Round of 32: Review

A small review of matches in the first knockout round at the twenty-third FIFA World Cup. 

A match-by-match review of games seventy-three to eighty-eight.

Match 73: South Africa vs. Canada (Pinheiro)

I think Joao Pinheiro was correct to determine no offence had been committed in the game's key scene:

Given that the ball is in within playing distance to Rsa no20, and Can no22 starts his action (an attempt to centre the ball) only after his opponent, no foul is the correct reading of this incident in my opinion. This incident can be contrasted with the penalty that Carlos Vera expertly awarded in World Cup 2014 (clip), where the defender begins his action clearly after the attacker, and the ball was not in the defender's playing distance.

Otherwise, the overall manner in which the Portuguese referee handled the game was adequate in the first half, and good in the second half. As I wrote on the day (here), Pinheiro did not handle the first half fouling by South Africa in an optimal manner, but corrected course in the second half, using cards very well. Both of Pinheiro's performances in this World Cup have been strong, but it is perhaps fair to question how much stronger they have been than some of his UEFA colleagues.

Grade: 7


Match 74: Brazil vs. Japan (Mariani)

Maurizio Mariani continued what has been a generally very good World Cup for him on personal terms, with a good performance in an exciting and dramatic match. The referee from Italy correctly produced yellow cards when required (five cautions were issued) and gave an assured impression. It is nice when we can reflect that the referee has made an explicitly positive contribution to the match as a whole!

Grade: 7


Match 75: Germany vs. Paraguay (Jayed)

This match was the most controversial in the first knockout round. 

The analysis of it should be split into two parts.

1) The key calls were all correct

The referees/VAR team solved the three contested incidents all rightly, in my view.

81min: While the defender always 'runs the risk' of being penalised by putting both of his arms around the attacker, the actual force of the hold is minimal, if not actually zero (indeed such that the attacking player himself thinks nothing of it). No foul has been committed!

97min: The defender makes a 'last-ditch' attempt to block the ball like a goalkeeper, but even though his right arm has marginally his increased body surface, the arm is in a large comprehensible position for this action, and it seems as though the arm was only covering his own midriff anyway. I think one could argue that this is close to being a 'borderline' scene, but in the end, I'd say it is fairly clear that no handball offence was committed (I would expect an intervention had a penalty been awarded).

102min: FIFA's corner crusade is an honorable one! In football, there are two kinds of fouls: 1) you trip your opponent up, and, 2) you illegally prevent your opponent from moving into the space he wants to fairly move into. The pre-planned move of Germany no3, moving toward the goalkeeper while the ball was heading in the other direction, fell into the latter category. I recall that Markus Merk made an excellent decision back in his 2005 Milan derby to disallow a goal under the same heading. As a point of record, I am really surprised that people do not realise the impact of (even small, subtle) bodychecks like this!

My own philosophy is such: football is a low-scoring sport. It should be prevented from happening that underhand tactics at corners should lead to goals: it is not good, for football, for matches to be won from 'illegal moves' at set pieces, instead of great and skillful play. 

FIFA should, in my personal view, be strongly praised for making their teachings on this issue steadfast enough, that a VAR (for this match it was Tatiana Guzman) felt comfortable enough intervening to disallow a key knockout goal. Remember: FIFA can do some things right, and some things wrong, at the same time. I respect that some people will still deem this as 'soft', but would like to put on the record that I disagree quite strongly.

2) The overall performance was not good

Generally speaking, Jalal Jayed handled the majority of Germany-Paraguay in a decent manner. The strongest element of his refereeing was foul recognition - Jayed correctly penalised offences and was accurate (and consistent) in this regard. However, two key elements of a top refereeing performance were always missing: 1) different personality dimensions, and, 2) a stepped approach in disciplinary measures. 

