Wednesday, 17 February 2021

Champions League 2020/21 - Referee Appointments - Round of 16 (First Leg, II)

Referees in charge of 2020-21 UEFA Champions League Round of 16 - First legs, games to be played on Wednesday 17 February.

17.02.2021, 21:00 CET
Estádio do Dragão, Porto (POR)
FC Porto (POR) - Juventus (ITA)
Referee: Carlos del Cerro Grande (ESP)
Assistant Referee 1: Juan Carlos Yuste Jiménez (ESP)
Assistant Referee 2: Roberto Alonso Fernández (ESP)
Fourth Official: José María Sánchez Martínez (ESP)
Video Assistant Referee: Alejandro José Hernández Hernández (ESP)
Assistant Video Assistant Referee: Ricardo de Burgos Bengoetxea (ESP)
UEFA Referee Observer: Terje Hauge (NOR)
UEFA Delegate: Charles Schaack (LUX)

17.02.2021, 21:00 CET
Estadio Ramón Sánchez-Pizjuán, Seville (ESP)
Sevilla FC (ESP) - Borussia Dortmund (GER) 
Referee: Danny Makkelie (NED)
Assistant Referee 1: Hessel Steegstra (NED)
Assistant Referee 2: Mario Diks (NED)
Fourth Official: Allard Lindhout (NED)
Video Assistant Referee: Kevin Blom (NED)
Assistant Video Assistant Referee: Jochem Kamphuis (NED)
UEFA Referee Observer: Mehmet Murat Ilgaz (TUR)
UEFA Delegate: Antonio Talarico (ITA)

97 comments:

  1. So far, no referee has a team again, that he had in group stage.

    14th CL match this season for a Dutch referee, i.e nearly every seventh match had a referee from the Netherlands.

    ReplyDelete
  2. It's strange not to see Orsato; he was out for Seria A so we were expecting him in CL

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Performance principle, after a very poor performance in MU-PSG in MD5 ? I would be harsh though IMO.

      Delete
    2. He is definitely kept for second leg, he is a big name and he will appear at this moment , no doubt. I think we will see him in EL.

      Delete
    3. Orsato yesterday was at the general assembly of AIA, for this reason he didn't appear in Serie A games

      Delete
  3. Good appointments for both referees, especially I expected Del Cerro here, he might be a candidate for a CL SF in case of good performances this season.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Had a feeling we'd get either del Cerro Grande or Mateu Lahoz on POR-JUV. Good appointment for Makkelie as well, coming off the CWC.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Why is Kamphuis Assistant VAR was he main VAR for whole of last season?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Makkelie's choice?

      Delete
    2. UEFA's choice?

      Delete
    3. It will be interesting to see whether all VARs and AVARs will be strictly selected from the new FIFA VMO lists.

      Delete
    4. Kamphuis was main VAR in team Makkelie until his crucial mistake in Man City - Porto with Treimanis (21/10/2020). After that game Blom became main VAR and Kamphuis assistant VAR in team Makkelie.

      Delete
    5. We have seen many, many crucial mistakes by VAR’s and hardly ever changes in VAR/AVAR roles for the officials involved, so that’s not a likely explanation

      Delete
  6. OT
    I would like to know your opinion about yesterday penalty incident that leads to draw 3:3 in match of Fortuna liga (Slovakia) between AS Trenčín - DAC Dunajská Streda. Referee of the match was Ivan Kružliak (Elite cat.)
    Video of incident is in this topic: https://www.fortunaliga.sk/zapas/1744-tre-dac (6:48).
    What do you think?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I would support the referee here, but IMO a defensive free-kick was a safer choice.

      Delete
    2. I agree with Quilava on this one.

      Delete
    3. As someone from Slovakia, I know he caught a lot of fire for that decision. And rightfully so. No way that is a PK, before the incident, there is a clear push by the defender and even without that, there are no grounds for PK.

      I spoke with a ref that was VAR there (still off-line here in Slovakia due to system malfunction) and he said that he would 200% call for an OFR with the camera shots he had.

      The Referee Committee chief has come out on national television saying it was "a decision nearing a scandal". From the information I have, 6 game ban is in play.

