UEFA Champions League: Chelsea vs Barcelona

Chelsea FC 1-0 FC Barcelona


Referee
Yellow Cards
2nd Yellow C
Red Cards
Penaltys
 F. Brych
4 (2-2) 


CHELSEA (ENG)

1:0

BARCELONA (ESP)

MATCH FACTS 18 april 2012 • 19:45 local time • Stamford Bridge, London • Attendance: 38.039

Function
 Full Name
Origin
Final Mark*
Referee
Dr. Felix Brych
GER
91,5
Assistant Referee 1
Mike Pickel
GER
85
Assistant Referee 2
Mark Borsch
GER
         90
Fourth Official
Manuel Gräfe
GER
80
Additional Assistant Referee 1
Florian Meyer
GER
         85
Additional Assistant Referee 2
Deniz Aytekin
GER
80
UEFA Delegate
Sune Hellströmer
SWE

UEFA Referee Observer
Jozef Marko
SVK

BLOG Referee Observer
Sander
NED

* Remark: The final marks presented in this ROR have been awarded by the respective BLOG Referee Observer and do not pose an official UEFA evaluation of the respective match official’s performance. THE FINAL MARKS OF THE REFEREE CANNOT BE COMPARED TO THE OTHER OFFICIALS’ ONES, AS THEY ARE RESULTING FROM DIFFERENT EVALUATION SCALES!

Evaluation scale (just giving a short impression of how the officials’ performances were):

Mark
Description
85-10,0
Excellent performance
77-84
Very good performance
70-76
Good performance
64-69
Still a solid performance
55-63
Error-phone performance
45-54
Defective performance
10-44
Inacceptable


Description of the match (including field conditions, weather conditions, match background and importance and difficulty):
First semi final between Chelsea and Barcelona. Two teams with a different style of play. Chelsea defend with 10 players behind the ball and it looked like a sort off handball defense. Barcelona created a few big chances but were not able to score a goal. Chelsea did ones by Drogba and that was enough for the victory. A match in this stage is always a difficult one and especially when the teams have a history. Heavy rain in the second half which did not make it easier for the players. The referee needed to stay sharp and focused which he did.  

The parameter match difficulty has been evaluated with the mark: (50 is minimum: easy, 60: easy match with some difficult situations, 70 intense match with several situations to solve, 80 difficult match with many situations to solve, 90-100 very difficult, heavy work!, all this is based on the perception of the observer)
85

Referee

1. Control

Evaluation scale (only full or half points can be given (e.g. 80 or 75):
Description
Marks
The match was under the referee’s full control all the time, a) even though it unfolded many situations which have been difficult to solve (e.g. upcoming riots…) or b) as the referee’s style and personality led to an easy-going match without bigger problems for the referee.
90-100
The match was under the referee’s full control and did not exhibit so many difficult situations to solve
80-85
The match was difficult and for this reason, there was – every now and then – a small but visible lack of control (e.g. that he sometimes allowed too many protests on his decisions or that he concentrated slightly too much on issueing cards to gain control.)
65-75
The referee a) showed many weaknesses in the area of controlling the match (e.g. often allowed too many protests on his decisions and only hid behind his cards to have control) which [the match] did not challenge the referee too much or b) did not have any control at all in an extremely difficult match.
50-60
The referee did not have control at all in an easy match. He perhaps even made it more difficult than it would have been possible.
10-45

Comment in words (optional):
Match started with a few hard fouls from Chelsea. Drogba and Meireles were not afraid to make their point in the first minutes witch fouls on Mascherano and Fabregas. Brych just warned them and that is a risk. As said, these two teams have a history between them and you never know how they will take that up in this match. So when you choose to give the players a verbal warning, you have to stay alert that it don’t become more worse than that. It worked perfectly for Brych. How further the match went on, the better his control was. Brych was able to hold the cards in his pocket until the 68th minute without missing a clear one. He just controlled it superb and in my opinion he showed us some of the best CL performances this season. I do not want to spend any words on the behavior of Drogba. Let’s say Brych did not let it influence his match which is great!

In the parameter “Control”, the referee has been (therefore) evaluated with the mark:
95

Remarkable situations one may focus on (optional):
Minute
Description of the situation and evaluation of the referee’s behaviour
4

Foul from Drogba on Mascherano. Brych just gave a verbal warning
7
Again a hard foul from the Chelsea side. This time Meireles on Fabregas. Again just a verbal warning.

