The Brazilian referee, in charge of the first Round of 16, will be at his third match at World Cup. Kick-off for KO stage and let's follow him here.
NETHERLANDS - USA
Referee: Wilton Sampaio (BRA)
Assistant Referee 1: Bruno Boschilia (BRA)
Assistant Referee 2: Bruno Pires (BRA)
Fourth Official: Andrés Matonte (URU)
Reserve Assistant Referee: Nicolas Taran (URU)
Video Assistant Referee: Nicolas Gallo (COL)
Assistant Video Assistant Referee: Juan Soto (VEN)
Offside Video Assistant Referee: Ashley Beecham (AUS)
Support Video Assistant Referee: Mauro Vigliano (ARG)
Standby Assistant Video Assistant Referee: Jerson Emiliano Dos Santos (ANG)
Analysis of GHAURU
ReplyDelete(I post it here as believe people will be quite interested in this match/performance? :))
(1/3)
DeleteFIFA set Daniel Siebert up to fail yesterday (my feeling is Rapallini too but let’s see if he gets sth now). At (almost) every World Cup, there comes a game where they decide to ‘sacrifice’ a referee - appointing someone less at the TOP than a game *probably* required, instead giving it to someone whom they know will still (probably) do a decent job, but then their WC can end when they inevitably become “damaged goods” and the higher-rated officials can pass through with an easier route to bigger things. The youthful-looking Berliner heading Germany’s officials crew at this tournament fulfilled that role yesterday, when FIFA decided to ‘discard’ him on the ‘historic’ Ghana vs. Uruguay tie, whose result ultimately dumped both WC2010 quarterfinalists out of the competition at the final whistle.
Siebert — who was bang on the money in all three key PAI scenes (clips below) — had performed well in a technically quite challenging TUNAUS in order to earn the ‘honour’ of handing ‘the Suárez derby’, and was visibly a bit nervous at the start of GHAURU in my opinion. The most obvious signal in this direction was completely missing the reckless ‘foot-down’ foul of Kudus in the first forty seconds: this wasn’t really that far from SFP. Only by intuition did Siebert give a freekick at all. The idea that the German can’t handle challenging matches or even more amusingly, wasn’t prepared for this game(!!), is absurd - but his impression from the start wasn’t really that good either (shy?).
The game was on fire from the start and Siebert had the misfortune that his linesman Seidel wrongly perceived the offside position of Ayew, and so Ghana’s penalty was awarded only after OFR (which he started to run to in the wrong direction… -> on edge :/). Rightly so, there was never a touch on the ball by the ‘keeper, only Kudus prodding the football forward himself. A clear foul, the attacker was too clever. The behaviour of the Uruguay players after the award (and indeed also after the save…) was terrible - but, that doesn’t mean that Siebert managed it well either, giving the impression (fairly), that he wasn’t really in control over the events in this match.
The bigger problem for Siebert is not that Valverde wasn’t punished for screaming at him, but that Valverde did it at all. Football refereeing is a catholic world of personalities, and Daniel Siebert isn’t Mateu, Orsato on a FORMAT level - neither of whom Valverde would have shouted at in the first place. Remember - Mark Geiger said it took him OVER-A-YEAR to recover from ‘that Gold Cup semifinal’, and Siebert faced a similar event in the last twelve months (Atlético), PLUS an injury too. In Siebert’s position he had the choices: a) try to punish Valverde and threaten to lose control of the game because you aren’t in the top form, or b) go more down the ‘turn a blind eye’ route (and btw we don’t know what happened off camera, maybe Siebert did warn Valverde, I looked hard for a ‘I filmed the penalty save on my phone’ YouTube video, but I couldn’t find anything). Siebert chose a). Not optimal, but I think you can *understand* him. Again though: that doesn’t make it proficient refereeing either.
