michaíl Koukoulákis (GRE)
    UEFA Delegate: Alina Căpățînă (MDA)

    19:00 CET - Tbilisi (Boris Paichadzis Erovnuli Stadioni - Dinamo Arena)
    FC Dinamo Tbilisi (GEO) - KF Tirana (ALB)
    Referee: Roomer Tarajev (EST)
    Assistant Referee 1: Neeme Neemlaid (EST)
    Assistant Referee 2: Sander Saga (EST)
    Fourth Official: Karl Koppel (EST)
    UEFA Referee Observer: Asim Xudiyev (AZE)
    UEFA Delegate: David Avanesyan (ARM)

    19:00 CET - Budapest (Szusza Ferenc Stadion)
    NK Celje (SVN) - Dundalk FC (IRL)
    Referee: Vítor Jorge Fernandes Ferreira (POR)
    Assistant Referee 1: Bruno Miguel de Campos Rodrigues (POR)
    Assistant Referee 2: Paulo Ricardo Duarte Brás (POR)
    Fourth Official: Iancu Ioan Vasilica (POR)
    UEFA Referee Observer: William Young (SCO)
    UEFA Delegate: Attila Tömő (HUN)

    20:00 CET - Budapest (Groupama Aréna)
    Ferencvárosi TC (HUN) - Djurgårdens IF (SWE)
    Referee: Fedayi San (SUI)
    Assistant Referee 1: Sladan Josipovic (SUI)
    Assistant Referee 2: Pascal Hirzel (SUI)
    Fourth Official: Alain Bieri (SUI)
    UEFA Referee Observer: Luc Wouters (BEL)
    UEFA Delegate: Rudolf Řepka (CZE)

    20:00 CET - Tiraspol (Stadionul Sheriff)
    FC Sheriff Tiraspol (MDA) - CS Fola Esch (LUX)
    Referee: Balázs Berke (HUN)
    Assistant Referee 1: Vencel Tóth (HUN)
    Assistant Referee 2: Balázs Szert (HUN)
    Fourth Official: Gergő Bogár (HUN)
    UEFA Referee Observer: Vadims Direktorenko (LVA)
    UEFA Delegate: Aliaksandr Aliejnik (BLR)

    20:00 CET - Cardiff (Cardiff City Stadium)
    Connah’s Quay Nomads FC (WAL) - FK Sarajevo (BIH)
    Referee: Jamie Robert Robinson (NIR)
    Assistant Referee 1: Gareth Eakin (NIR)
    Assistant Referee 2: Paul Robinson (NIR)
    Fourth Official: Lee Philip Tavinder (NIR)
    UEFA Referee Observer: Kenneth William Clark (SCO)
    UEFA Delegate: Paul Tompkins (ENG)

    20:00 CET - Podgorica (Gradski stadion)
    FK Budućnost Podgorica (MNE) - PFC Ludogorets 1945 (BUL)
    Referee: Ferenc Karakó (HUN)
    Assistant Referee 1: István Albert (HUN)
    Assistant Referee 2: Theodoros Georgiou (HUN)
    Fourth Official: Ádám Farkas (HUN)
    UEFA Referee Observer: Karel Vidlák (CZE)
    UEFA Delegate: Loukas Siotropos (GRE)

    20:00 CET - Klaksvík (við Djúpumýru)
    KÍ (FRO) - ŠK Slovan Bratislava (SVK)
    Referee: Kristoffer Hagenes (NOR)
    Assistant Referee 1: Tom Harald Grønevik (NOR)
    Assistant Referee 2: Geir Oskar Isaksen (NOR)
    Fourth Official: Sigurd Smehus Kringstad (NOR)
    UEFA Referee Observer: Cyril Zimmermann (SUI)
    UEFA Delegate: Maksimas Bechterevas (LTU)

    21:00 CET - Ta’ Qali (Centenary Stadium)
    Floriana FC (MLT) - CFR 1907 Cluj (ROU)
    Referee: Laurent Kopriwa (LUX)
    Assistant Referee 1: Joaquim Da Silva (LUX)
    Assistant Referee 2: Claude Ries (LUX)
    Fourth Official: Jérémy Muller (LUX)
    UEFA Referee Observer: Chrístos Nikolaḯdis (CYP)
    UEFA Delegate: Lambriní Dimitríou (GRE)

    ReplyDelete
  4. https://twitter.com/IgSchiri/status/1293956244588429315
    This site reports Brych appointment for Sevilla - Manchester United.
    I don't know how much reliable, though.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I would say, not reliable: Sometimes they have good sources, sometimes they copy stuff from somewhere else without checking.
      However it would be a rather obvious appointment, so it could at least be a good guess.