      Nonetheless, this mistake cannot be made by one of the best 32 referees in Europe. And to be honest, it is not his first, before the New Year he had 2 crucial mistakes in 60 seconds in his last match.

      Delete
    4. I´m OK with fire about bad decision, but everyone offend him for match fixing and bribes. And it is unacceptable for me. Was it error? Absolutely. Was it match fixing for bribe? I don´t think so.

      In 2018 were 20 (13 referees and observers and 7 club/team officials) people arrested for corruption in lower divisions (3rd, 4th and 5th) and that was huge scandal about it. They were banned from footbal for 5-7 years from FA and for around 10 years from court, they got fined in thousands euros and probation. I don´t think he wanted risk somethink like it. He is profesional referee. He is in UEFA elite category. He have great potential. I don´t think he wanted risk somethink like it.

      Delete
    5. For me there is a very clear push before the penaltyfoul, in this case the forward gets his advantage by making a foul, so the ref should have whistled for a defensive freekick, iff there was a var in this match......then i really don't understand why he didn't call the referee, i wouldn't support this penaltycall.

      Delete
  7. Can anyone clarify this statement made by FIFA? I missed the only accusations towards FIFA’s president Infantino. What happened?

    https://twitter.com/fifamedia/status/1361354254959673347?s=21

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Accusations were not against Infantino but it was reported by many sources that Qatari royal family didn't want to shake hands with female officials when they got their medals, but the posted videos were always missing of some parts.

      Delete
    2. The organising committee said in a statement that it was a misunderstanding and that the female referees avoided it, not the Qatari prince...

      Delete
    3. Thank you Chefren, I did hear something about that. But in this statement it is explicitly said that there were “lies concerning what the president said to the female officials during the ceremony.”

      So in some way Infantino was also involved in this issue? For me this is a somewhat strange and incomplete statement made by FIFA...

      Delete
    4. all in all a pathetic statement by infantino. of course it is now framed the way that the female referee avoided it. but for a host of the worlds biggest event, i think me and everybody else EXPECTS in the year 2021 that even the quatari king literally reaches out his hand to females to congratulate for their performance...now saying "it wasnt clear" is just total bs, sorry...everybody knew this would happen by the time the two women were appointed. it was clear that they will go to the podium and receive their medals and will face the quatari king. now to say this was a misunderstanding is just not true. and: nobody would have stopped the quatari king reaching out his hand! why did he not do it? how is this acceptable in 2021?

      Delete
    5. Money talk! Infantino himself said: you ask for something and Qatar makes it happen! :)

      Delete
  8. Today's game from World Cup 2010

    Uruguay - Germany, Benito Archundia

    wc10refs.blogspot.com


    (final on Friday)

    ReplyDelete
  9. OT: Portugal/Champions League next week

    Artur Soares Dias named for a match on Friday in Portugal.
    Possible candidate for CL next week?
    Paulo Soares, AR2 of Soares Dias usual team, infected with COVID.

    Appointment:

    Friday, 19th February

    21:30 Boavista FC-Moreirense FC
    Artur Soares Dias - Rui Licínio, Bruno Rodrigues - David Silva
    [João Pinheiro, Tiago Costa]

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

    ReplyDelete
  11. Possible handball penalty for Dortmund in 23' (replays ca. a minute later). Elbow is increasing the body surface, so I think penalty would be the better decision.
    Probably not clear enough for VAR, but maybe at least a "missed incident"? - unless AR1 saw it well, of course.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Clear penalty. I am sure Rosetti will say it was a bad mistake by VAR.

      Delete
    2. This is not the first time that Makkelie makes a mistake and VAR is unresponsive, there were also some similar situations during the group stage

      Delete
    3. Rosetti will confirm it was a penalty, but there will be no consequences for the referees. In the group stage they made a lot of mistakes, but they are still assigned to the next matches

      Delete
    4. So now you’ve spent 3 different posts on the same handball situation. It’s more than clear that you have an issue with Makkelie, no need to emphasize that over and over again.
      By the way, where were you the last months? You only seem to appear when you can criticize particular refs. No problem of course, but it’s quite evident ;)

      Delete
  12. I actually find absolutely scandalous the way in which these two referees don't show even mandatory yellows. At least this gives a huge advantage to the teams that play today in comparison to the teams that played yesterday. You call it lenient or whatever, for me it is a parody.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. If you’re talking about the Sevilla-Dortmund game then you’re statement is absolutely bogus to me! I cannot remember even one moment a yellow card could be considered....