As I have said before - not everyone (or indeed anyone else!) can be Mateu; however, Jayed only being able to access a near-perpetual glare and shouting distantly at players is clearly a limit to what he could achieve on the field of play in this match. I would underline though that it is still better to act like that, than to allow your authority to be undermined by being too soft. By extra time, this aspect was wearing quite thin though (for example: Germany no3 sneakily standing on the foot of the Paraguay gk at the 'be careful!' warning at 94:58). It takes real skill to control a difficult match by using cards at an extreme minimum, and 'the FIFA philosophy' was rather unhelpful for Jayed in this match: immediate cards in incidents like 9:06 or 77:46 would surely have helped the Moroccan's grip on the match, but none were forthcoming, nor were the 'varied reactions' (in terms of whistle tone and manner). The latter isn't too much of a slight on Jayed, but it did mean that match control became frayed, especially in extra time.

As such, with the wick of control gradually burning away, the second half of extra time was handled poorly. Jayed did not clock the extent of how reckless the off-the-ball charge at 105:24 was, and it seems the consequent yellow card was the result of a VAR tip-off. He did manage well the frustration of Germany no10, Musiala. Jayed was correct not to issue a yellow card at 112:10 - just as in the Club World Cup quarterfinal incident where he broke his leg, Musiala stepped into the sliding tackle of an opponent in order to generate a foul call. However, the distant manner in which the Moroccan referee dealt with the (understandable!) complaints of the flare Germany player was not good. The same incident brought a comical potential violent conduct scene later. Jayed then made a very poor decision to penalise Musiala for trying to stay on his feet and not awarding him an attacking freekick at 114:36. In frustration, the Germany player then committed a borderline-to tackle as an attack foul, for which Jayed (rightly) cautioned him. The incident reminded me of David Beckham's booking by the current chairman of the FIFA referees committee at Euro 2000! The way in which Jayed gives the yellow to Musiala is a disaster: the referee more-or-less signaled, 'this was a normal yellow card foul, nothing more'.

The very poor end to extra time was a logical consequence of these snowballing factors; the events in this period were too deficient to deem this a passing performance, in my opinion. Given what happened in the next round, the correctness of the big calls and Jayed's relative inexperience on the very top international stage, I would still say the Moroccan equipped himself fairly well - but in a very challenging match, his performance ultimately fell short.

Grade: 5


Match 76: Netherlands vs. Morocco (Sampaio)

This was a performance where it seems that I disagreed with the consensus of comments - in my view, the Brazilian referee handled the match excellently. I saw this as a masterclass in how to handle a (very) challenging game in coherence with 'the FIFA philosophy'; indeed, perhaps I would go further and say it was something approaching miraculous, and hugely his merit, that Wilton Sampaio managed to solve this match having only given one yellow card, yet scarcely suffering in control aspects. 

The weakest element of this performance was making rulings on duels next to the nearside touchline - not seeing the deliberateness/recklessness of the foul at 26:06 was the worst such incident and did nearly cost the Brazilian referee match control, but the warning he delivered worked well enough to diffuse tensions. I felt the referee was absolutely spot on to deem that no foul had taken place in two DOGSO scenario situations during the second half (63:23 and 71:19).

By outstanding movement and textbook definition 'variations' in how to deal with fouls (in terms of whistle language, facial expressions, gestures and so on), Sampaio always kept a firm grip on the match. His performance was, in my view, outstanding. I would score it as, by a fairly significant margin, the most impressive of the first ninety matches in the World Cup (8,8-level in the UEFA system). I took it as a given that the Brazilian official would be rewarded with further matches in the tournament, but it seems like FIFA are running the available time down to an absolute minimum, if that is to be the case.

Grade: 8


Match 77: Ivory Coast vs. Norway (Valenzuela)

Although the match was clearly of normal difficulty, I was also extremely impressed by the manner in which Jesus Valenzuela handled this game. His insistence that only 'real' offences, and not very soft/zero fouls, would be whistled down in this match was genuinely exceptional, as I wrote on the day (here). His use of cards was also textbook, as per the oft-mentioned philosophy - among the three most severe fouls of the game, most people would have deemed the offence that brought the game's only booking as the lightest (22:42, +45:28, 87:34), I think that Valenzuela correctly read what the players were trying to achieve perfectly in all three actions. The audible dissent towards the linesman Moreno was not pleasant, but I wouldn't censure the referee for not taking any action. The prevention of a confrontation in second half additional time was clearly not textbook, but led to an adequate result. 