      Delete
    2. Siebert has been withdrawn from a friendly appointment on Sunday, so he could be Brych's 4th official again.

      Delete
  5. Does anyone believe that Orsato told players that VAR Irrati was sleeping???
    https://www.thesun.co.uk/sport/football/12387503/ruben-neves-wolves-sevilla-penalty-var-sleeping-ref/

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Maybe Orsato was sarcastic but as usual player and media made a spectacl about it...

      Delete
    2. This comment has been removed by the author.

      Delete
  6. How much delay for this "potential penalty check"?
    A long time has passed!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Ball wasn't out of play for several minutes.

      Check over.

      Delete
    2. If an OFR is required, the VAR should inform the referee to stop the game in case the ball is in a 'dead area'. Such a procedure prevents potential conflicts if the game continues for minutes. There's no need to wait a long time if it's clear that an OFR is necessary.

      Delete
    3. ...but without OFR, it's fine to let the game continue during the "silent check".

      What do you think about the situation itself?

      Delete
    4. Me: A penalty should be given.

      UEFA: Not a "clear and obvious error".

      Football world: But wasn't that a penalty in Juventus - Lyon?

      I would say 'unfortunate' for UEFA, but things like this are always going to happen at some point with their interpretation of clear and obvious.

      Delete
    5. This comment has been removed by the author.

      Delete
    6. @Philipp: Indeed, one cannot stop the game only for a silent check. But if the silent check ends with the conclusion that an OFR is necessary, the game should be stopped immediately in case the ball is in a dead area.
      The situation itself is solved correctly for me. Penalty would have been supportable as well but so is Marciniak's decision to play on. No need for a VAR intervention. I don't think it's a careless touch.

      Delete
    7. @Ref_1707: Yes, I agree and just wanted to complete your statement.

      Very difficult IMO. My feeling says, it shouldn't be a penalty, because it is purely accidental (and minimal contact and player moving away from goal). My brain says, it's rather a clear penalty, because the contact causes the player to fall down (and it is in a way careless by the GK, who comes from behind).

      Would be very useful to get some clarification by UEFA, what would be the "correct" solution here and in other grey area penalty situations during the last days. Even if they see none of them as "clear and obvious" mistakes, it should be known tom the public (and of course to the referees), what is considered as "best" or "expected" decision - also to improve uniformity and predictability.

      Delete
  7. OT:
    Does Alireza Faghani (FIFA Iran) now exclusively do games in the Australian A-League? According to what I was able to find out. His last match in his home nation (Iran) was 29 August 2019. Since then he's been a regular in the Australian A-League. He's there solo, not with his referee team.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. He relocatue to Australia due to education of his childs. Iranian comitee will support him as a Fifa and will nominate him.

      Delete
  8. Missed YC for a reckless jump in the back and dissent after the whistle in 30'.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. This comment has been removed by the author.

      Delete
  9. Missed YC to Saul for a very reckless challenge.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. This comment has been removed by the author.

      Delete
  10. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  11. Does the 4th official play for tourist? How many times he allow Simeone to make gestures to the referee before he gets a public warning?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. This comment has been removed by the author.

      Delete
  12. IMO correct play-on in the penalty incident but not fully convinced by Marciniak as for now, too lenient.

    ReplyDelete
  13. Now Savic and RB player with some serious head clash.

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

    ReplyDelete
  15. Very lenient Marciniak in 1H, IMO not convincing enough, especially because the contacts are getting tougher and small talkings on borderline challenges aren't the best way to deal with, especially with a team like Atletico.
    I expect a different approach in 2H, because the game will surely boil over if Marciniak don't change his tactic.