(2/3)
DeleteThe rest of the 1H was on a relatively shaky but still decent-enough level. The game calmed itself down after the penalty freneticness (not before very chaotic play on at 21’ and the manager difusing a contretemps himself at 22’…), but quite a key moment was 30’ IMO - a very deliberate and reckless charge by Bentancur should have resulted in a caution for the Uruguay player, their second after Núñez was well-sanctioned in the penalty aftermath. Again, like Rapallini, the variables “avoiding cautions at this WC” and “simply poor form and not wanting to take the intiative in my games” are both at play. In any case, the players headed the message of inaction, and a twelve-and-a-half-year wait to recklessly stamp on Súarez immediately followed (31’). The offender, Seidu, as Bentancur was, went unpunished.
Whereas Siebert in the past (2021) excellently used controlled, fierce reactions to keep control, in worse form this time he was a bit shyer, and preferred only to use his physical presence, a tactic together with heavy whistling used to solve a tactial foul at 39’ - a yellow card should have been issued to our friend Valverde instead. Siebert might not have noticed the recklessness of Seidu’s stamp on Súares, but ostensibly De Arrascaeta did: a very reckless (NOT SFP for FIFA - though it should be) ‘foot-down’ stamp on the chest was the Ghanian’s vigilanty punishment at 42’. Like the comparable offence at 1’, it was completely missed by the German officials. It really did feel like it was going to end in a big mess at this point - Salisu cleaned out Súarez with a standing foul from behind seconds later, and Siebert now trying to use his personality skills as infrequently as possible (form), he unconvincingly just stood between Ghana and Uruguay players, hoping they wouldn’t fight each other. They didn’t, and nor did they after another late+deliberate foul by Ghana at 44’, but it was really only just that Siebert ’landed the plane’ and got the game to halftime.
The match was much calmer in the 2H generally speaking, and as Euro Soccer Ref noted, this much coincided with the subbing out of Ghana’s public enemy no.1 in 66’ - but not before the German referee finally won a battle against him, even if he lost the war (39’…). His caution for Súarez for a mini kicking-the-ball away (they got Al Capone on tax evasion) was good, and his facial expression and determination was really excellent there: probably a highlight of Siebert’s MtG performance yesterday, and reminiscent of many firm reactions by the Berlin-based ref in the past. I hope he can return to that form in due course.
The no penalty after OFR was a very good (and refreshing!) call - but wouldn’t it have just been clever to punish the prior handball? I spotted it myself on the French stream live yesterday and the BBC commentators agreed. I think Siebert was 100% right to judge the later tackle as fair, but contrary to the murkier waters of that decision, it *seemed* like Núñez’s prior handling was quite clear, but anyhow, they got it right in the end IMO. As in +93’, a very comparable case to Mateu’s rightful play on in QATECU - Cavani was very desperate and Siebert saw through it. Though his gestures and manner in the second scene were quite exhausted, and probably he could have done better to make a ‘he stepped across’ rather than ‘dive’ gesture. The latter suggested he misread it and I’m sure many experts think he got it wrong…
(3/3)
DeleteThe final remark is about the understandably-technically-risable work of the anonymous fourth official, the Japanese Yamashita. I don’t really blame her for not wanting to ‘take on’ either of these two sides benches, but the carte blanche for their behaviour was really quite terrible (eg. 61’ and 67’ for Ghana). Marinescu ought to have broken protocol and stepped in - probably it would have saved the excesses of the disgraceful Uruguay bench behaviour after FT, having worked themselves up into a fury the whole match through. FIFA might as well have not appointed a fourth official for this game, TBH. And indeed, the final point that Siebert was sacrified: if you they really wanted the German to have the best possible chance of a later game, they wouldn’t have given him Yamashita…
Overall Siebert did okay-enough IMO and his performance should not be rejected because:
- all three penalty scenes solved correctly
- despite not much control over the players actions, he never completely ‘lost it’ at ANY point
- very difficult game (the most difficult of the whole GS)
- like WC1986, ‘the Uruguay factor’ —> hardest team to ref at this WC
This game went EXACTLY as designed by FIFA with regards the refereeing performance with their appointment. Siebert’s Qatari adventure should be over now.
