Saturday, 3 December 2022

World Cup 2022 - Referee appointments for Round of 16 (5 December)

Third set of referee assignments for Round of 16, games to be played on 5 December. FIFA has appointed US referee Ismail Elfath for Japan - Croatia while French Clément Turpin will oversee Brazil - South Korea. The confederations rule is still kept. 



Game 53 - Al Wakrah (16:00 CET)
JAPAN - CROATIA
Referee: Ismail Elfath (USA)
Assistant Referee 1: Corey Parker (USA) 
Assistant Referee 2: Kyle Atkins (USA) 
Fourth Official: Mustapha Ghorbal (ALG) 
Reserve Assistant Referee:  
Video Assistant Referee: Nicolas Gallo (COL)
Assistant Video Assistant Referee: Julio Bascunan (CHI) 
Offside Video Assistant Referee: Ezequiel Brailovsky (ARG)
Support Video Assistant Referee: Paolo Valeri (ITA)
Standby Assistant Video Assistant Referee: 

Game 54 - Doha (20:00 CET)
BRAZIL - SOUTH KOREA
Referee: Clément Turpin (FRA) 
Assistant Referee 1: Nicolas Danos (FRA)
Assistant Referee 2: Cyril Gringore (FRA)
Fourth Official: Slavko Vincic (SVN) 
Reserve Assistant Referee:  
Video Assistant Referee: Jerome Brisard (FRA)
Assistant Video Assistant Referee: Alejandro Hernandez Hernandez (ESP)
Offside Video Assistant Referee: Roberto Diaz Perez Del Palomar (ESP)
Support Video Assistant Referee: Benoit Millot (FRA) 
Standby Assistant Video Assistant Referee: 

29 comments:

  1. Replies
    1. Yes, Turpin has a very good tournament so far.

      Delete
  2. Wow, what a trust comitee has in Elfath,looks like yesterfay's performance was great,so as a reward he gets this match.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Wow Elfath again hahaha. He didnt deserve either BraKor after PK for Portugal.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Unbelievable! Elfath's performance is Portugal-Ghana was one of the worst performances. If he is still there then Faghani and Makkelie are surely still 'alive'.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. yeah has there been any announcement of who's gone home and is still at the tournament?

      Delete
  5. Ghorpal deserved main referee instead of elfath Japan vs Croatia

    ReplyDelete
  6. Faghani to Morocco VS Spain.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Penalty for Portugal against Ghana was at least supportable for FIFA I guess.... Good luck to all referee crews.

    ReplyDelete
  8. I really don't think it is deserved for Elfath. Sure, he did well in his last match - but Beath, Escobar, Al-Jassim and Sikazwe didn't get this second chance. Will we see Makkelie and Faghani again? By this logic, they should still be candidates for the final - if they do well in their 'recovery game', anything seems to be possible

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I haven't ruled Faghani out but his problem is that he has made a major objective error while Elfath's criticisms were subjective and defensible.

      Delete
  9. Turpin expected.

    Elfath not not just because of the debate over him but the quick turn. I am starting to wonder if the Moroccan will be pushed by both CONCACAF and CAF. CAF surely needs at least 1 more whistle unless they are satisfied with extra 4th, VARs, and adopting Elfath.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Rather than thinking that Collina assessed as acceptable the performance by Elfath in his first game, according to this assignment we should just point out, in my opinion, that he is seen as big name, regardless of everything. So how we see UEFA High ranked Elite, this seems the same for FIFA about Elfath. They kept eyes closed after first display, one can wonder whether this management is fair or not. Not all referees have had a second opportunity, but the judgments on their qualities is related to reputation in this case.
    Then for sure Faghani can't be ruled out from next stages, otherwise this would be totally unfair. We can expect everything.
    On the other hand, an European referee for BRA - KOR was expected for me, indeed Turpin is among the ones that could end the tournament due to their national team. I predicted Mateu for this reaosn for this game, but it looks a quite similar choice.
    Extremely interesting fourth officials choices: Ghorbal and Vincic have ended their WC as main referees, at least we can draw this conclusion, but for the CAF officials there is still the chance of third place game, very likely used for that. Nevertheless, one shouldn't still rule out Gomes, but I thought that Ghorbal would have got the next "CAF" assignment. Also, no AFC referees after Faghani display at all, if I'm not wrong, our reader Philipp pointed out that after MD3. Well, now we have almost all Round of 16 without them as well... I think that Collina was furious not only with Qatari VAR but also with the managers from AFC... we will see what will happen, very particular situation. But still I think chances for Faghani, because if you appoint again Elfath for a full poor game, then for a penalty you send home a referee?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I agree Chefren, but it was a blatant mistake . Fifa has shown many clips where those kind of handball are not foul.