    ReplyDelete
  16. Clear foul and penalty to Atletico for my taste. Careless trip, simple as that. Marciniak doesn't arouse respect and his decisions make players nervous. Not good optic today, imo.

    ReplyDelete
  17. I am waiting for halftime replays to see whether my impression that Atlético should have been awarded a penalty in the situation with a long check.

    I actually think Marciniak was quite good in that half. Just as Taylor read his game very well last night, I think the referee from Poland has done the same here:

    - Freekick to Leipzig and no caution to Saúl at 30' was the most sensible choice there

    - IMO clearly reckless tackle in front of the Atlético bench not punished with a caution as they wildly protested, Marciniak must have decided there was more tactical value in showing he had the 'balls' to not 'give in' to Simeone et al. This could could be a tactical mistake though as it was a decent chance to calm the Atlético players down.

    - Correct no YC at +48' with a potential sanction for the mobbing by Atlético players against the referee, he decided it was better to get to halftime without a card and it would have inflamed the game to open the cards there.

    I much preferred Anthony Taylor's performance last night, but I don't think Marciniak has been mindlessly lenient either.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yes, my impression is also better than some of the previous comments.
      He just needs to find the correct moment to open the cards now (if required at all) - then it still can be a well-handled match.
      About the penalty, I just wrote further above.

      Delete
  18. 14' Penalty to Atlético?

    https://streamable.com/bgc9bm

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Let's not overcomplicate things where we don't need to - that's a clear penalty (surely).

      I really agree with Philipp's comment above about explaining decisions better to the general public - IMO it's much better to inform and try to educate general football people rather than stick to the current interpretation of "clear and obvious".

      I think the 'football world' would accept that better, but also the 'football world' is more interested in fast-flowing games (ie. less VAR interventions) than good refereeing, and big associations / confederations recognise that.

      Delete
    2. This is a prime example of why the introduction of VAR for subjective penalty decisions is so fraught.

      Does the keeper carelessly make contact with the attacker? Yes. That is clearly visible on replay.

      Now, is that careless contact enough to trip the attacker? That's much more debatable. Some would say yes while others would say the contact is slight and the attacker is dramatically falling/embellishing.

      Good VAR protocol is to look at something like this at 100% speed, once you determine contact did indeed occur. I think when you look at this at 100% speed--rather than the slo-mo shown in the clip--it's much harder to say this is a CLEAR penalty and that not calling a penalty is a CLEAR error.

      I know the word "supportable" is being scoffed at here, but it's the reality we live in with VAR now. If every decision was "right" or "wrong" then we would just have VAR make every decision. Not calling this can't be labeled a clear error so the no-call should stand. Conversely, if this had been called, there is of course no way the decision could be overturned because contact is evident.

      It's a mess. And, though I agree Mikael that we shouldn't overcomplicate things, I just don't see how we can't when you mix the VAR system with the behavior of attacking players who feel slight contact. If this exact same action occurred but the attacker didn't go to ground, no one would even suggest that it's a clear penalty, right? So there are other factors outside the contact we get to see in slo-mo.

      Delete
    3. No way thats a penalty

      Delete
    4. See what I mean? One poster says "surely it's a clear penalty." The next says "no way that's a penalty."

      Delete
    5. 100% clear penalty. He steps on the back of his shoe. It's careless. It makes tha attackers leg tangle and hit the other leg. Very easy on replay.

      Delete
  19. https://streamable.com/p609a6

    Penalty to Atletico? For me is penalty to Atletico and VAR should have intervened. My opinion.