6 - 6 - 7 - (II)
VIDEOS (16’, 57’, +93’):
https://streamable.com/07dg4p
https://streamable.com/6nn14f
https://streamable.com/h92pcq
Thank you so much for your hard work, Mikael (ESR and Upstylon too!). Always a pleasure to read.
DeleteEvery referee would have troubles with Uruquay players in yesterdays's match. It is interesting to imagine for example Lahoz, Makkelie or Elfath there...
DeleteGood spot on the Nunez handball, I never picked up on that. In this sense, it's quite lucky that Siebert rejected the OFR (I thought he should have accepted it, clear penalty IMO), because I don't think Dankert ever realized that there was a handball incident to check...
DeleteMost difficult game of the group stage, though? No, for me it was close but another game on the same day (SRB-SUI) was definitely harder, and a few others were close as well. It is remarkable though, what a Group H we had: every game (besides URU-KOR) presented serious challenges for the referees, what an exciting and challenging group!
On the Valverde incident post-penalty, while I can understand the inaction here, I think your words are not strong enough. Siebert is supposed to be a _referee_, not a spectator. Taking tough decisions and standing up against misbehavior is part of the job. Such clear dissent needs to be punished. What are your thoughts on what happened after the final whistle? Such leniency shown, it is a black eye on our sport...
*besides URU-KOR and KOR-POR
DeleteDominic - thanks! We work very hard to provide sth 'extra' in our analysis posts and receive any compliments gladly :D :P
DeleteKosino - for sure!
Smala -
1) BBC did a 'zoom-in' focus on 57', perhaps it changes your mind? https://streamja.com/625M5
2) Fair!
3) For sure. But we don't live in an 'ideal world' and Siebert was faced with that choice. I'd like to think that in 2021 he'd have taken a better one, but I understand *why* he chose 'b)'. FIFA really did Siebert dirty with this assignment (plan) so the least he could have done to thank them is multiple red cards for Uruguayans after the final whistle...
Btw I genuinely feel quite cheated of that BRAURU clash! It would have offered a chance for a referee to finally access a 9 or even 10 mark again at the WC...
As always, fantastic work on the GHAURU match breakdown Mikael.
DeleteI disagree about the penalty because the touch on the ball is so minimal, and it occurs only after the foul has already been committed IMO.
DeleteDon’t you worry though - we still have a potential Brazil - Argentina semifinal to look forward to!
And the other reports from yesterday's games :)
ReplyDeleteKORPOR (Tello) -
http://law5-theref.blogspot.com/2022/12/games-45-and-46-daniel-siebert-and.html?showComment=1670005845115#c8585500985668269646
CMRBRA (Elfath) -
http://law5-theref.blogspot.com/2022/12/games-47-and-48-fernando-rapallini-and.html?showComment=1670018903579#c6909762421664766631
SRBSUI (Rapallini) -
http://law5-theref.blogspot.com/2022/12/games-47-and-48-fernando-rapallini-and.html?showComment=1670077649342#c32471786773109906
No way that can be a deflection at 20' for that offside call
ReplyDeleteI saw this as well, but no replay was offered and I didn't rewind.
DeleteBut avoiding the word "deflection" will help.
Was the defender in a controlled position/movement to play the ball? Maybe, maybe not. The referee, in these cases, needs to take the lead and communicate to the AR (before a flag) what they think.
I think this is the easiest match for any ref on this WC.
ReplyDeleteResult suggests that trend will continue in the 2nd half.
The Dutch are content to rest and then take advantage of poor marking by US defenders. Makes for easy work for the match officials.
DeleteVery uneventful first half, but at 21', it looked like Pulisic pushed the ball past his defender in the Dutch defensive third, the defender then blocked his path and knocked him down, and there was no call. When a referee misses what appears to be a clear and obvious foul, it shakes one's faith in his abilities. Then, a very small thing is that a foul on a U.S. player at 30' with decent contact elicited the tiniest tweet of a whistle. I like to use the whistle as a tool, with harder fouls eliciting louder whistles. I don't think the second half will be any harder, so Sampaio will probably remain untested in this match.