      Delete
    2. That‘s quite harsh voice I really don‘t like...
      I can only speak about del Cerro Grande, who is in full control, but has some problems with foul detection. But no mandatory card.

      Delete
  13. Evident penalty kick for Borussia. The Sevilla player plays the ball with the expected hand and blocks the cross, more importantly, the player moves with his hand.

    ReplyDelete
  14. Here's the potential penalty for handling mentioned above.

    https://streamable.com/xpurzc

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Hm, the English commentator agrees with the German one, that it's not a handball. Also no protests by Dortmund. So it seems at least not "clear and obvious" for non-refereeing people.

      From the LotG view, he is clearly increasing his body surface. The question is, whether it is unnatural or still can be justified as natural part of his movement there.

      Delete
    2. After VAR, clear penalty missed by VAR and Makkelie. No doubts, intentional handball and body incrusing...

      Delete
    3. @Philipp S, it's meaningless as he jumps in order to block a pass, so every ball contact with a hand increasing body surface should be deemed as foul.

      Delete
    4. The situation is very tricky, in my opinion player tries to go with head, but then he misses coordination and he hits ball by arm. It is not deliberate in the exact meaning of the term, however we know that this isn't a valid argument anymore for assessing a handball. Penalty would have been clearly supported by VAR, one can wonder about the possible intervention in case of PLAY ON, as it happened. Assistant referee looked to be exactly on the line, as Philipp suggested, maybe he saw it.
      However, for me, as it is very often with handball, not 100% clear mistake.

      Delete
    5. Chefren is the biggest fan of GREY AREA

      Delete
    6. @chefren: 100% agree with your very good assessement :-) also the spot at the upper arm is not quite clear to me, is it already in the punishable area of the arm?

      Delete
    7. @grumpy
      Maybe this was crucial for VAR, that it was within or close to shoulder area.

      There was a similar situation in Croatian league, but from the corner and hence much bigger distance, and there was an OFR and a pk whistled.

      My opinion is that something strange began to happen, and that is the perception that it is important what the outcome of the handball is. So, if the ball is not blocked and the player does not gain control, then there is an "advantage". That could be added to LOTG maybe as one of the aspects, but in the meantime it is completely unacceptable IMO.

      Delete
    8. IMO penalty (body surface enlarged, active movement towards the ball).
      I personally prefer an OFR here, but I think one can back Blom's decision here.

      Delete
  15. Some mistakes by Makkelie in the last minutes:
    Wrong FK Sevilla in a dangerous position (86')
    Wrong YC Sevilla (88')
    Also the first YC of the game to Hummels already seemed harsh.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Agreed. I would also expect more preventive approach in the second half. Way too passive attitude by Makkelie tonight, especially in the dying stages (in 93' he totally lost it). For me it looked like he didn't read the game well to be honest.

      Delete
    2. I agree with the wrong free kick in 86’, but for me both the Hummels YC as well as the Sevilla YC in 88’ are spot on decisions, the first even mandatory to me.

      Delete
    3. i think the cards shown by makkelie today were all ok. i must say however that i did not like the approach how he handled dissent (not the first time too defensive). if it is true that in the last course uefa gave out strict guidelines for the handling of dissent i am missing some proactive warnings and at least against 14s and 28d two compulsory cards for getting into the referees face...

      Delete
    4. These are the two YC scenes Philipp commented on. Philipp, do you really think one or both of these sanctions should not have been handed out?

      https://streamable.com/8nup1a

      https://streamable.com/0pda4v

      Delete
    5. Thanks for the videos.
      1) Late body-check, that can be considered as reckless. But as there is no contact with the head, I would only see it as 5-6 on the RAP scale. And normally one waits for a clearer offence for the first card after 70 cardless minutes. But still an acceptable caution
      2) Here I hardly see a foul, although it looks bad in the live picture. But in the replays, one can see, that Sancho jumps before the contact and IMO mostly causes the little contact at the legs and the medium contact at the upper body by this jump. Oscar would just have stepped next to Sancho, so was at most careless.
      So I still consider that caution as wrong.