Referee

2. Calls

Evaluation scale (all the criteria is subject to the observer’s feeling + perception, the following measures can be taken into consideration, but there is no need to apply them, simply mark the evaluation areas with X):
Description
Evaluation
Measures
+ +
+
o
-
- -
Foul Detection (also dives etc) (++ all the (non-)fouls have been recognized correctly, + most of the (non-)fouls have been recognized, only minor mistakes in this area, o decent foul detection, the referees has missed several of (non-)fouls, - inconsistent foul detection with many missed (non-)fouls that influenced the match, whistled either by far too many or by far too less fouls, - - inacceptable)
of course all the calls in this field have to be weighn up in order to come to a final evaluation!
X




Disciplinary Management, note: all the cards have to be listed in the last grid (++ the disciplinary management has been excellent, the referees found the right balance between card and no-card, he booked players if necessary with regard to the laws of the game, + overall, the disciplinary management has been good, most of the (non-)given cards were adequate, the referee perhaps missed a yellow card or gave a wrong one, o there is a lot of room for improvement concerning this field, the referee revealed a lack of consistency in his card policy, missed more than one yellow or gave more than one that was wrong or unnecessary, - poor disciplinary management, no consistency, the faulty card policy potentially led to difficulties, the referee perhaps missed a clear red card so that the card policy did not correspond at that moment to the laws of the game, - - inacceptable) = of course all the calls in this field have to be weighn up in order to come to a final evaluation!
X




Match Influencing Decisions (penalties, decisions immediately before a goal has been scored…) note: MIDs have to be listed in the Comment and the last grid (optional, if no MID had to be taken, this parameter may remain empty)
X




Advantage Rule (++ if possible, the referee applied the advantage rule in a very adequate way so that the play could flow [optional: and booked (a) player(s) for the original foul afterwards], + if possible, he applied it, sometimes a free kick or an advantage would have been better, a) no advantages to be applied or b) only a decent advantage rule applying, - did not pay much attention to the advantage rule and potentially even stopped promising goal attempts, - - unacceptable, potentially even avoided goals by not paying attention to the advantage rule)
X




Additional Time adequate?
X









Comment on the application of the Laws of the Game
Nearly perfect. The match started with two heavy fouls from Chelsea. Brych chose to warn them verbal which was not fault but a risk. The risk is that players will see it as a license to get further. When you make that choice as referee it is your own responsibility to keep everything in hand.Brych did that great. He had the ‘’luck’’ that the players took it up and the first half went smooth.

There was that situation in the 10th minute when Terry posts his knee on Sanchez’ leg. Brych was not able to see it but Pickel had a clear view. Also Meyer should have seen it but his view was from behind.

In the 13th minute Meireles made a foul on Busquets which was his second foul in 5 minutes. Brych did less with it but should have made clear that this was the last time. His positioning and following was great. It made that he had a clear view when Iniesta went down in the box after a duel with Terry. Brych was right to not award a penalty to Barcelona when Terry played the ball and the contact was not enough to give one.

Brych had a great interpretation off the advantage rule which he showed now and then. He was also able to take the play back when advantage did not came out properly. In the 43th minute, when Barcelona had a corner to take, he warned Puyol and Terry fore houlding each other before the cik was taken. Perfect way of preventive refereeing.

Also the rest of the German team did great. Meyer and Aytekin had their, correct, influence and also the assistants did well.


Remarkable situations and important calls one may focus on (necessary) like all the cards, crucial fouls or overseen fouls, match influencing decisions like penalties :
Minute
Description of the situation and evaluation of the referee’s behaviour
4
Foul from Drogba on Mascherano, just a verbal warning
7
Four from Meireles on Fabregas, again a verbal warning
10
Terry posts his knee on Sanchez’ leg. No action by the referee or his assistants
13
Second hard foul from Meireles but again Brych did nothing
     24
No penalty for Iniesta after a duel with Terry. Correct call
33
Good advantage rule after a foul from Ramires
36
Brych waited for advantage after a foul on Mikel. When it did not appear he gave a free kick
43
Preventive warning for Terry and Puyol when they are holding each other before a corner
57
Gave a throw in to Barcelona when Chelsea take too much time for it. Great!
59
Handball from Cahil which was seen by, I think, Meyer. Good cooperation
61
Foul on Ivanovic right before Aytekin. Well seen and again good cooperation
68
Yellow card to Ramires, correct
70
Yellow card to Pedro. Not correct. There was no contact but it looked like there was. I can imagine why Brych gave the card.
75
Yellow card for Busquets after a foul on Ramires. Clear one
84
Foul from Kalou in the box when he pushed Puyol.
85
Yellow card for Drogba. It seemed harsh but the replay showed it was correct