Overall, I would deem this a very good and impressive performance by Valenzuela (8,5 in my book, for what it is worth) but the resolution looks the same as Sampaio - it seems these two high-level officials are quite likely to go without reward for their level, which is a real pity.

Grade: 7


Match 78: France vs. Sweden (Makkelie)

The nuance that most people missed in this match was that the level of difficulty during the first half was, on a technical basis, actually very high (no 'normal difficulty' encounter this!). I think Makkelie's performance should be viewed through that prism. As such, I would say this performance was a parallel to the United States - Paraguay opener for the Dutch official: he managed to cope with everything fairly well, by presenting a calm exterior and keeping afloat in the match, but in technical aspects, the performance probably only reached the area of 'decent', more than 'excellent'.

As in the aforementioned match, there is one incident which is therefore enough to reduce the overall consideration from good to adequate - the incident in 36:20 should be viewed quite critically, not because it was a missed yellow card in itself (not infrequent at this World Cup!), but because it was a complete blackout which came quite close to costing Makkelie control of the match; if one compares to Sampaio's similar incident, at least the Brazilian referee awarded a freekick and still gave a clear warning!

All told, I would say this was an adequate performance by Danny Makkelie in a not-easy match.

Grade: 6


Match 79: Mexico vs. Ecuador (Vincic)

In an extremely pressured and hot-headed environment, Slavko Vincic showed his experience by being able to keep a cool head, and earned the players' trust in so doing during Mexico-Ecuador, and the Slovenian was able to bring the match to a sound conclusion. Not overreacting (especially at 19:33) was a big asset for Vincic, as was being able to earn understanding from the players during the many warnings and lectures he delivered - I only noticed one occasion (Gallardo at 61:43) where the referee wasn't able to reach the target of his interaction. The expulsion for mouth-covering appeared correct. I really believe that very few referees would have been able to pull this match off as Slavko Vincic did, and he deserves great credit for having done so. It seems as though the nature of the draw, as well as potential outside factors, have drawn the curtain for Vincic, whose performances merited further appointments.

Grade: 8


Match 80: England vs. DR Congo (Makhadmeh)

Makhadmeh was right! Harry Kane, having pushed the ball to the right, jumped left into the goalkeeper's path and tried to generate a penalty decision. Quite impressively, even if one should never really make the gesture 'dive' and not accompany it with a yellow card for simulation, the Jordanian referee saw through Kane's attempt and did not award a penalty kick. 

As was clear during the group stage, Adham Makhadmeh is more a adept referee in terms of leadership style than technical accuracy, but I think that despite some mistakes (such as giving a warning at 65:44 rather than a clear yellow card), the referee did well and overall this was a good performance.

Grade: 7


Match 81: Belgium vs. Senegal (Martinez)

The rewarding of Said Martinez with a knockout game was a correct and fair judgement after his good level of refereeing during the group stage, but I believe this match to have been the weakest of his three World Cup performances - even notwithstanding the big incident at the end of the game.

In Qatar-Switzerland, Martinez correctly read the niggly, technical nature of the game and used disciplinary control very well in order to keep both teams in check. In England-Ghana, the Honduran official faced a match which was quite difficult from the beginning, and navigated it in a decent manner. What happened in this match was a little bit different - the match started off quite calmly, but the players could not find much solace in Martinez's refereeing, and as such the tension grew as the match continued. I think the players picked up that the referee from Honduras was perhaps a little nervous even in routine situations, and tested his authority with a number of DtR and mobbing-ish behaviours which weren't present in the match's beginning. Still, I would say that Martinez coped with this adequately.