      Delete
  11. Agree regarding Elfath - he is obviously being looked at in a BIG way. I also expected Lahoz instead of Turpin for BRA. I can't imagine him now getting POR v SWI as this directly affects Spain so, Oliver would be the logical choice with perhaps a QF appointment. I wouldn't rule out Faghani with a game either!

    ReplyDelete
  12. Right now the AFC spot(s?) in the KO stage seem quite open.
    Mohammed had the best group stage.
    Faghani has the best pre-tournament reputation.
    Beath also seemed to be liked by FIFA before the tournament and therefore got a challenging match, where he had problems but no clearly wrong KMI. So similar to Elfath somehow. Plus, he might be geographically more suitable to MAR-ESP than his colleagues from the Middle East.
    Al Jassim comes from the host nation and wasn't that bad in his first game.
    I hope, it will be performance-based, i.e. Mohammed, but none of these options would surprise me right now.

    ReplyDelete
  13. "But still I think chances for Faghani, because if you appoint again Elfath for a full poor game, then for a penalty you send home a referee?"

    It becomes a question of public and media image. Faghani going against one of the pictures in the law book gets a lot more bad attention. Elfath may not be to all tastes but has nothing that was absolutely wrong and without defense that the media can use against FIFA. Add in the reaction to the red card and the general public thinks he deserves more. A very safe and political choice compared to going by Faghai's reputation.

    ReplyDelete
  14. Some of you guys are hilarious. Or sad.

    I say all this as someone who hasn't actually been a huge Elfath fan since he first entered MLS. My basic assessment is that he's technically subpar, but excels in player and match management. I don't think that should be good enough to reach the highest levels, but whatever, it's not my decision to make. With all that said, to the Elfath/Faghani debate...

    Elfath officiated his first game in a manner that most of you don't like. He was a bit choppy throughout, as his approach didn't work the way he probably wanted it to. He also gave what is perceived as a soft penalty. Okay, fine. Call it a below average performance. It didn't affect the result.

    Faghani quite literally went to the monitor and awarded a penalty 100% contrary to FIFA's explicit instructions. He gave a penalty that FIFA says isn't a penalty. And it eliminated a team, ultimately. We should repeat that: he availed himself of the technology that is available precisely to fix grave errors except he used it to commit a grave error! Step out of your bubbles for a second and think about how bad that is for FIFA.

    One guy had a below average game. The other guy used technology to get a KMI wrong when he originally had it right. This isn't even close. Faghani almost has to be rejected. This isn't the case of "both guys have a negative against them." It's one subpar performance versus one crystal clear mistake that Faghani didn't have to make--he was looking at the video when he did it! That's simply unacceptable.

    You can whine all you want about Elfath not deserving a second match but as is pointed out above, FIFA has held him in high esteem and you don't toss a 4-year project overboard for one match. Instead of people saying "oh, he was poor and then he was good, that's enough" the logic should be "FIFA didn't abandon its project after one shaky outing and got rewarded with the best performance of the tournament." Add in the made-for-media red card moment and it's an absolute no-brainer that Elfath needed to be used again at least once. This is going to make some people's minds explode, but the fact that he was rushed into this match and not held for a QF means you could see him one more time, too.

    One more thing... if Faghani had the good sense to reject that OFR for Portugal, I bet he would have sealed a WC semi or final appointment. The decision was that consequential.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Sorry, how did Elfath's soft penalty not affect the result? The difference was 1 goal... Faghani's error didn't impact the match result at all (it did, of course, impact the group result in the end). Regarding the project: surely they had big plans with Beath as well? He refereed the CWC Final. He's immediately thrown overboard despite being a project...

      I wish him a very good game, but we have to be honest and say that at least 5 referees at this tournament wished they had (USA) behind their name as well, as that would have given them one (or two) more games

      Delete
    2. @usaref
      +1
      One of the best analysis about Elfath-Faghani mistakes.

