Slavko Vinčić to officiate Belgium - Italy, Quarterfinal of EURO 2020. Let's comment his performance here.
BELGIUM - ITALY
Referee: Slavko Vinčić (SVN)
Assistant Referee 1: Tomaž Klančnik (SVN)
Assistant Referee 2: Andraž Kovačič (SVN)
Fourth Official: Fernando Andrés Rapallini (ARG)
Fifth Official: Juan Pablo Belatti (ARG)
Video Assistant Referee: Bastian Dankert (GER)
Assistant Video Assistant Referee 1: Marco Fritz (GER)
Assistant Video Assistant Referee 2: Christian Gittelmann (GER)
Assistant Video Assistant Referee 3: Pawel Gil (POL)
UEFA Referee Observer: Vitor Melo Pereira (POR)
UEFA Delegate: Charles Schaack (LUX)
All the best for Slavko Vincic, it could be a very hot match.
ReplyDeleteSlavko seems very/extremely concentrated. He run everytime !
ReplyDeleteWith this very special match we might watch the birth of a rising star. Hope so!
ReplyDeleteAgreed ! I hope !
DeleteWe need fresh prince for Rosetti,,other one bothering me because of the fans
DeleteHe is definitely a fresh of breath air but not a rising star, he is 41 years definitely almost too late
DeleteTwo offsides missed by AR2, unluckily. VAR has to intervene.
ReplyDeleteMissed (probably double) offside position by AR2. Correct VAR intervention in 13' disallowing Italy's goal.
ReplyDeleteQuite significant offside missed by AR Kovacic. Good and fast procedure by the VAR team.
ReplyDeleteSpain/ belgium- italy match will be hot match i think,,i wonder that cakir can manage this game?? Will be second spain match İf he handle.is it possible??
ReplyDeleteI see that administrators deleted fake news and slander about Vincic. Are you going to ban this person finally or what?
ReplyDeleteWill there be any South American referees in these last rounds? Is this the first year that they are in the Euros, and why did they start this interesting exchange?
ReplyDeleteThe first time there was an exchange at the Euros was in 2000. Gamal Al Ghandour (Egypt) had two matches, Spain-Norway and Denmark-Czech Republic. For some reason that was the only Euro until this one.
DeleteCorrect YC(2)
ReplyDeleteTwo or three offsides in the same position. At least the first one was not that difficult.
ReplyDeleteIt was confirmed that the Bonucci offside was the one that was punished.
DeleteChiellini was offside at first also
DeleteYes but it was the Bonucci offside that was punished. Did you not see the Image of the VAR offside lines?
DeleteTwo yellow cards in a few minutes, but I noticed that Vinčić is feeling under pressure. Too late the second YC and after many complaints by Italian players. You can see this is the most important and very likely challenging game of his career so far... would have been better to issue second card immediately! But basically, correct decisions, of course.
ReplyDeleteMost important, he made correct decision .
DeleteI definitely thought the same. Both YCs were correct but I had the impression that Vincic wanted to warn, not caution the BEL-player. It did not look great, I hope he is able to ignore that players from both teams try to influence him.
DeleteWith pressure...
DeleteTwo correct YCs (20' / 21'). Sensible choices by Vincic to keep the - potentially heated - duel cool from the beginning.
ReplyDeleteWhat an advantage played by Vincic. Great!!!!
ReplyDeleteDid he make advantage gesture? I missed it.
DeleteYes he did. One handed advantage.
DeleteNo
DeleteU watc another game i think where is the advantage???
DeleteHe showed advantage with one of his hands. I saw that clearly on replay from sky-cam.
DeletePretty sure not an advantage. The ball was going towards centre of the pitch, so there is no way to apply advantage over whistling a PK.
DeleteWatching the replay you can see that Vincic makes a gesture, but its definitely not an advantage gesture, but rather "get up". Not to mention at the time of the gesture there is no indication that an advantage should be given rather than a penalty
DeleteNope he said to Italian player get up with his arm.
DeleteNow possible penalty before goal, we will never know :)
ReplyDeleteİmmobile happy :))
DeleteI like how the "injured" player quickly gets up when they score the goal!