As a personal judgement, I cannot count myself as a fan of Guillermo Pacheco's intervention - it was quite plain to me that Belgium no8 deliberately stepped into the tackle of his opponent only to win a foul, and he had no intention of actually playing the ball himself. This incident seemed to test FIFA's penalty area philosophy to the limit, and the officials reverted to making the generally expected call. 

I think one shouldn't be too critical of referees making public announcements in their second languages, but the nature of Martinez's announcement was coherent with the slightly nervous impression he gave throughout the game(s). In general, the call itself is clearly acceptable. However, as for Jayed, the end of the extra time unfortunately proved above Said Martinez - he lost control both over the match in the confrontations before the penalty execution, and his own decisions (no YC at +128:40!) at the very end. The conclusion can be mirrored too: Martinez had a good (even, great!) World Cup, and I don't think there is any great shame for him in being defeated by a difficult third match.

Grade: 5


Match 82: United States vs. Bosnia-Herzegovina (Claus)

Having been unable to outsource this part to an eighty-year old Washington DC resident who made plain his (extremely irresponsible) opinion on the refereeing of this game, some thoughts follow in two parts. 

1) I think it is fair to declare the expulsion of Balogun as a 'VAR red card' - this would have been nearly impossible to pick up in real time for referees in the pre-technology era. I wondered if the nature of the clash would lead the VAR, Juan Soto, to rule the incident as an unfortunate accident, but the near-textbook "buckling of the ankle" must have been the deciding factor for the intervention.

The decision was surely deemed as correct by FIFA internally. The surrounding affair to this red card, as we have already touched on (link), was, is and will remain completely unacceptable.

2) The overall manner in which Raphael Claus handled this game was quite mediocre. His approach was something approaching a diametric opposite of Wilton Sampaio - the level of alertness that Claus showed in this match was mostly quite good, but I missed any 'variation' in the way that the referee dealt with fouls, and as such, the tension increased in this match in a completely avoidable way. The lack of expulsion for the Bosnia manager was not surprising, but still disappointing; the freekick leading to the second United States goal was correct, even if the delay in the call made the referee's decision look unconvincing. In general, I would deem Claus' performance as so-so.

Grade: 6


Match 83: Spain vs. Austria (Nyberg)

Glenn Nyberg continued with the elegant, light-touch approach which served him well in two group stage matches, but I think he (slightly unluckily) set the yellow card threshold a little too high during the first half, and suffered for it as the game went on. Having 'felt' the beginning of the match, like France-Sweden, was to be a technical and not-easy affair, Nyberg should either have immediately have booked Austria no8 when he committed an off-the-ball blocking foul at 14:15, or, booked no5 from the same team at +45:25 with a gesture to the effect 'you, as a team, have done this too many times'.

Nyberg stayed true to the line he gave himself in the first half during the second, but the confrontation which happened at 74:20 was a logical consequence of his approach. As a rule of thumb, 'FIFA philosophy' or otherwise, persistent and deliberate fouling by one team should be punished, for the good not only of match control, but for the flow and entertainment value of the match itself. 

Finally: the decision, caught eagle-eyedly live by Nyberg, to disallow a first half goal for Spain on the grounds of fouling the goalkeeper was an excellent one in my opinion; I found both this call and the intervention by Guzman in Germany-Paraguay rather refreshing, personally.

Grade: 6


Match 84: Portugal vs. Croatia (Eskas)

Espen Eskas was for some people a surprise choice for one of the round's marquee matches, but I felt the Norwegian crew justified the assignment with a high-level performance. Both Eskas' use of cards and action against (potential) mobbing were very good. I think both on-field reviews were correctly called by the VAR, Jarred Gillett: both the intervention for holding, and using an OFR for the offside offence, were examples of very good VAR-ing in my book. Clips of both are below.

Personally, I would have considered Eskas for a further match after this display, but it seems that FIFA (as after Austria-Jordan) have themselves ruled differently.

Grade: 7


Match 85: Switzerland vs. Algeria (Falcon)

Yael Falcon's performance in this match was not bad, but especially given the relatively low level of difficulty, I would classify his refereeing as satisfactory. The non-penalty for holding at 36:40 was okay, but too many decisions were made after a period of delay and were unconvincing. The way in which he solved potential conflicts at the end of the game was unorthodox, but worked quite well. Overall, I think Falcon had a good World Cup, with decent performances in all three matches he took charge of.

