ned por oliver

7/27/2019 Ned Por Oliver

1/5

The Third Teamfootballrefereeing.blogspot.com

The 3rd Team Referee Observers Report

UEFA Under-19 European Championship

Group Stage, MD2

(NED) Netherlands 1:4 Portugal (POR)

23/07/2013, 15:30 CET Alytus (LTU)

Goals scored: 0:1 Guedes 32, 0:2 L. Silva 77, 0:3 Horta 87, 0:4 Guedes 89, 1:4 Vloet 90+1

Match Officials Name NAT Mark Mark* Difficulty

Referee Michael Oliver ENG 8.4 0.0 Normal

Assistant Referee 1 Dermot Broughton IRL 8.3 0.0 Normal

Assistant Referee 2 Stelios Nikita CYP 8.3 0.0 Normal

Fourth Official Sergejus Slyva LTU 8.0 0.0 Normal

UEFA Referee Observer Kyros Vassaras GRE

UEFA Delegate Christian Teinturier FRA

Blog Observer Niclas E GER * mark without crucial mistake (7.8/7.9)

Evaluation Scale (applicable for referee and assistant referees only)* Level of Difficulty

9.0 10.0 Excellent. Normal: Normal match for the officials, fewchallenging situations8.5 8.9 Very good. Important decision(s) correctly taken.

8.3 8.4 Good. Expected level. Quite Challenging: Difficult match with somedifficult decisions for the officials8.2 Satisfactory with small areas for improvement.

8.0 8.1 Satisfactory with important areas for improvement. Very Challenging: Very difficult match withmany difficult situations for the officials7.9 One clear and important mistake, otherwise 8.3 or above.

7.8 One clear and important mistake, otherwise 8.0 8.2.

7.5 7.7Below expectation, poor control, significant point(s) forimprovement.

Additional Time

First half 1 Second half 3

*Expected level for fourth official: 8.0

7.0 7.4Disappointing. Below expectation with one and clear importantmistake or a performance with two or more clear and importantmistakes.

6.0 6.9 Unacceptable.

Disciplinary Home Team Disciplinary Away Team

Minute Card Player Misconduct Classification Minute Card Player Misconduct Classification

35 YC 17 Unsporting behaviour (UB) 34 YC 5 Unsporting behaviour (UB)

42 YC 10 Unsporting behaviour (UB)

54 YC 8 Unsporting behaviour (UB)

Description of the match:

Second matchday at the finals of 2013 UEFA Under-19 European Championship staged in Lithuania. Netherlands andPortugal met each other in to fight for an optimum position in the standings of Group A prior to the last group stagematchday deciding on the teams that will qualify for the semifinals. Although Portugal gained advantage by a deservedgoal in the first half rewarding the Iberian team for their offensive alignment, the Netherlands came back but found no wayto score a goal in the early second half. The final result of 1:4 therefore is no real mirror of the match or relative strength ofboth sides.The match was characterized by a decent level of fairplay so that the match officials faced a difficulty that can be classifiedas normal.


2/5


REFEREE

1 Application and interpretation of the Laws of the Game / match control, tactical approach and management of thegame with the special situation(s) of the minute(s):

Comments:The referee of the game, English Michael Oliver, showed a strong application and interpretation of the Laws of the Game.Foul detection and line of decision-taking were both good and fully met the requirements of the match. The refereewhistled 24 fouls, a number that was enough for this match and represents the decent level of fairplay in the match.His awareness for rather technical Laws of the Game became visible when he insisted on the appropriate application ofLaw 16 in the 14

thminute.

The referee chose a passive approach at the beginning of the match and offered the players some room to prosper play.When infringements occurred, he showed no hesitation to punish them with the suitable means (free kicks etc.). Histactical approach hence suited to the match and was well accepted by the players he had full control for 90 minutes.The referee dealt with the advantage rule in a very good fashion. One must highlight an incident in the 24

thminute where

he detected an infringement, applied the advantage rule and whistled to award a free kick with some delay as soon as hehad recognized there would not be a promising or profitable advantage.

Additional time was by the way well chosen in both halves.

Minute Description of the situation

14Correctly advised the Dutch goalkeeper to repeat the goalkick, because a team-mate had touched the ballbefore it left the penalty area. He well insisted on Law 16 here.

24Correctly applied the advantage rule when POR #8 was fouled by NED #25 first waited for an advantage andwhen the ball reached an unprofitable position close to the corner flag, he awarded a free kick with some delay.Good management.

2 Disciplinary control, management of players and team officials (bench) with the special situation(s) of theminute(s):

Comments:Based on a well-chosen tactical approach (see in 1), the referee had a clear line in terms of his disciplinary control. He didnot tolerate tactical fouls and issued all four yellow cards for this reason. POR #5 had committed a tactical foul around themidfield circle and received a mandatory caution due to that. Same goes for NED #17 who stopped a counterattack in atoo reckless manner. Also in minute 42, POR #10 was booked for the same offense. A rougher challenge happened in the54

thminute when POR #8 tried to gain the ball with a (mistimed) sliding tackle from the front and solely hit the opponent.