DeleteYes me too... great recovery 👍
DeleteVincic is happy also i guess ))
DeletePossible penalty ?
Deletehttps://twitter.com/i/status/1411058050190958592
Great advantage!
ReplyDelete2 correct YC but the 2nd, Vincic was under pression.
Good performance for the moment!
Very good performance so far. Great the 2 YC
ReplyDeletefor me it is unbelievable how vincic's movements and gestures match those of skomina. if you can't see the referee's face you could think it's skomina on the court
ReplyDeleteYes, if it's up to performance, Vincic is a favorite for the finals with Cakir.Good
DeleteFull agree ! Vincic = Skomina 2.0
DeletePenalty, wrong decision for me.
ReplyDeleteI strongly disagree with Vincic here, I think he perceived a contact with the foot the attacker he got stuck in the ground. That is the reason for the attacker's fall. There is a slight push but not enough. However, VAR cannot do a lot here. However, if Vincic said "contact with attacker's foot", VAR should have intervened because of the wrong perception.
DeleteVincic won't have an easy game from now...
Supportable penalty to Belgium in my opinion, but not a very clear one.
ReplyDeleteNever a penalty
DeleteGood Penalty
ReplyDeleteAhh no penalty here…
ReplyDeleteGood PK, well done Vincic
ReplyDeleteI don't like the Italians surrounding the referee like that!!!
ReplyDeleteI don’t like a referee who gives such a penalty. De gustibus…
DeleteYou can dislike the decision but you can never disrespect a referee because you don't like how he referees. I'm Italian and I think that the penalty is light, but still supportable, he may have seen contact with the feet but there was also a push. In any case, I noticed that only Italian player protests in this way and it's the fault of our mentality! It's always the referee's fault for us ... Too easy!
DeleteWell, I’m not Italian, but I still disagree with such a penalty. VAR can’t intervene, it’s true, but it’s very soft
DeleteNow clear penalty by Vincic.
ReplyDeleteClear shove, I agree, PENALTY.
DeleteToo aggressive with hand. Clear push. Right decission.
ReplyDeleteSoft penalty, but not wrong.
ReplyDeleteVery soft penalty but no VAR stuff.
ReplyDeleteFor me thats not a PK however if you see the push one can give it. Rather wrong for me though
ReplyDeleteYes, Belgium player baited Italian player to make contact, and you can see Italian players forearm come away from his body for the push, so somewhat easy and correct call.
ReplyDeleteClear penality. The arm of Di Lorenzo has pushed the opponent
ReplyDeleteMoving at that pace it's a deliberate push that's enough to foul him. Good decision imo
ReplyDeleteGood penalty decision for me. No call would have been maybe supportable too, but penalty is the better decision. It’s a clear push in the back.
ReplyDeleteNever a PK....extremely soft.
DeleteFor me NEVER a PK, just a little pushing, no more contact. Not the first strange foul detection in this game, now tragically in the box. Vincic trying to reach 12o%, nervous and now a crucial mistake.
ReplyDeleteI agree with the penalty, but that badgering by the Italians is unacceptable. Once again, referees must give the YC for ‘mobbing’ the referee (a form of “dissent”), in line with UEFA guidance. It was really persistent, and continued throughout the VAR check and at half time. It’s clearly excessive.
ReplyDelete+1
DeleteVery soft penalty IMO. If italy losed today Vincic will have trouble.
ReplyDeleteSupportable penalty, never intervention.
ReplyDeleteIf this is PK, them you can give 5-6 PKs almost every game.
ReplyDeleteI actually think that the PK decision is a very good one. The defender loses position and impedes the attacker from progressing with an active push with the left arm.
ReplyDeleteManuel Gräfe, German TV referee expert, assessed the decision as too hard, but as not clearly wrong enough for the VAR.
Otherwise, convincing display by Vincic in the first half IMO.
+1
DeleteThe other situation mentioned by Gräfe was the Immobile v Courtois incident flagged by AR2 (33'), which he also assessed as too soft.
