UEFA Referees’ Committee chairman Roberto Rosetti has given a positive mid-tournament assessment of the UEFA EURO 2020 referees and video assistant referees (VAR) – and has called on them to strive for even higher standards in the competition’s crucial knock-out phase.
“We are extremely pleased with the standard of refereeing that we have seen at the EURO so far,” Rosetti said on Friday to mark the end of the 36-match group phase.
“The referee teams have responded to the challenge we set them to show their undoubted qualities,” he added, “and we would like to thank them at this stage for their professionalism and dedication, as well as for how they have applied UEFA’s refereeing guidelines in such a diligent way.”
The referees and UEFA’s fitness team are based in Istanbul, Turkey until the completion of the quarter-finals. “I urge the referee teams – the 25th team at the EURO – to maintain their high standards throughout the rest of the competition.” Rosetti said.
Christian Eriksen incident: Referee Taylor 'amazing'
Rosetti, a former Italian international referee who took charge of the UEFA EURO 2008 final between Spain and Germany in Vienna, also gave special praise to English referee Anthony Taylor for how he handled the serious incident involving Denmark player Christian Eriksen, who received emergency medical treatment during the group stage match against Finland in Copenhagen on 12 June.
“I think everyone recognised that Anthony managed this difficult moment perfectly,” Rosetti reflected. “We are proud of him for his conduct and his calmness. We recommended that referees should be alert to this kind of situation, and that safety should always come first. Anthony was amazing.”
Referees: Facts and figures
Rosetti went on to present and comment on key refereeing statistics from the EURO group stage:
Fewer fouls
Number of fouls in comparison to EURO 2016 (36 matches)
2020 : 806 (22.4 fouls per match)
2016 : 911 (25.3 fouls per match)
Rosetti: “We didn’t want the referees to whistle less fouls. This was not our intention - our role is to take the correct decisions. We are very happy to see that there are less fouls at the moment.”
Fewer yellow cards
Yellow cards in comparison to EURO 2016 (36 matches)
2020 : 98 (2.7 per match)
2016 : 129 (3.6 per match)
Rosetti: “We see a reason for this – the players have a better attitude on the field of play – less fouls, less yellow cards, better conduct by players towards the referee. We would like this trend to continue.”
Red cards
Red cards in comparison to EURO 2016 (36 matches)
2020 : 2 (0.05 per match)
2016 : 2 (0.05 per match)
More effective time played
Effective time played in matches (36 matches)
EURO 2020 : 58 minutes 51 seconds
EURO 2016 : 56 minutes 30 seconds
VAR’s crucial role
Rosetti also gave top marks to the team of video assistant match officials working in tandem with the referee teams at the EURO to ensure that correct decisions are taken on the field.
“They are playing a crucial role in helping referees take correct decisions,” he said, “and figures show the invaluable contribution that they are making.”
“I’ve been working on the project since its beginning in 2016,” Rosetti said, “and we very much believe in it. This is a project which is still young, and we need top and expert drivers.
VAR facts and figures
Two rooms on UEFA’s campus in Nyon, Switzerland have been set up for VAR activities. At each of the EURO matches, the main video assistant referee (VAR) is accompanied by an assistant video assistant referee (AVAR), and offside video assistant referee.
The VAR is the leader of the team and the main point of contact with the referee, with the task of focussing on incidents. The AVAR concentrates on following the match, while the offside VAR evaluates all potential offside situations.
179 incidents checked in 36 matches
91.6% of decisions on the pitch correct
12 VAR corrections (6 offside, 3 foul play, 2 handball, 1 use of the elbow)
7 direct corrections
5 on-field reviews
1 correction every three matches
Offside situations
Tight offside incidents : 21 (6 VAR reviews)
No wrong decisions (100% accuracy)
Rosetti: “We may no longer consider that offside is an issue for us.”