Reckless and dangerous foul. That was a very clear yellow card which was really necessary also as kind of signal that thereferee does not accept such tackles. He undermined this call by a small verbal warning so that he seemed to be aware ofthe danger this tackle could have aroused.The referee however missed a mandatory yellow card for delaying the re-start of play in the 77

thminute: POR #18 kicked

the ball away shortly but clearly after a whistle for a free kick. The scoring line was 0:2 so it was clear this was a method towaste some time. He did not even talk to the player and should show more alertness here in his coming matches.


77Kicking the ball away (POR #18) went unbooked. Mandatory yellow card missed for delaying the re-start ofplay. The referee should at least have warned the player verbally.

3 Physical Condition:

Very good

Positioning and Movement:

+ Expected -

X --- --- Always close to the play, follows play at all times, and does not interfere with play

--- X --- Flexible diagonal system


3/5


--- X --- Able to anticipate the action

--- X --- Enters the penalty area when necessary

--- X --- Efficient positioning at set pieces / dead ball (e.g. corner-kick, free-kick, goal-kick)

Please describe any special situation(s) with indication of the minute(s) mandatory if you tick - (negative point) in one of

the above boxes:


Full time

The referee showed a very good level of fitness displayed in various quick counterattacks. The match was notthat demanding under the physical aspect though, but he really made the impression he can easily deal withmore challenging matches in future. He had a very good positioning on the basis of a good and anticipativefootwork.

4 Co-operation with assistant referees, additional assistant referees (where applicable) and fourth official:

The referee relied on his assistant referees in some moments and situations that occurred in their immediate area ofvicinity. However, the match did not reveal remarkable incidents that could have demanded some obvious teamwork. It

seemed all right.

5 Personality:

In this particular match, the referee did not have to apply very much personality as the number of verbal warnings wasquite low. He presented himself as focused official who does not smile that much (also becoming visible at the coin-toss orshake-hands after the national anthems). He could be a bit more relaxed here on the other hand, this might have alsosupported him in keeping the match control high.

6 General comments, advice on performance and personality:

He was not so much challenged so that real points for improvement were not visible, some minor things should beimproved though. One of them is the way how he issues cards. It is unnecessary to first write the offenders down in thebook and to then raise the card aloft. More swiftly showing the card may avoid protests or conflicts e.g. with players whodemand a yellow card to the opponent.Overall a really good and promising performance in this sonorous but in the end totally fair match. He may have a lot ofhopes to handle a third match at this tournament.

7 Points discussed in the report:

Positive points: 1) Application (Law 16) and interpretation (foul criteria) of the Laws of the Game.

2) Consistency in punishing tactical fouls with necessary cautions.

3) Advantage rule.

4) Positioning play.

Points for improvement: 1) Awareness for mandatory cautions due to delaying the re-start of play.

2) The way how he issues yellow cards can be improved (see 6).

3)He might deploy a slightly more friendly and relaxed body language and playermanagement.


4/5


ASSISTANT REFEREE 1

8 Assistant referees performance (please mention some important decisions with reference to the minute):


+ Expected -

--- X --- Correct offside decisions and good application of the wait and see technique

--- X --- Good positioning and movement

--- X --- Adequate alertness and good co-operation with the referee

--- X --- Reaction to incidents within his vicinity

--- X --- Efficient control at set pieces / dead ball (e.g. corner-kick, free-kick, goal-kick)

Comments:The first assistant referee, Irish Dermot Broughton, made a mentally alert impression as long as he was captured by the

TV cameras. A lack of replays in minute 89, but an onside call made preceding the 0:4 goal in this minute was the onlyremarkable call I can report. Good performance in an easy match for him.

Please describe any special situation(s) with indication of the minute(s)mandatory if you tick - (negative point) in one ofthe above boxes:


.

ASSISTANT REFEREE 2

9 Assistant referees performance (please mention some important decisions with reference to the minute):


+ Expected -

--- X --- Correct offside decisions and good application of the wait and see technique

--- X --- Good positioning and movement

--- X --- Adequate alertness and good co-operation with the referee

--- --- X Reaction to incidents within his vicinity

--- X --- Efficient control at set pieces / dead ball (e.g. corner-kick, free-kick, goal-kick)

Comments:Overall Stelios Nikita had a more challenging match than his team-mate on the other sideline. Good onside decisionsfacilitating two goal attempts by the Portuguese team in minutes 25 and 30. Some confusion in minute 56 (see below), apoint to improve became visible here. Apart from that correct throw-in decisions and everything on expected level.

Please describe any special situation(s) with indication of the minute(s)mandatory if you tick - (negative point) in one ofthe above boxes:


56 Acceptable to abstain from a free kick following an intense duel close to the sideline and to allow play to go on,since the Portuguese defender touched and played the ball first with his sliding tackle. However, then the ARshould have signalized a corner kick goal kick was the wrong decision.


5/5


FOURTH OFFICIAL

0 Comment on the fourth official:

Sergejus Slyva from the hosting nation Lithuania was appointed as fourth official in this match he dealt with all technicalprocedures in the appropriate way.

ned por oliver

Documents