DeleteNo PK, a little bit of contact should be allowed and DiLorenzo did so well within his right
ReplyDeleteI hope that UEFA now recognize that Bastian Dankert should never have a VAR game internationally. Apart of this laughable penalty Vincic strong presence and connection with players.
ReplyDeleteI don't know what you have against Dankert but this is never VAR stuff. You can see in the comments that this penalty can be given.
DeleteI think, it's the other way 'round. If he intervened, Dankert's decision would have been rejected by the commitee. Surely no VAR material.
DeleteI don’t agree with PK either but it’a never VAR stuff.
DeleteIt's a soft but supportable penalty imo. There's nothing Dankert can do. So please stop with disrespectful comments like this.
DeleteI think a lot of people have forgotten the point of VAR. It is not there to rereferee decisions and it should stay that way. It’s for clear errors not judgement calls.
DeleteGood decision. After first replay i thought is wrong, but in the end the push is clear.
ReplyDeleteSoft penalty,,second half will be hard for Slovenian
ReplyDeleteLet’s remember that Lahoz and Turpin were sent home because of similar penalties. IMO this one will not be accepted by committee also.
ReplyDeletePenalty is supportable but very soft, however this is not the main point if we want to analyze first half. I think that Vinčić is definitely feeling too much pressure in this game, also, the way he whistled penalty, not natural, a bit delayed (but surely in that position no help by any teammate). I noticed the same when he issued second yellow card. I think that he is worried to take wrong decisions, and this isn't helping him. It is something mental. I hope that in second half he can re-start with a free mind. Not relaxed, but firm and composed. The game is very challenging and it is his first very big test, this is more than noticeable.
ReplyDeleteYes, but we should notice that his performance is on level of 8,7 at least.
DeleteOn the penalty, do you not think he took a second to evaluate the point of contact and be certain of the decision?
DeleteI fully agree. He looked concentrated but also stressed in my view, I had the same feeling in terms of the second YC. But the decisions were fine. I am not too sure whether Vincic whistle the penalty for the slight push, he could also have perceived a contact with the attacker's foot as it looked a bit strange. I think this was also the reason why the attacker fell down. UEFA said several times, they want to have clear penalties, clear sent-offs. Unfortunately, we have two big decisions today with possible influence on the result, that were (very) soft.
DeletePraise for the penalty. There was a very good position for making a decision. Maybe now fussiness and worries will go away.
ReplyDeleteSupportable PK but I think it won't be praised by UEFA.
ReplyDeleteRosetti said that Committee didn't want soft/cheap PKs.
Soft penalty is the right term here... I think Rosetti is not very happy with this decission... It is true that the defender was active with his Hans, but still not very clear...
ReplyDeletehand*
DeleteIMO excellent Vincic in first 44 minutes with great presence on the pitch and excellent foul detection and card management but at the end very soft penalty
ReplyDeleteI feel Vincic perceived a contact with the foot and thought 2ice befor blowing and of course he would have told VAR what he had seen which made it a long time to confirm and it was the upper body foul which I feel Vincic should have gone to check and still probably stick with PK but with the low level tolerance for interventions it was supportable
ReplyDeleteAgree but as you mentioned for me this is not the problem when the decisions are ok which were in 1st half.
ReplyDeleteDi Lorenzo clearly pushed Doku so there was no choice for VAR.
ReplyDeleteBy the way Doku shamelessy dived...
Soft but supportable penalty, if Vincic will mantain the same line throughout the whole match then i have no complaint.
But he didn’t, see 57’ De Bruyn on Jorginho...
DeleteMinute 35 and Some guys says Vincic favourite for the final :))) calm down guys he need more experience,,he cant manage pressure yet..
ReplyDeleteVery cheap PK. Better not to give.. however VAR have to support the light push. Let’s hope for Vincic that Italy won’t loose.
ReplyDeleteAs mentioned earlier, the pen is soft and a little harsh. But it is also supportable as a 'shove'.
ReplyDeleteAnd for me, there is nothing wrong with the Italian players protesting since the pen is clearly debatable, and they are within their rights to try and convince the VAR intervene.
And credit to Bonucci, Verrati and Chiellini who both made sure the protest didn't go overboard.