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

    ReplyDelete
  21. In my opinion the situation in 14' is not a 100% very clear penalty and I disagree with Mikael's assessment. Simply explaining my point of view I say that I'm not sure that attacker fell just because of that contact, it is possible that he felt a touch and he made that action more blatant, to deceive referee. The contact is clear, yes, but in my opinion the reaction can't be deemed as 100% related to what happened before. Of course a penalty call would have been fully sopported by VAR, but in this case I think one can agree with the decision by Gil. There isn't an evidence about the real effect of the touch, looks too soft, for a big call.
    However, there is another argument to discuss about: given how the touch happened, I think it is quite sure that Marciniak didn't see anything at all. Very quick and difficult action to spot live. Under this aspect, maybe there are arguments for a possible OFR based on the concept of "missed incident" (but nothing more than that). Then, Marciniak would have made his assessment in front of the monitor. So, I don't "close the door" saying that Gil was fully right, but for sure under some aspects we can discuss.... it is a very tricky situation. My personal opinion, of course, but I don't see a big mistake in letting play on in this case.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I agree here with Chefren, very tricky situatiom, but never a penalty for me.
      I must say, I am here on the blog for years and there was never so much different opinions on the same sitations as there are in the last weeks....
      For the same situation some say clear penalty, some say soft but supportable, some say never a penalty....
      It is not easy to be referee today you must admit...

      Delete
    2. This comment has been removed by the author.

      Delete
    3. My personal opinion on these is if half the room says penalty and half says no foul, it isn't a clear enough action to warrant intervening in the game by whistling a foul.
      I
      believe that, even in error, it is generally more accepted by players and the public to not whistle a borderline incident in the PA than to intervene and whistle something mild.

      Delete
    4. But he trips himself only because of this tackling...imo that's a clear evidence, that the contact had to be sanctioned

      Delete
    5. An argument can be made that the contact on its own wasn't enough to cause the fall and that the player did only trip himself. It's a matter of opinion/interpretation - and when this happens I'm more inclined to think that what's least damaging to a game is to give the benefit of doubt to the defense.

      Delete
    6. Good point Larry, but you can see a contact, and you can clearly see the player tripping himself. And therefore that it's almost not possible tripping yourself with intent, I don't think there should be doubts.

      Delete
  22. Seriously? We think thats a penalty?
    Had he not tripped himself after i am not sure his balance would have been affected and he goes on to collect the ball.
    I wonder if at times we look at incidents in a sterile environment, slowing things down to micro seconds. Not all contact is a foul

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

    ReplyDelete
  24. Excellent YC to ATM#12 for simulation.

    ReplyDelete
  25. 65': VC by Diego Costa (kicking from behind without any intention to play the ball)?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. This comment has been removed by the author.

      Delete
    2. Clear VC for me. Unbelievable that he didn't give at least a YC.

      Delete
    3. This comment has been removed by the author.

      Delete
    4. I'm not sure this qualifies as VC... force is very mild and while late, the ball can be seen in the replay which means it wasn't a completely random off-ball incident.

      Yes Marciniak is lenient with cards, but we're far from violent conduct here.

      Delete
    5. This comment has been removed by the author.

      Delete
    6. Other than complain that the referee (and anyone that disagrees with you) is incompetent, convince me that it's violent conduct. I propose we have a conversation instead.

      I base myself on this:
      - Point of contact: seems to be the shin from the angle of the replay.
      - Part of the body used by Costa: also seems to be the shin as he his kicking.

      - Force used: I'd argue it was mild, but let's say it's medium. I don't consider this kick to be done with a large amount of force.

      Finally:
      - Was this a footballing action?
      We all agree this was late. I believe it was out of frustration. I can defend a YC if this is how we view this.

      However, it can also simply be a -very- late attempt at the ball. I think it's one of those borderline no card / YC that Marciniak had the option to give or to manage.

      Reception of the decision from both teams seemed to be good, other than the player that was fouled.

      There simply isn't enough in the considerations to justify violent conduct in my view.

      Delete
    7. I agree regarding the force - but this is the only argument against a RC IMO. Whether nearly any force is excessive in such situations (because none was required) or only really strong force, i.e dangerous and brutal actions fulfill the VC conditions, is an old question, that is interpreted differently.

      I don't think this can be seen as any attempt to play the ball. If anything, it is a "stopping the opponent at any cost" offence like holding, when the ball is away. But to me it looks like a clear act of frustration after not managing to get the ball for some seconds (there is also a failed attempt to get the ball some metres before, where some tripping occurs).