ReplyDeleteDefinition of nitpicking. About the incident #21, it really is not crystal clear, never a "clear and obvious foul". In England you just don't sanction that at all, by any means. Pulisic sort of forces his body into Dumfries'. If that happened inside the box, you would probably say it is not enough for a penalty.
Delete58' Missed YC for hard kick to Pulisic's knee area led to YC for harder foul on him a minute later.
ReplyDeleteSeriously, any agenda against Sampaio? The Dutch defender does not even touch Pulisic's knee. He lightly hits the shin. Which game are you watching?
DeleteLast game for this ref
ReplyDeleteActually, Sampaio is making the case for SFs.
DeleteMaybe, but not related to his performance more depends on Brazil's progress in the tournament.
DeleteI'd say the SF match that does not involve Brazil.
DeleteWhen your country is in the SF, it is not possible to referee the other SF
DeleteSampaio as sharp as ever. Spot on in denying the Netherlands a PK in 2nd half. Look, it's a guy who's used to officiating in an elite league in Brazil and at Libertadores. Just superb control from the get-go.
ReplyDeleteRemarkable comments thus far I have to say. I have no clue where the critical comments come from, it really feels like nitpicking to me. At the same time excessive praise is exaggerated as well. To me a good, expected level performance in an easy to normal difficulty game (though after the USA goal now things could become more challenging ging).
ReplyDeleteFor the large part correct FK calls and a correct YC (and none missed).
+1
DeleteSome people just like to play referee observer. And some referee observers think it's a game of how many things they can find.
Delete87' - that is a mandatory YC (kick to the knee) and Sampaio immediately gives it. Nothing to with 21'.
ReplyDeletePretty easy game for Sampaio, but still a very good performance. He could be a candidate for a SF but I doubt it considering I predict Brazil to go all the way :)
ReplyDeleteIf Brazil continues to compete (which I think it will) Sampaio would say goodbye with a very good WC, otherwise, another candidate to take into account
ReplyDeleteWhatever happens, congratulations to Sampaio
If this is his last game, Sampaio can be very pleased with his tournament
ReplyDeletePretty easy game of course but, like Taylor the other day, the lack of accountment for added time in added time is frustrating. Sure, it's all academic at that point, but still. This stuff really grinds my gears.
ReplyDeleteAfter watching a couple of games, I can congratulate Brazilian federation for having 2 very good referees. Despite that they have two different styles, both of them work and they are both very talented. As an European who saw them for the first time, maybe I'm wrong, but I sense a better natural authority on the pitch for Claus, he controls better the players; for this reason I slighlty prefere him if I had to choice. I think we'll see one more time a Brazilian crew in this tournament, anyway the Brazilians let a better impression than their Argentinians colleagues overall.
ReplyDeleteAnalysis
ReplyDeleteOverview:
The players didn't challenge Wilton Sampaio this time. He navigated through the game very well, correctly assessing most of the incidents.
Good disciplinary control:
- no need for cards in 14' (careless use of arm by 22NED), 36', 40' (late challenges by 3USA and 2NED)
- good stepped approach in 59' and 60' - still forgiving 4NED's blatant tripping and cautioning 20NED for a similar offence one minute later
- crystal clear YC issued to 21NED for SPA tripping in 87'
- perhaps not the best management of 22USA provoking his opponent close to AR1 in 90+1'.
In addition, well assessed minor penalty appeal in 63' (22NED lost the ball and legs tangled), good teamwork with AR2 assessing play by defender as undeliberate under new instructions (20'), two nice advantages after offside flags by AR2 (71', 90') and very good advantage after a handball offence in 90+4'.
Sampaio handled what was in front of him very well.
Marks:
Wilton Sampaio - 7
Bruno Boschilia - 7
Bruno Pires - 8
Nicolás Gallo - III