And it's also a good decision by the ref not to issue a YC for dissent. He displayed a good sense of emotional intelligence, in understanding that at this stage of the competition, conceding a pen can be a very emotional experience for players.
Tough 2nd half coming up for Vincic. I wish him well.
I think the pk is less dubious than thaz given by Lahoz, but still not expected by UEFA.
ReplyDeleteI think the same it is completely different situation compared to Lahoz, different position, speed, agressivnesd
ReplyDelete57' I agree with Vinčić, no penalty. In this case he looked very convinced! Good!
ReplyDeleteI respectfully disagree, it was a light contact (as i stated NOT a penalty imho) but if you raise a low bar then you should check every light contact....
DeleteRoberto, you can be sure there was a silent VAR check but after 1 replay it was clear that this cannot be a clear penalty.
DeleteI agree that it wasn't a penalty but there wasn't the time for a review. After just a few seconds BEL lost possession and closing the VAR window.
DeleteI disagree Roberto, VAR cannot take into account the bar of the referee to call fouls. VAR van only take action in case of clear and obvious errors or (missed incidents). It’s the responsibility of the on-field referee to have a clear and logical line in foul detection/selection.
DeleteSo was it the right call? Yes absolutely but Vincic took a risk...
DeleteI admit my mistake: i thought Vincic was too casually dismissing the episode risking to loose credibility.
DeleteIn the end he was right and i was obviously wrong...
57’ no PK? Is there a push from De Bruyn on Jorginho from behind or not? I think there is, then Jorginho lets himself go to the ground, exactly like Doku at 47’. If that is a PK then this is a PK too. Same type of contact. Probably too light contact to be PKs either of them. Very inconsistent Vincic, different bar for the two actions, not worth refereeing Euro quarter final.
DeleteHe will not referee anymore in this tournament I am afraid.
As i stated it wasn't a penalty, there was a light contact and then Jorginho dived.
DeleteImho it was in the same class of soft penalty of Doku (given) and Immobile (ignored) so it makes a questionable choice...
Both with the late first half PK here and with Oliver’s red card, we have two decisions that are normally at least supportable (I would just call them patently correct), but which don’t jive with the apparent lenient line that UEFA has seemingly instructed their referees to take with these big calls…I can’t criticize the referees but I don’t think UEFA will be happy with today’s events.
ReplyDeleteImho not a penalty on Jorginho, but after the first penalty not even a check??
ReplyDeleteAs i said i appreciate consistency....
61’ good advantage played
ReplyDeleteThia match is a little bit big for vincic. Maybe another some easier KO maych would be better. But committee is too busy with their darlings ( kuipers & brych) they don't pay attention to other referees.
ReplyDeleteBig? He is excellent so far, got everything right? Are we watching the same game?
Deleteİ think so bro
DeleteAnd then the anonymous users were asked to show better behavior on the blog…?
Delete:))) fully agree
DeleteYes you are watching the same game, but you have different opinions.
DeletePK decision for BEL is correct. It is a foul in the box therefore penalty. Everything else has been correct by Vincic
DeleteCorrect verbal warning for Vermaelen and Insigne.
ReplyDeleteMissed YC, Vincic was right to let Italy continue but at the end of the action he should have carded Hazard...
ReplyDeleteIn what langage, Vincic and Rapallini speak together ? English ? Spanish ?
ReplyDeleteEnglish.
DeleteCorrect YC for Berardi (distance not respected)
ReplyDeleteFollowed up with a non-existent foul on the goalkeeper.
DeleteI disagree Wetsel tried carelessy to play a ball he couldn't reach...
DeleteThe goalkeeper collided with his own player who had jumped behind Witsel and ended up taking the ball on his hand instead of into his gloves, hurting himself in the process.
DeleteDonnarumma tried to catch the ball over the head of Chiellini, Witsel collided with both italian players with no chance to play the ball so it was a foul.
DeleteWe should remember that
What a lot of time wasting this second half. Only 5 minutes of extra time
ReplyDeleteyes bro
DeleteMissed YC for Witsel and free-kick for Italy in 90'. 5 minutes additional time is definitely not enough. Should have been at least 7 minutes. German commentators are harshly criticising Vincic, I do not agree with that but not the best impression at the end.