      Delete
    8. I've seen off-ball incidents in UEFA RAPs where a kick out at a player with the ball out of play is clear - but medium force had brought the severity of the incident down from red to yellow.
      Given that this is a UEFA competition, I think this is how they interpreted it here too.

      I agree with you however - this seems to be like it was a gesture of frustration more than a play at the ball. I believe a YC would have been a better decision due to this not being a footballing action, but if you consider the force to have been mild + point of contact not being anything that puts the opponent's safety in danger - I can understand why Marciniak hasn't given any card.

      Delete
  26. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  27. Correct PK and YC for Atlético.

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

    ReplyDelete
  29. Marciniak having a good game. A little relax on YC sanction but good control overall.

    ReplyDelete
  30. 74

    One more YC forgiven.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. This comment has been removed by the author.

      Delete
  31. This comment has been removed by the author.

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

    ReplyDelete
  33. Another missed YC against Athletico

    ReplyDelete
  34. Not sure about that last foul against atleti. They had a break there if it wasnt whistled. Overall good game for ref.

    ReplyDelete
  35. Very good performance by Marciniak. It is a full 8.6 to my eyes.

    ReplyDelete
  36. Excellent Marciniak. Congrats on great game

    ReplyDelete
  37. Actually if tomorrow Bayern win against Barcelona, we can expect Mateu Lahoz in the final for sure.

    ReplyDelete
  38. Well no surprise that Marciniak was in big trouble at the end, but he just about managed to keep a lid on everything until the final whistle.

    On the one hand every decision he took in disciplinary control was probably the most optimal on a game management level, on the other hand his calls isolatedly were (at least) somewhat unsatisfying.

    How to square those two elements then...

    ReplyDelete
  39. Overall a solid performance by Marciniak. Let's be honest:
    Was disciplinary control good? Not really. Especially reckless jumps in the opponent's back were not evaluated adequately.
    Was Marciniak in control of the game? Yes, although there was a lot of pressure at the end of the game, Marciniak did not lose control, which is important.
    Foul detection was overall fine. Everything depends on how you evaluate the penalty incident in the first half. For me, it was not a mistake to play on. However, one can doubt that Marciniak and/or AR2 perceived the contact.

    ReplyDelete
  40. Great Marciniak in the second half. Very good performance!

    ReplyDelete
  41. I'd say a brilliant 2H by Marciniak until Leipzig 2nd goal.

    Okay but too lenient in 1H and (although with a very good injury time management) it was too obvious that after a good performance by 90', the last thing a referee wants to face is extra time...

    ReplyDelete
  42. By the book, some YCs were missed by Marciniak today. But as Mikael said, considering what was the most optimal management for this match, Marciniak did right not to give all those YCs.
    I think nobody will speak about referee after this match, therefore we can say Marciniak was good tonight...

    ReplyDelete
  43. Seeing the many different opinions on the penalty incident, it should be quite clear, that this is not a "clear and obvious" situation, so VAR should not intervene for that reason (as Chefren mentioned, also "missed incident" needs to be considered though - but also there we need some certainty about a mistake).
    I hope, that most people here agree about that, so that we at least have some clarity in this aspect.
    Remember: Even, if you personally think it's a clear error and that the referee should be blamed (i.e. get a crucial mistake assigned), for the assessment of a potential VAR intervention, we should consider others' opinons to evaluate, whether the situation is as "clear and obvious" as we might think.

    ReplyDelete
  44. Excuse me but I think this is a clear and obvious mistake and OFR should have been called. The goalkeeper touches Raul's foot and directs his left leg against his right. Without the goalkeeper's touch, Raul doesn't fall.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. +1
      but in the end, it was a mistake noone noticed.

      Delete
    2. But if there are different opinions on that situation, which is obvious here on the blog, how could that be obvious and clear mistake. For obvious and clear mistake everybody should be convinced that it was a penalty and obviously that is not the case here. As long as there are different opinions, it is not ok to say that something is obvious and clear.