Grade: 6

Match 86: Australia vs. Egypt (Tejera)

I think both the positives (manner, alertness) and negatives (leniency!) in this performance by Gustavo Tejera were quite manifest. The inflection point for this game was the non-YC at 30:40; this would have been the perfect opening sanction for the game, but Tejera chose to keep the card in his pocket, and I think not only his refereeing, but also the level of excitement in the match overall suffered as a result. Despite the increasing tension, the Uruguayan referee brought the match to a sound conclusion, so I would classify this as an adequate(-ish) piece of refereeing overall.

Grade: 6


Match 87: Argentina vs. Cape Verde (Fischer)

Unfortunately, I believe this to have been the poorest performance in the group stage and first knockout round of the World Cup - Drew Fischer earned this assignment on merit after two good performances in the group stage, but the lack of alertness shown by the Canadian official in this match was not acceptable. I would deem this refereeing as worse than Garay in Canada-Qatar and thus, the worst in the first two rounds of the tournament:

- I don't know if Fischer was expecting a walkover-style match and would have prepared differently in hindsight, but his start was poor. He missed a clear foul in attacking position by Cape Verde (3:18), solved a borderline foul by Argentina no7 in a very weak manner (3:54), and chose not to give a crystal clear yellow card to Argentina no13 (9:14). One has to feel a little bit for the Canadian with the 10' incident, it is difficult for a referee when the reaction on the field of play to an offence is incommensurate, on the lower side, to the actual severity of it. However, the job of a referee entails making brave and unpopular decisions, even when it would be easier to turn a blind eye. In this, Fischer totally failed.

SPA?

- Disciplinary control in this performance continued to be inexistent. Not only were borderline offences only whistled as 'normal' freekicks (fe: 52:15), a further clear caution offence by Argentina no13 was also only counted like it was a careless kick (57:20). Again, it came across like Fischer was determining his decisions by the (lack of) reaction on the field of play, not the incident itself. This is not acceptable!

- Two wrongs do not make a right; Fischer was correct to issue a yellow card to Cape Verde no6 for SPA at 67:40 (very promising options on the near side). However, the Canadian official was very nearly forced to issue a second yellow card to the same player at 78:45 by (again!) a lack of alertness: having missed two clear fouls (one for each team) in the move previously, already-booked no6 committed a frustration foul which was on the borderline to reckless. It is not worth imagining what the outcry would have been had the no6 committed a crystal clear step-on-foot, and Fischer been forced to expel him with a second YC.

- What happened at the ceremonial freekick procedure at 71:52 was, not wishing to sound like a broken record, also not acceptable. Fischer, pressured by Argentina no7, panickily whistles a freekick to be taken without being in any sort of position to declare it a fair restart. Mistakes happen, but what happened in this scene, with it being player who encouraged him to restart the game, seems to touch on the same theme as the whole tie - it seemed like the referee lacked courage to handle the match properly. This sole restart incident would be enough for an official at semi-professional level to fail an assessment.

- On the positive side: there were a number of sound, no penalty calls (the closest among them was 88:25 but the handling came from a deliberate play by the defender's own head which took away most of the pace on the ball) in the match and the allowing of Argentina's second goal was correctly solved on-field.

Drew Fischer's performance was very disappointing; it should be (or should have been) strongly rejected.

Grade: 3


Match 88: Colombia vs. Ghana (Turpin)

Clement Turpin showed his class in this match, handling the game in a very cool and strong manner. Besides a couple of small pointers - that it is a pity the pushing substitute at +50:05 got away scot-free, likewise the Colombia tactical fouler at +95:55 - this was a very good rendition of refereeing by the French official.

Grade: 7

All marks are compiled according to this system. 

This post is intended as a general overview, and not a deeply exhaustive analysis of every single incident!