More penalties – VAR accuracy
Penalties in comparison to EURO 2016
2020 : 14 (0.38 per match)
2016 : 7 (0.19 per match)
Rosetti: “One of the key points for this increase has been the implementation of VAR, which was only just being considered at the time of the EURO in France. We now have more accuracy in detecting penalty area fouls thanks to VAR.”
VAR helping football – not changing it
Rosetti emphasised that the VAR system was not aiming to change football, but to help the game. “We need to find the correct balance in relation to VAR intervention, because our target is to keep football like it is,” he explained. “The objective is to intervene for clear and obvious mistakes - minimum interference for maximum benefit.”
UEFA.com
Let me summarize what has happened in the last few hours:
ReplyDelete-Rosetti said that two of the mistakes occurred so far belong to Makkelie’s team in TUR-ITA
-Lahoz and Turpin sent home because of two penalties that should have not been whistled, like Sterling’s in SCO-ENG
Looks like most of the comments here were proven completely wrong. Let’s see what’s in for the next matches, really can’t wait ;)
Sterling‘s was NOT whistled so what was wrong? Comments about Makkelie‘s handball in the opening game were actually (sadly) wrong.
Delete@Anonymous 20:39
DeleteCould you provide us with a source, stating that Lahoz and Turpin were sent home because of 1 penalty incident in their respective matches? Or are you freely adding information to the official statements made?
which 2 mistakes are you referring to for Makkelie? Is it the 'offside' which wasn't (from the corner) and something else (can't remember what it may be...)?
DeleteFrom your summary, are you implying that Lahoz, Turpin and Grenfield have all gone home?. If 2 mistakes that occurred so far belongs to Makkelie's team, why was he spared and others sent home? Only asking a question
DeleteWould be correct from his side to announce who left the tournament. We still don't know ho goes(exception Grinfeeld).
ReplyDeleteDias also left Euro, according to his AR's Instagram.
DeleteSo if 91.6% of on-field decisions that were checked were correct.
ReplyDeleteAnd 12 of 179 (6.7%) of decisions resulted in VAR correction...
That leaves 1.7% of decisions that were incorrect and did not get corrected.
The number that I think we all probably care about is 3. Three is 1.7% of 179.
So what were the three CMEs, in UEFA's eyes, that did not get properly corrected by VAR?
I think no penalty for handball in TUR-ITA, the penalty by Turpin in RUS-DEN and the penalty for France in FRA-POR were seen as wrong decisions.
DeleteI think you're talking absolute crap about the potential handball in TUR-ITA. Everybody has already said here that this decision was in line with the additional interpretation on natural body movement.
Delete@Jackson: Rosetti himself said publicly that it should have been a penalty kick for handball in ITA-TUR: https://www.sport.es/es/noticias/eurocopa/eurocopa-faltas-tiempo-juego-11856219
DeleteIndeed the three decisions should be TUR - IRA, POR - FRA and DEN - RUS in which you can also find a very clear second YC missed by Turpin.
DeleteThe missed 2YC would not have been checked by VAR, so that cannot be included in what we are talking about.
DeleteNo one thinks the fourth penalty incident in POR-FRA was a mistake for NOT intervening?
If we concede the handball in TUR-ITA was a missed intervention, based on what Rosetti has said, we are left with 2 missed OFRs.
But it seems like there are three plausible misses. Turpin penalty, Mateu penalty #2, and Mateu non-penalty. I personally find the non-penalty the most egregious miss. But that would mean either the Turpin penalty or Mateu penalty #2 was correctly affirmed.
I genuinely think that in Mateu #4 penalty the first and decisive contact (studs on leg) was outside the box. And OFR for a Serious Foul Play I’d consider even less probable.
DeleteSo I think the remaining two missed interventions are the Turpin penalty and Mateu penalty #2.
I am also thinking of Mateu #4. Based on videos I saw, it was on the penalty area line, which means a penalty kick once called. Players on the field accepted the no call because they both advanced, while a potential scored penalty kick would have eliminated Portugal. Huge stakes in that situation!
Delete