      Delete
  45. Very difficult to describe this performance. I think that there are both many positive and negative aspects. If we isolate the disciplinary control we can find many controversial situation, if we look at the major calls I think we can say that most of them were absolutely correct and that's the most important thing. I don't think that possible penalty in first half will lead to big discussions, Atlético got the call in second half and it was an absolutely correct decision. Given the challenging context for Marciniak, I think that he rather did well, but for sure one can say: "I would have expected more". Let's see what committee will decide. Enough for another game? In this case, I don't know. Let's see.

    Incidentally, at the final whistle something very important for CL final happened: Mateu Lahoz can see his hopes to increase after this elimination. Everything now it's up to tomorrow's game, if Barça goes out... well, I reveal my idea now, I'm convinced that in case of final without Spanish teams for sure Mateu will be there. We will know that soon.

    ReplyDelete
  46. IMO Marciniak will have EL Final

    ReplyDelete
  47. IMO Marciniak chose a friendly, empathic way of dealing with Atlético what is not only extremely risky but also stupid (my opinion of course!). You should handle their games being a fully focused law enforcer who doesn't allow any kind of 'unnecessary' communication. But OK, he chose that way and did he succeed? Technically? Mixed bag - some good calls but some missed cards too. However, in overall it worked somehow...

    Nonetheless, my biggest concern is the optic of the performance. Too hectic, unaesthetic, rather a boss among players than a real UEFA leader as for example Makkelie or Kuipers (I hope you get what I mean). Simply not my cup of tea. This attitude reminded me Claus Bo Larsen.

    And regarding the penalty incident... Well, try to kick yourself in full speed like this. Impossible! The kick was caused by the minimal but clear and obvious contact. Careless trip, simple as that. VAR intervention required.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I agree with your impressions.

      I won't discuss the penalty again but for me it is (of course) a clear foul.

      To be honest the biggest take home from this performance for me is that Marciniak in his 'comeback form' is missing the 'X-Factor' from his extremely strong 2014-17 period.

      His approach was indeed "stupid" in my view but calculated and necessary for him - he wasn't confident enough to take the lead 'over' the Atlético players (which Makkelie did so brilliantly in their match vs. Liverpool), so he tried to manage them - and the match - in a different way.

      He tried to be in the background as much as possible and put all his effort into computing the tactical value of decisions - which is very tiring and doesn't leave much 'energy' to leave a convincing impression for the players, and would make them more nervous. Whether he strayed too far from correct decisions is a question of personal taste.

      His performance reminded me a lot of the Brazil - Uruguay game at CC 2013 handled by Enrique Osses (you can find that on Whistles of the Past refereeingretrospect blog). Nothing against Osses specifically, but Marciniak has a lot more competencies than him in soft skills, gestures, mimics etc. but he handled the game tonight in a very similar way to the referee from Chile.

      I don't think his performance was bad per se, but he is a better referee than using the approach he did to (just about) solve this very challenging match.

      Delete
  48. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  49. Good overall performance by Marciniak.

    The penalty situation in 14' was a bit tricky, but if anyone is to blame there, it's the VAR for not giving Marciniak the chance to review the situation on the screen.
    It was virtually impossible for the human eye to spot the little contact of Leipzig's gk on Niguez in real time.
    Marciniak likely just saw how Niguez tripped over his own feet and assumed it was all that happened.
    I also feel like the touch was not enough to really warrant a penalty.

    Other than that, very good performance. A bit lenient when it comes to yellow cards, but at least he stayed consistent on both sides with this line.

    My biggest compliment for Marciniak today: FINALLY a referee who punished a clear dive with a yellow card and did so in a big game. Hopefully this will serve as an inspiration to other referees from now on.

    ReplyDelete
  50. If Barca will not be in final, Mateu should be a safe bet.
    "Worst case" for UEFA and most interesting for us would be a final PSG-Barca because it would exclude Mateu and Turpin. Then, it would be nice to see if somebody gets his second final (as it happened to Kuipers in EL) or if they go for an 'unexperienced' ref in terms of semis/finals on UEFA level (Makkelie/Orsato).