      Delete
  16. Two very doubtful situation in the penalty area in the last seconds of both matches...

    ReplyDelete
  17. Sorry but I was dissapointed in Makkelie tonight.

    Too much verbal warnings, tolerancy and leniency, allowed too much protests from Sevilla players and potetential 1st half penalty.

    It was not his usual 5 star performance.

    ReplyDelete
  18. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Your profile picture tells us a lot...

      Delete
    2. IMO this is not penalty at all. Excellent Del Cerro tonight. Congratulations!!

      Delete
  19. @Chefren why did you remove my cooment ? Because I said that Cerro Grande and VAR didn't whistle a clear penalty for Juve in last minut ? How is possible to not whistle such foul ? How ? Pls, tell me. Yes, that's the level of european refereeing. Such mistakes are unacceptable at this level !!@

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. It is not the first time that you seem to forget the terms you use in previous messages...

      Delete
    2. You know very well that I'm right. With the exception of few very godd referee, the others are (more or less) low level, even if they are in Elite. How is possible that Herndez Hernandez didn't intervene ? Pls explain me ?

      Yes, Juve was very, very poor tonight. I don't deny that. But a clear penalty is a clear penalty.

      Delete
    3. Also the yellow card for Danilo was a mistake (the players will be suspended for 2nd leg)

      Delete
    4. I didn't watch the incident, waiting for a video I will give my opinion!

      Delete
    5. Fabia Capello: "rigore netto, non c'e discusione"
      Billy Costacurta: "rigore netto"
      Alex Del Piero: "rigore netto"

      Delete
    6. @chefren pls say that is was not penalty (or at least the play-on decision is supportable) and I promise you that I won't write on your blog in my entire life.

      Delete
    7. I watched it, for me penalty must be up to referee here, if not whistled, not VAR stuff. But on the pitch, rather penalty than play on for me.

      Delete
    8. GREY AREA!!!

      Delete
  20. Dont know the procedure.. Do we have OFR in UCL? In that case its a shame that VAR doesnt intervene and give dCG the chance to revaluate the situation. In my book a penalty, since a FK would be awarded 10 out of 10 outside the box.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. In book yes. But I think you know very well, that it can not be considered the same inside the box.

      Delete
  21. Not good del Cerro Grande tonight: problems in foul detection and revisable card management (for example, clear YC not given to de Ligt, wrong YC for Danilo). IMO correct -or at least supportable- to play on at the end.

    ReplyDelete
  22. I watched now the situation in Porto - Juventus last minutes, clearly not VAR stuff. Penalty to be supported only if whistled by referee.

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

      Delete
    2. Ok, thanks for your reply. After many years on Niclas's and Chefren's blog, my activity ends here. Good bye to everyone !

      P.S. some opinions about that situation:

      Fabia Capello: "rigore netto, non c'e discusione" (Sky Italia)
      Billy Costacurta: "rigore netto" (Sky Italia)
      Alex Del Piero: "rigore netto" (Sky Italia)
      Arsene Wenger: "yeah, it was a penalty for Juventus." (Bein)

      Delete
    3. Haha just admit you can’t leave us! Only 5 minutes after your goodbye message you return to post another goodbye message + some extra information you want to share with us :)
      Just cool down, have a decent night of sleep and then we’ll see you around!

      Delete
    4. This last comment should be deleted! Personal provocation, not connected to the topic.

      Delete
  23. KMIs from 2H additional time in Porto - Juventus.

    DOGSO?
    https://streamable.com/wq9wi1

    Penalty?
    https://streamable.com/2wftj4

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. My view on the controversial penalty appeal at the end:

      - for me, it's a (clear) foul! Defender carelessly impedes the progress of the attacker with contact.

      Arguments that Ronaldo is already falling (he is just adjusting his balance for changing direction!) and that the ball is far away (-> normal collision) aren't satisfactory to me.

      - del Cerro's procedure is quite poor IMO. For me, it is better to blow the final whistle normally, and then show the players that VAR is checking the situation specifically, even if that isn't the case. Spanish ref only inflamed the Juventus players with the way he managed it.

      - in IFAB / UEFA / FIFA interpretation of "clear and obvious", that will NEVER be a VAR intervention.