In the parameter “Calls”, the referee has been (therefore) evaluated with the mark:
90


Referee

3. Physical aspects and style

Comment on the tactical approach of the referee, his personality in the pitch and also physical aspects. Might also contain general circumstances the observer has come across with.
Not so good. Followed to much trough the middle and missed some small fouls due to that. Also some bad positioning during the game. Positioning was okay by dead play moments.


Overview

Description
Evaluation
Positioning, movement and physical condition
+
Expected level
-
Good positioning, always close to the play, follows play at all times and does not interfere with play and enters the penalty area when necessary
X


Flexible diagonal system (movement in the pitch)
X


Able to anticipate situations and the action
X


Efficient positioning (at set pieces or dead ball e.g.)
X


Physical Condition
X



Description
Evaluation
Tactical approach (style) and personality in the pitch
+
Expected level
-
The referee has a style that fits to the match and its background, is able to adapt the style during the match and shows a consistent line which can be understood by the players.
X


His style is moving within the borderlines the Laws of the Game set.

X

Communication
X


Clear and respectful gestures
X


Shows respect towards the players in general, the referee is one the same level like the players
X



In the parameter “Physical aspects and style”, the referee has been (therefore) evaluated with the mark:
95
Referee

4. Neutrality

Description
Evaluation
Neutrality
+
Expected level
-
The referee is in general neutral.

X

The referee does not tend to prefer teams with bigger names or a higher reputation.

X

The referee makes decisions independent from previous ones and does not make them due to compensative reasons.
X


No match influencing mistake wronged a certain team (it need not necessarily be the referee’s intention)
X



In the parameter “Neutrality”, the referee has been evaluated with the mark:
85


Referee

5. Final Mark

Parameter
Percentage
Mark
Control
25 %
95
Calls
30 %
90
Physical aspects and style
25 %
95
Neutrality
10 %
85
Match difficulty (page 1)
10 %
85

Final mark
     91,50



Assistant Referee 1

Brief comment on the degree of occupation and difficulty the assistant referee 1 had to cope with. Remarkable situations should be mentioned with reference to the minute [in brackets].
A lot of close calls which he had all right. He should have seen the foul from Terry in minute 13.

Overview

Description
Evaluation
Positioning and technical aspects
+
Expected level
-
Good positioning and movement
X


Adequate alertness, psychological concentration as well as awareness and good cooperation with the referee as long as situations appeared in the AR1’s area of responsibility (reaction to incidents within his vicinity)
X


Efficient positioning and control in difficult circumstances (dead ball, no-look-passes e.g.)
X


Holds and moves his flag in an adequate way and in accordance with the Laws of the Game (Law 11, FIFA Laws of the Game p. 90/91)

X

Physical Condition

X


Description
Evaluation
Offside and foul detection
+
Expected level
-
Correct offside decisions and good application of the “wait and see” technique (+ should be only awarded if the offsides have been very difficult – contrary movements e.g. – or if there has been a large amount of offsides or if certain (one) offside decision(s) has been of great importance for the outcome of the match)
X


Supports the referee with a good foul detection in his area of responsibility

X


Remarkable decisions
Minute
Description of the situation and evaluation of the assistant referee’s behavior
8
Close onside call when Sanchez hit the crossbar.
13
No reaction after foul from Terry




Evaluation scale (only full or half points can be given (e.g. 80 or 75), the observer can take the scale as measure, there is however no need to do so:

Mark
Description
85-100
The assistant referee showed an excellent performance in all the criteria in a match which challenged him a lot.
75-80
The assistant referee a) showed an excellent performance in a match that revealed several challenges for the assistant referee or b) made excellent decisions in a not so easy match but showed some room of improvement in technical areas.
65-70
The assistant referee a) showed an excellent performance but made one remarkable mistake (mostly in the field of offside) or b) revealed some smaller weaknesses in different criteria or c) struggled in difficult situations he had to solve.
50-60
The assistant referee made a) – in the opinion of the observer – too many mistakes or b) made a match decisive or influencing mistake.
10-45
The assistant referee does not only unfold technical weaknesses but also made a lot of mistakes. His performance was inacceptable.