    Guess for remaining matches:
    PSG-Leipzig: Orsato
    Barca/Bayern-City/Lyon: Kuipers
    Sevilla-ManU: Brych
    Shakthar-Inter: Turpin
    EL final: Cakir

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Uf, Barcelona-PSG would be very, very difficult match for referee and I realy don't know who should get that match in case of that final. It is a match where you can literally ruin your career, as unfortunately Aytekin did. Although not a fan, I would go with second final for Brych or Kuipers. Two most experienced (I would add Cakir, but unfortunately after Barcelona-Napoli I don't think he will get another appointment).

      Delete
  51. This years CL will probably be the most boring ever. No fans and almost all big teams are gone.

    ReplyDelete
  52. I think we really argue in a one way street, if we discuss like there were 2 possible styles of refereeing and every ref would be on one of these two sides:
    1. The Enforcer of the law or
    2. The Wannabe-friend of the players.
    But this is not at all the point. Talking about modern refereeing style means that especially with VARs in the back, the soft skills and management aspects get more important. But that does not mean at all, that the law of the game is not more than a nice-to-have-guideline.
    We STILL have to take the correct decisions according to the existing rules.
    Don't ever believe you get the player's respect when you misinterprete game management as avoiding conflicts on the pitch. In the opposite that's the perfect way to loose control AND RESPECT same time. Like Zwayer does so often. Marciniak today had a clear, IMO a bit too lenient line, but the line was clear and he followed it, including IMO a missed clear RC and a very well done YC for a diver. He was OK, not more, not less.
    But why did we love someone like Collins so much? He was clear, brave, doing all that was necessary for following the rules, and same time he showed compassion and sensitivity in his brilliant communication. No, management and enforcing rules should be on the same medal and the top referee talents should get a better psychological support - supervision - to work on their self confidence, which is the key to develope charisma on the field. Marciniak had some moments where he showed an aggressive way of gaining more distance - I had the feeling he was afraid of losing control. Make clear, that you are the boss. We are not the players best friends. We are maybe a good uncle. As long as we do not loose our authority. Without we will be alone, the idiot for everyone, without respect and without control, lost in the field...

    ReplyDelete
  53. A very good match from Marciniak, kudos to Polish team.

    Also, to the moderation, why this poster called 'Modern < By the Book' deletes every single post of his? Either do not post it at all or do not delete it, he is ruining the reading experience of referee threads, which I value a lot.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Because Modern < By the Book (also known as Sheriff Castrilli in the past) is a remarkable participant on this blog, sometimes even close to trolling.

      Delete
    2. I do not follow that statement dear Anonymous, do you mean to say he deletes to troll people? or, the mod team deletes all his posts?

      Delete
    3. Yes probably, just like he frequently tries to provoke other readers. I can’t think of another reason. It’s not the moderators as this would result in another notification (“this comment has been removed by a moderator”).

      Delete
  54. Szymon Marciniak has nearly double the comments as Taylor did for his 1/4.

    That shows a lot. After that I would expect Taylor in a final, however Man u and Manchester City have a great chance of getting to thier respective finals. Taylor may miss out on an oppertunity this year.

    ReplyDelete
  55. For me it is a mistake to pass that the referee was a fine psychologist who treated with words, whistles and gestures the Spanish players who had lying on the couch in his study. It is wrong to think that he chose the way of the psyche by putting the law of the game in the drawer to govern and manage the Spanish. But were the Spaniards really terrible last night to make the Polish fear losing control? Then you don't remember Atlatico a few years ago. Last night there was a german team that always thought only of playing and the spanish a little less, temperamental, but responsible.
    Last night there was no need for a psychologist but a precise referee, determined and ready to stop the impetus of the colchoneros right from the start, not to allow the coach to make a blatant count of the fouls suffered and to give the yellow card to the players guilty of unfair play.Psychological referees serve in other types of games, yesterday a good referee was enough...

    ReplyDelete
  56. The commission decided that there should be no penalty in the 13th minute. More like a striker foul. Marciniak was rated highly and deservedly reached the semi-finals.

    ReplyDelete

Thank you for writing a comment on our blog!