      - penalty area decisions like are an example of the 'UEFA Summer 2020' doctrine, which Kuipers 'broke' yesterday. To be honest, personally, I strongly disagree with this idea, but people can have their own view.

      Delete
    2. For me, no VAR stuff and have many doubts about the penalty itself. Probably I wouldn't have whistled it live either.

      Regarding "del Cerro's procedure" as Mikael calls it, it's actually the standard procedure in Spain. When the time is over, the referee stops play, checks with VAR that he can end the match and then does so. IMO, that's better than giving the final blow and having to review the incident later.

      Delete
    3. @mikael: i fully agree, no var stuff as it isnt c/o. also agree on the management of this situation with the final whistle just when the var-check is over and the attacker wants to cross the final ball in the box for a late screamer. as observer i would support the decision, however as a referee-coach i would ask: why dont you take the easy option and just whistle the penalty? why do you have the urge to find a "special" decision rather than a football-wise and reliable decision? thats what i usually see from unstable referees that they want to have this very "special" decision to cover up some management issues they had previously...

      Delete
    4. For me, "no foul" is the only possible decision, very good reaction by del Cerro Grande. The position of attacker's body at the moment of contact shows that he clearly lost his balance and started to fall before, therefore the fact that there was a careless tackle afterwards makes no difference. Out of context, it could have been a YC for dissent, but it was expected choice to ignore the reaction as it was in the last moments of the game.

      Delete
    5. IMO it's borderline, but I'd prefer a penalty here, as grumpy-ref explained.

      Delete
    6. Mikael W, what is the "UEFA Summer 2020 doctrine that was broken by Kuipers"?

      Delete
    7. This is a penalty for me. Nice skill from Ronaldo, who was fouled. It is very similiar to the Gundogan incident vs. Spurs, but there Gundogan didn't control the ball well - on the other hand, he was not out of balance before the collision (with Hojberg)

      Delete
    8. Anonymous - to not whistle accidental tripping contacts, such as the one given by Kuipers in Barcelona - Paris on Tuesday.

      Delete
  24. For the first situation it looks more DOGSO then SPA.... for me is red and VAR should intervened. For possible RC

    Second is penallty .... defender does not look the ball at all, he see only the attacker moves and try to stop him, also is a kick on the attacker knee. More ofen this kind of situation on the field looks more penallty, if only you as referee have make up your mind not to whistle this kind of sitution. But no VAR Staff ... just referee

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. That's really interesting. For me it's no DOGSO at all (as VAR I would have intervened, when a RC would have been given).

      For me there are no arguments, that the defender's action is careless. Just a normal accidental contact.

      Delete
    2. For me no DOGSO, clear YC.

      Delete
  25. In my opinion the possible DOGSO is not a 100% clear one as well, so again correct by VAR to support referee.
    A message to anonymous who wrote that I'm fan of GREY AREA, indeed, can you deny that there are many grey areas in refereeing? Things would be too easy if everything only black or white.
    One can talk about the position of the foul the distance from penalty area, and the possible attempt to have a last save by another defender. Maybe for somebody rather RC than YC, but in my opinion never clear RC or clear YC.

    ReplyDelete
  26. Just heard a podcast with Andy Madley - Taylor was due to do Barcelona v PSG and Oliver was due to do Sevilla v Dortmund until lockdown restrictions meant they could no longer go (as it would've meant 8 referees and numerous ARs in quarantine on their return).

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Interesting so both Dutch could be replacements, indeed about Sevilla - Dortmund this was a suitable game for Oliver, without English team and without Italian teams (if one doesn't want to appoint him with them after Real - Juventus...). Very difficult situation for committee.

      Delete
    2. Here

      https://open.spotify.com/show/0WQCtSEWOH9znXFWkAhjch

      Delete
  27. Three incidents from Ekberg's game. Thanks Edward for having reported two of them on the blog (I found the third one - 61' - just by chance).

    61'
    https://streamable.com/pmfx32
    Management after accidental collision, but what about that left arm hitting opponent?

    68'
    https://streamable.com/5tkclv
    Missed second YC?

    90'+1
    https://streamable.com/f87pa4
    https://streamable.com/r2dai4 (replay)
    Missed foul and second YC?

    ReplyDelete

Thank you for writing a comment on our blog!