The assistant referee 1 has been therefore evaluated with the mark:
85


Assistant Referee 2

Brief comment on the degree of occupation and difficulty the assistant referee 2 had to cope with. Remarkable situations should be mentioned with reference to the minute [in brackets].
A lot of very close calls which he had all right. Great performance! He was wrong in minute 3 but it was tide. We forgive him for that.


Overview

Description
Evaluation
Positioning and technical aspects
+
Expected level
-
Good positioning and movement
X


Adequate alertness, psychological concentration as well as awareness and good cooperation with the referee as long as situations appeared in the AR2’s area of responsibility (reaction to incidents within his vicinity)
X


Efficient positioning and control in difficult circumstances (dead ball, no-look-passes e.g.)
X


Holds and moves his flag in an adequate way and in accordance with the Laws of the Game (Law 11, FIFA Laws of the Game p. 90/91)

X

Physical Condition

X


Description
Evaluation
Offside and foul detection
+
Expected level
-
Correct offside decisions and good application of the “wait and see” technique (+ should be only awarded if the offsides have been very difficult – contrary movements e.g. – or if there has been a large amount of offsides or if certain (one) offside decision(s) has been of great importance for the outcome of the match)
X


Supports the referee with a good foul detection in his area of responsibility
X



Remarkable decisions
Minute
Description of the situation and evaluation of the assistant referee’s behaviour
29
Good and close offside call when Drogba was offside
39
Again close and correct call when Drogba was offside



Evaluation scale (only full or half points can be given (e.g. 80 or 75), the observer can take the scale as measure, there is however no need to do so:

Mark
Description
85-100
The assistant referee showed an excellent performance in all the criteria in a match which challenged him a lot.
75-80
The assistant referee a) showed an excellent performance in a match that revealed several challenges for the assistant referee or b) made excellent decisions in a not so easy match but showed some room of improvement in technical areas.
65-70
The assistant referee a) showed an excellent performance but made one remarkable mistake (mostly in the field of offside) or b) revealed some smaller weaknesses in different criteria or c) struggled in difficult situations he had to solve.
50-60
The assistant referee made a) – in the opinion of the observer – too many mistakes or b) made a match decisive or influencing mistake.
10-45
The assistant referee does not only unfold technical weaknesses but also made a lot of mistakes. His performance was inacceptable.

The assistant referee 2 has been therefore evaluated with the mark:
90


Additional Assistant Referee 1

Brief comment on remarkable situations or circumstances (optional):
Did well. The foul from Terry was hard to see for him because he saw it from behind. Had his influence when he saw the handball from Cahil


Overview
Description
Evaluation

+
Expected level
-
Good positioning and movement

X

Adequate alertness, psychological concentration as well as awareness and good cooperation with the referee
X


Involvement in the match (did the AAR1 show concentration and the courage to advise the referee concerning situations that appeared in his area of responsibility?)
X


Quality of the calls he made or which were influenced by his message

X


The additional assistant referee 1 has been therefore evaluated with the mark (the scale for the assistant referees can be taken as measure):
85


Additional Assistant Referee 2

Brief comment on remarkable situations or circumstances (optional):
Not really challenged. Had a good call when Ivanovic was brought down right before his nose.


Overview
Description
Evaluation

+
Expected level
-
Good positioning and movement

X

Adequate alertness, psychological concentration as well as awareness and good cooperation with the referee

X

Involvement in the match (did the AAR2 show concentration and the courage to advise the referee concerning situations that appeared in his area of responsibility?)

X

Quality of the calls he made or which were influenced by his message
X



The additional assistant referee 2 has been therefore evaluated with the mark (the scale for the assistant referees can be taken as measure):
80


Fourth Official

Brief comment on remarkable situations or circumstances (optional):
--


Description
Evaluation

+
Expected level
-
Concentration and potential involvement in situations

X

Communication and respectful dealing with coaches and substitutes

X

Quick and concentrated execution of substitutions and providing of the additional time

X


The Fourth Official has been therefore evaluated with the mark (the scale for the assistant referees can be taken as measure, expected level should be 8,0):
80


Observed by Sander (NED)
Date, Location 19 April 2012, Netherlands

0 other reports: