UEFA EURO Analysis: Day Eight (SWESVK, CROCZE, ENGSCO)

A day decided by three penalty area decisions - Daniel Siebert instantly pointed to the spot, Carlos del Cerro Grande did too after an on-field review; Antonio Mateu Lahoz said no however in the British derby. Let's look deeper at them, and the wider performances, in this post. 

Reverse chronological order again - let's go to London first!

Antonio Mateu Lahoz's team in England vs. Scotland

Big Decision

If I may, I will paraphrase our user Flip, who analyses this situation very well:

"I praise Mateu and Hernández Hernández for their courageous decision, which, I think, is correct. 

The attacker recognises that he cannot come to a promising opportunity anymore. He therefore puts his right foot on the left side of the ball on purpose, because he knows that the defender will step there as a result of his movement, in order to initiate a contact and to shout for a penalty. 

The defender has no chance to avoid that contact - he cannot evaporate into thin air, he has to tread somewhere having started a normal running movement"

The prescient point being - it is not whether the contact is "enough" to warrant a penalty (because the nature of the contact clear enough for a penalty), it is how that contact has come about - and Flip perfectly summarises my view as to why play on is the much better call in this situation. 

If Mateu saw it exactly like that on the field of play - then bravo indeed! A non-VAR intervention, especially according to the rigorous approach to penalty area situations seen in this season's UEFA club knockout stage where intervention was quite conceivable, showed excellent "football understanding" in my opinion. 

Summary

This England - Scotland derby was quite some way from 'blood and thunder', and referee Antonio Mateu Lahoz handled the normal difficulty game well. He correctly blew for a number of freekicks in the opening ten minutes, and ensured that the game would be played in a passionate, but still fair way. 

He issued some good verbal warnings (14', 25'), missed one yellow card for a SPA / LoR holding (57'), this tournament's characteristic ignoring kicking-the-ball-away offences (5', 26') and on one occasion Mateu gestured play on whilst Pau Cebrián Devis had flagged for a foul (?) at 85'.

Some nice advantages aside, there is actually very little to remark about this performance - full expected level. 

Carlos del Cerro Grande's team in Croatia vs. Czech Republic

Big Decision

This decision caused quite some consternation here in England - "the first refereeing mistake of the tournament" - and while I can understand why some people have big reservations about the call, in my estimation after looking at closely, I would assess it as a totally correct one. 

I would highlight two reasons why this penalty is actually a very good decision:

1) Lovren behaviour in this duel is not good defending, he is caught flat-footed if I may say so. Schick actually reads the flight of the ball better than his opponent, and only by elbowing him, can the Croatia defender prevent him from reaching the ball. 

This screenshot shows it well - the thesis of Schick's jump is to head the ball, Lovren's is to cart his elbow out towards his opponent's face in order to prevent him from doing so.

2) the biggest reason why football personalities here were against the decision was the idea that Lovren cleanly heads the ball away. Actually, that was my impression at first (and I had reservations too!), but a close inspection of replays shows that actually was not the case. 

As this clip shows. 

The ball does hit Lovren's head, but he is looking the other way when it happens - this is a deflection, not a header.  The reason why the ball spins away is because it actually hits the Croatia defender's arm after that deflection off his head, the one which is recklessly striking his opponent. 

So it was anything but a clean header, and that makes sense - Lovren's jump was targeted at his opponent, not heading the ball. 


-> honestly, my instinct at first was more that play on was impossible, and was even slightly uncomfortable with the penalty's award. On closer inspection, I think that a penalty is an excellent decision. I hope this analysis helps convince others who had the same initial idea as me!

After the theoretical, some practical thoughts on its' giving:

- del Cerro Grande certainly could have seen it from the pitch, but the angle did make it a bit harder; he could only look into the duel laterally, whereas from square-on, Lovren's offence was clearer

- Martínez Munuera was correct to intervene; he also did so for a less clear elbow offence in the Iceland - Romania playoff, if UEFA had huge problems with that decision, I doubt the Spaniard would have intervened here

- the yellow card, not red, was correct; Lovren's jump was only reckless, still ball-orientated (enough), and not violent

- criticising del Cerro for allowing Schick to take the penalty while slightly bleeding is totally wrong for modern refereeing; can you imagine the reaction if the Spaniard denied him taking it, before a teammate missed... 

Summary

For the second consecutive game, Carlos del Cerro Grande was not bad, but his performance was not really that convincing by the same token. 

He struggled quite significantly at the start of the game, not really in control of the player's actions - I would highlight particularly the missed careless stamp at 5', letting the game go on at 11'/12'; and there were other such incidents too (7', 8', 13', 14'). 

The Spanish ref did manage to get a hold on the game after that, his verbal warning for an advantage-played borderline tackle at 25' over minute later was good, and he managed to find a clearer line in fouls which calmed the players down. 

Everything hotted up much more after the penalty call, but I would like to draw attention to del Cerro's chat with Modrić after the OFR and penalty award. He dealt with mobbing well and took the time to explain a decision which was probably 'surprising' to the Croatia captain - definitely the highlight of this refereeing performance, well done. 

Technically he failed to recognise a couple of key incidents before and after the halftime break (41', +46'), and tactically I was not really convinced he was able to really connect with players, alter their behaviour in a positive way (45', 49'). 

The yellow card at 50' was a good call, much needed, but such an offence was absolutely coming in this game. Indeed, del Cerro used his cards very well in the second half, but everything was rather much calmer by the time of the final two cards. 

And he finished the match twenty seconds early (I even double-checked)...

Balance: for the second time running, Carlos del Cerro Grande performed on an 8,2/3 level. While I don't think the missed penalty counts too much against him, one can doubt whether on a foul detection, game management level, the Spaniard really did enough to justify a knockout stage game in the wider picture. 

Daniel Siebert's team in Sweden vs. Slovakia

Big Decision

Siebert was spot on - the goalkeeper clearly charges into the attacker, penalty is the correct call. The caution for DOGSO was too, even at first I thought it was "harsh", replays proved the German quite correct on that front too. 

Summary

Daniel Siebert was immediately reappointed after his strong impression in the Scotland - Czech Republic game, and in a more challenging match, showed an even better performance which was, for me, the refereeing highlight of this EURO so far. 

The excellence of his persistent infringement and dissent management has already been extensively covered in the comments, so I would only like to raise two further points:

1) his foul detection (56', 70', 81'), recognition (90') was not always optimal, but still on a good level in one of the EURO's more challenging games so far

2) he could perhaps improve his angry manner in some scenes; however, I am really hesitant to criticism him too much - this referee from Germany, a relative novice at the top international level, managed great acceptance at the EURO, impressive!

A knockout stage match should be a must for Daniel Siebert, who totally convinced in both his group stage performances. 

Balance

In my estimation, the referees got the three big calls on this day correct. Antonio Mateu Lahoz will go on to bigger matches at this tournament; and Daniel Siebert simply must! Anything else would be a violation of the performance principle. 

For Carlos del Cerro Grande, there is perhaps one-too-many things counting against him after his two games. 

Refereeing highlights:

Sweden - Slovakia
Croatia - Czech Republic
England - Scotland