UEFA EURO Analysis: Day Ten (ITAWAL, SUITUR)

The first straight red card of the tournament was given in Rome, and the other game was a rematch of the Battle of Istanbul. A closer look at both refereeing performances which closed Group A. 

Later, Chefren will take us through the Switzerland vs. Turkey game with Slavko Vinčić, but we will start in Rome, and HowardMaxi's report. 

Ovidiu Hațegan's team in Italy vs. Wales

Big Decision

When the referee from Romania issued a red card for Ethan Ampadu’s challenge on Federico Bernardeschi, it was not only the first straight red card of the tournament, but the first sending off for an SFP offence at the EURO since 2000 (!). 

Was it a correct decision though? In my opinion: Yes. Ampadu’s – and the commentators – surprise at the decision taken by the Romanian referee certainly show that the expected punishment of non-refereeing people was a yellow card. 

The Welsh player was late though and stamped onto his opponent, catching him fully on the ankle with his studs and considerable intensity. He therefore willingly endangers the safety of his opponent. Hațegan has a perfect view on the incident and his immediate decision should be assessed as correct.

To quote UEFA’s own article regarding the refereeing for this tournament: “Referees are being urged in particular to act firmly at the EURO to punish holding and pushing offences in the penalty area, and to take strong action against reckless challenges and serious foul play which could endanger a player’s safety.”

I would argue the fouls falls under the latter category. People have pointed towards a) the rather lenient line regarding such offences in this tournament and b) a similar incident in 34’, where Hațegan only gave a verbal warning.

As for point A, I would argue that the hitting point and the intensity of this particular foul made this challenge comfortably the worst of the tournament so far. I am struggling to see the inconsistency here, to be honest. 

As for point B, Daniel James is also late in this scene and hits nearly the same area of the foot as Ampadu would later do. But his contact is more of a glancing nature – he slides across his opponent’s foot – and not a full-intensity stamp. It is definitely a reckless challenge though and should have been punished with a YC.

Regardless, I would fully support Ovidiu Alin Hațegan regarding his decision and in fact praise him for it. Despite the higher threshold for SFP in recent years, tackles such as this that could lead to heavy injuries should still be strictly punished. In any case, the VAR team led by Paweł Gil was correct not to intervene.

Managing the Game

In general, Ovidiu Alin Hațegan had a good performance in a match that was generally played in a fair spirit like most of this tournament so far. The Romanian offered a good foul detection with only few mistakes (22’) and his sometimes-delayed whistles (9’, 21’, 40’) were in the spirit of letting the game flow and allow potential advantages to unfold.

Management-wise, Hațegan solved one scene very well. When Italian wing-back Emerson went down inside the penalty box in 31’, the Romanian gave him a knowing smile, pointed for a goal kick and stayed on scene in case the following come together with a Welsh defender turned sour. It didn’t. 

Goal kick was the correct decision, Emerson did go down after realising he would not be able to reach the ball before it crossed it left the field of play, but this more a late stumble than a simulation attempt. The scene in 34’ was calmly managed and James was given a good verbal warning, but as said above, it was insufficient here.

He continued his stepped approach with a good verbal warning for a first harder foul in 49’ before opening the cards for a clear SPA case in 51’. Only one larger scene required his attention in match that remained calm towards the end as the result was enough for both team’s ambitions: 79'. 

Matteo Pessina committed a reckless foul, Hațegan allowed the Welsh team to play the advantage, which resulted in an Italian counter-attacked and a late challenge by Chris Gunter. The Romanian calmly solved this situation by first booking the Welsh defender and then the Italian player for his previous foul. 

Based on the replays, Hațegan had missed the foul by the Italian – as it happened behind his back – and most likely got a call from his assistant referee.

Both assistants had one doubtful onside/offside flag (12’, 80’) in a moderately challenging game.

Balance: After an overall good performance in Poland vs. Slovakia, Ovidiu Alin Hațegan again sent off a player – correctly in my book. The rest of his performance was on a good level, minus a missed caution in 34’. If UEFA backs him regarding the red card (and they should!) a knockout stage appointment should be on the cards for the Romanian trio.

Report by HowardMaxi

Slavko Vinčić's team in Switzerland vs. Turkey

Big Decision

The only crucial situation of the game which Vinčić had to face occurred during the most tense minutes of the game (from 70' to 80') - 77'. 

In my opinion the decision by Vinčić is supportable, he saw and he was aware of the incident: that's surely the most important thing to underline.

Absolutely perfect by VAR to support referee, an intervention would have been a mistake. Turkish player took a risk by charging the opponent in that way, but it stayed "in the limits". Penalty decision should have been accepted as well. 

So actually in my opinion this shouldn't mean something more or something less in the final assessment.  The subsequent YC for protests to Swiss player was a signal of Slavko Vinčić's management and indeed I'm about to talk about that on next chapter.

Managing the Game

The game in Baku was overall of a normal difficulty for the Slovenian referee, especially in first half, with a relatively easy job, however, despite of that, his presence, and this is something I really like, was noticeable starting from the early stages. The foul detection was overall good. 

A very early warning to a player who had reacted in an appropriate way against referee occurred in the 5' minute of the game. Not enough for a YC, but surely mandatory action by the referee to spend some words. This showed us how the Slovenian wanted to control the game, and he succeded.

A few minutes later, in the 11' minute, I think a YC for stopping a promising attack / reckless should have issued, however it didn't look to be a very big miss in the context of a very quiet first part of the game.

The referee kept in applying his style in 31', when again there was a good warning in the midfield. A good advantage in 34' is worthy of being mentioned as well. 

A small point for improvement a few minutes before half time, in 42', when a player from Turkey was hit on head by opponent after an accidental collision, referee didn't stop the game, however Turkey started a counterattack and they were immediately close to score.

Second half was absolutely a very calm affair until minute 70', in which cards started to be issued, for a very clear reckless infringement. Very well seen by referee.

To follow, after this YC in 70', other three disciplinary sanctions:

74' YC for holding a player from behind in a very blatant way (UB), absolutely correct

76' YC for a foul at the edge of penalty area, impeding the progress of opponent, clear SPA

77' YC for protest for the aforementioned penalty incident

After that, the game came easily to an end, without significant issues for the referee, who showed always his presence, and this was the key of his success. 

Apart from these incidents there weren't situations in which referee could have booked players, and / or particular issues. 

Assistant referees were rarely challenged, 2 offside calls in the game, but replays were not shown, we should trust them, both with a normal difficulty. 

Balance: Not a very challenging game but referee showed his presence when needed and this was the only important thing in this game. Key minutes in second half were appropriately managed with 4 correct yellow cards. 

I think that overall an appointment in KO stage could be justified, looking back at his first game, Spain - Sweden, in which he was good as well, he can keep the chance.

Report by Chefren

Balance

For what it is worth, I totally chime with HowardMaxi's view on the red card to Ethan Ampadu - this is a decision worthy of praise. I don't really understand why we should look for reasons to spare him when:

- his challenge is obviously not an attempt for the ball, but to hurt his opponent

- the amount of force used his totally unnecessary; Ampadu tries to maximise as much damage as he can do, look at his movement after the challenge

- there is at least a medium amount of force used against Bernadeschi's ankle / leg

- Ampadu's whole attitude in this scene is very aggressive, just a quick escape where he tries to cause the maximum damage, 'knowing' he was only going to be shown the yellow card


This is nothing other than a brave and unpopular, excellent decision in my book. 

It makes me sad that the consensus is to only reluctantly support this call - Hațegan put his tournament on the line, it would have been so much easier to try and get away with a yellow card, but instead he took the braver call, the decision he thought was right.

Maybe I'm relatively alone, but I would like to unequivocally say - well done Ovidiu Hațegan for this red card decision. Furthermore, I would also praise Slavko Vinčić for his play on decision at 77' - Xhaka puts his leg across, so the correct outcome is no call. 

Overall, I think we had one stronger expected level performance and another which was more decent on Sunday, but in general another good day for this EURO and officiating, in which the officials sent a clear marker as to what the tournament line is regarding Serious Foul Play. 


Refereeing highlights:

Italy - Wales

Switzerland - Turkey