ReplyDeleteSame kind of words were said by romanian commentators about Vincic. For me, he was good, maybe great, until Spinazolla's injury. After that I was not convinced anymore.
Delete5 minutes extra time, are you kidding me? Just 6-7 minutes for spinazzola’s injury. Mamma mia!
ReplyDelete5 minutes clear mistake by Vincic, this is something very factual, it should have been 6 or 7. And now not even playing since 3 minutes and even before 90:00. Let's see when he will make final whistle.
ReplyDeleteSpinnazola and Chadli was almost 5 minutes. Why is this always in the benefit of the leading team. 7-8 minutes at least mandatory
ReplyDeleteI don't like the deliberate time wasting of the Italians.
ReplyDeletePoor Vincic today. Whistles almost every contact for a foul. Also very bad managing skills. Seems to hesitate a lot and is really falling for the Italian drama.
ReplyDeleteThis match is way too much for Vincic, but I knew that before the match started.
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH
DeleteSlavko Vincic seemed inclined throughout the game to blow often soft fouls in favour of Italy a lot of the time when he could have really played on.
ReplyDeleteI can’t wait Mario van de Ende publish the amount of actual game time. I expect a shocking total.
ReplyDeleteCan I see this in internet?
DeleteHis Twitter account published this statistics after each Matchday. Follow him and you’ll see some information
DeleteMasterclass performance by Vincic!
ReplyDeleteHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
DeleteCry me a river
DeleteGood bye Daniele Orsato.
ReplyDeleteHello Danny Makkelie & Cuneyt Çakır for SF !
IMO only that additional time in 2nd half was the real problem, at least 2 or 3 minutes more should be played. But despite that Vincic was solid IMO.
ReplyDeleteAgreed!
Delete8.2 performance for me. Expected and acceptable with some points of improvement (foul detection, time management).
ReplyDeleteI think Vincic will get a 4th official appointment in SF/Final.
Short summary:
ReplyDelete- 1' – around 25': two correct YCs, Vincic seemed a bit impressed by the match, he did not look convincing
- 25'- 44': solid, nothing to report.
- 45': penalty given, too soft for me, VAR was right to support
- 46'–85': overall solid, correctly rejected a penalty appeal by Italy
- 85'–end: a bit disappointing end, did not intervene against time waisting, additional time was not enough, a lot of free-kicks for Italy were too easy, he did not seem to be in control.
-> Overall, it was an important experience for Vincic, some parts of the game were good, however, the penalty definitely was not the better decision (and I am sure UEFA did not want to have a penalty for that). I was not fully convinced by Vincic but I am not as harsh as German commentators who were heavily criticising Vincic for his performance.
*wasting, sorry.
DeleteI partially agree with your ideas.
DeleteI think that a soft penalty inevitabily led to a lot of soft free kick (not only for Italy).
Probably Vincic failed to shift gear and be more assertive during the last 30'.
What did i dislike? Well the dangerous use of hands and elbows by a few players (chiefly Witsel) and the excessive delays.
I also think Vincic missed a couple of YC.
Overall a somewhat good performance for 60' marred by a few mistakes and the inability to be more forceful in the last minutes.
Assuming Kuipers is kept for the Final, there is no much names to be appointed in the middle of Spain-Italy, which will be the hottest game of the tournament IMO.
ReplyDeleteBrych would be a great choice theoretically, but almost impossible after his display in PORBEL.
Considering the no penalty call in TURITA has been assessed as a crucial mistake, I don't Think Makkelie would be appointed again in a game involving Italy.
Taylor is a possible name, but will be automatically ruled out if England makes it to the SF.
Other performers in the tournament like Karasev, Siebert and Rapallini won't be considered by committee (the latter is actually a great choice with experience in hot games in South American football, but his confederation will be the argument against him in the end).
Considering Turpin's performance in RUSDEN was rejected by UEFA, and Mateu being out because of Spain (independently of how he performed), UEFA lacks a big name ATM, a referee like Skomina, which is unfortunately injured, is a asset UEFA miss.
Other referees just aren't experienced yet or not good enough(although I'd argue Hategan could be a possibility, which fades away considering what the committee thought about his SFP call in GS.)
In fact, the only name who has enough experience/trust, coupled with good performances is Cakir, with would be again appointed for a SF atfer GS like WC14 and WC18.
Btw Cakir had Spain-Italy in the R16 at the Euro 2016
Delete... and we all know what happened in that match that ended his participation at Euro 2016.
DeleteYes, the performance was not great, but one can’t forget that he was very busy in that season in the club competitions, e.g. 2 semifinals in UCL and he came very tired to the Euro in France, but I think he is the man that can manage the pressure that comes from media this time , and deliver a good performance.
DeleteVinčić won this match as a protege of UEFA leadership. But there were no bad decisions, penalty was correct, players themselves controlled game.
ReplyDeleteI don’t think that Makkelie will have the semifinal. Why not a surprise referee. By the way, the former head of romanian referee, Ion Crăciunescu, talked about Hațegan that he could have an important game. Maybe the second semifinal because is less sonorous than Spain vs Italy. My predictions are Çakır for the big clash, and Hațegan for England/Ukraine vs Czech vs Denmark. Why not Makkelie for the final?
ReplyDeleteLast tournament for Kuipers. UEFA will get him for the final, as a present of his career
DeleteI could see the committee throwing us a surprise that Hategan has been saved for a SF rather than out of the tournament after the GS. I like Hategan and would be very happy with this reality.
DeleteI do suspect that we will see some surprise in the SF's... the easy predictions are Makkelie, Kuipers, Cakir... I think one of the semifinals may give us someone from off our radar.
@Giovanni you don't give someone a final as a present... you give it to the best referee. And right now, that is not Kuipers. Makkelie or Cakir deserve the final; in my opinion, it should be Cakir's.
@smala017: Everybody who watched last seasons knows that Bjorn is not the best referee on this tournament... But that's also truth that the final is not always for the best: a lot of political reasons and so...
DeleteFor SF there are more possible names: maybe Kuipers (if not the final for him), also Makkelie, Cakir, Karasev, Rappalini, Vincic, maybe Hategan, or Taylor, if Ukraine win against England...
And of course Siebert would deserve one more game.
DeleteToday Nijhuis strikes three times; VAR, AVAR were sleeping in the Switserland - Spain match (never a red card, VAR must intervene) and the penalty for Belgium was total wrong for this UEFA referee. Also he mentioned that Cakir will never have the final because the president of the UEFA is angry. Also last week he mentioned that Cakir used hairpiece. During UEFA courses everybody was laughing. What a information he spreads around, unprofessional.
ReplyDeleteNijhuis will continue to spread this BS as long as people like you will react on it. Nijhuis is purely there to talk our Dutchies into the final and to discredit the competition. Its not worth reacting on that here and it doesnt deserve any attention
DeleteAnd in the first two points you mention i think he has valid points.
I didn't see SWI-SPA but in BEL-ITA VAR couldn't change the penalty call: Di Lorenzo clearly pushed Doku, the entity of the contact is a subjective decision of the referee.
DeleteNijhuis sounds very unpleasant to me, and I personally think it’s morally wrong for current / ex referees, teammates of the referees, to make money by going on TV to criticise colleagues. They have the right obviously, but not nice. Just my view.
DeleteThe Çakır comments are sick - personally making fun of a former colleague just to get a cheap laugh on television. Criticising decisions is one thing but that is well, well past the line. Nijhuis should be absolutely ashamed of himself.
DeleteMaybe just because he never reached that level on refereeing he feels jelaous and try to make fun of him in a stupid way.
DeleteItaly-Spain for Kuipers, the other HF for Brych, Final for Cakir.
ReplyDeleteHahah lol.
DeleteI think these sf appointments are almost impossible, given that both refs have qfs just days before the sfs. Brych or kuipers in the final - maybe. But I am all but sure none of them will get a sf, no matter how well they perform on saturday
Delete