      Delete
    3. "You don't toss a 4-year project overboard for one match" Tell that to Beath who in the last 18 months refereed both the Olympic and Club World Cup Final. One average game with one KMI that he corrected via on field review and he didn't get another game.

      Delete
  15. It is this hypocrisy of some commentators here that I fight. Not commentators, actually cheering from compatriot referees. These are extremely critical of referees from other federations, they see details that even Collina does, but in addition to being too lenient to referees they defend, of course because it suits them, they do not see obvious mistakes that such referees make.
    Have the minimum of humility to admit your lack of reason: someone said that Elfath simply won CMR-BRA because it was an easy and non-committal game, and he as an American referee being benefited by FIFA due to WC26. I ask these vultures on duty: What now? What is it due to? Elfath was and is as good a referee as everyone else in this cup, he had mistakes and successes like everyone else, respect him. Likewise, respect that he has a different and divergent opinion from yours. Differences are what praises a Blog where everyone can participate and contribute freely.
    As for the other match, despite having bet on Ramos (MEX) for this match, I believe that Turpin was an excellent choice as well, and I am happy that the excellent French school is back in the spotlight with him. I would also like to see the excellent schools in Eastern Europe (Romania, Bulgaria, Czech, Hungary) return, where I highlight the Hungarian school that had great referees like Sandor Puhl for example.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Where is the hypocrisy? The commenters picking apart the referees minute by minute are not the same as the ones saying Elfath could advance. Maybe on the Massachusetts forum there are blind cheerleaders but no one here has said Elfath has been the best. It is simply a prediction game and luck is falling in his favor.

      Outside UEFA/CONMEBOL is weak this year. No referee emerged clearly in front. Elfath comes with better ARs and from one of the top VAR countries. He has a strong profile before the tournament and more political backing (unfair or not). The entire world liked the red card. And don't forget Brazil also had Geiger in 2018.

      This is not a Frappart situation. There is a clear chance for him to be considered the best option in ANY remaining game that does not involve Portugal, two UEFA teams, or UEFA loving Argentina.

      Delete
  16. Quite remarkable development for Gallo as VAR.
    After 5 AVAR appointments on MD1 and 2 he got his first main VAR game (CMR-SRB) only on day 9, followed by KOR-POR on the last day of the group stage. And now already two matches in the R16, meaning he works 3 times in 4 days in that role plus his SVAR appointment in ENG-SEN.
    So he seems to have overtaken all the other CONMEBOL VARs during the tournament.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. FIFA seems to have some more issues with regard to the VARs and AVARs: Netherlands - USA yesterday had AVARs from Argentina and Australia. The winner of that game faces the winner of Argentina - Australia in the next round. Rather weird - or at least avoidable - appointments ...

      Delete
  17. News from the Netherlands: The referees are no longer in front of the camera after the match!

    Serdar Gözübüyük said this on tv talk show:
    "It is quite unique in the Netherlands that we come in front of the camera afterwards, often if it is negative. We want to follow the policy of FIFA and UEFA and not comment on moments."

    "I have news for you: it won't happen again from the new year. This is equally important. After a questionable moment, a reporter knocks on my door within five minutes, asking if I'm coming to say 'sorry'. It's almost always negative. I don't think it's good to be alone in front of the camera with something negative."

    I can't imagine someone like Bas Nijhuis thinking the same thing. There are certainly meaningful cases where referees explain rules questions post-match without being negative, but he said they are no longer in front of the camera entirely.

    ReplyDelete
  18. FIFA has now announced that goalline technology was used to verify the goal (2-1 goal in the Japan - Spain).
    https://www.fifa.com/fifaplus/en/articles/japan-v-spain-var-check-goal-fifa-world-cup-qatar-2022

    Is it consistent with LotG? I can't erase the impression that this tournament is a grand test venue for FIFA.

    Isn't the video Video confirmed by VAR sufficient evidence? To convince people who weren't convinced by it, did they just announce a supplementally tested feature of GLT?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Remarkable, in the news article on FIFA’s website it is said that Goal Line Technology was used, and in Twitter communication FIFA stated that the Goal Line Camera was used. That is an important difference I would say.

      Delete
    2. FIFA has folks who do communication for them. Just like folks at a call centre for whatever service/product someone's trying to sell you, one tells you one thing and another another thing.

      In this case, the goal line camera was used. GLT is for between the posts only.

      Delete

Thank you for writing a comment on our blog!