UEFA Champions League: Real Madrid vs Bayern München

Real Madrid Club de Fútbol 1-3 (2-1 PSO) FC Bayern München


Referee
Yellow Cards
2nd Yellow C
Red Cards
Penaltys
 V. Kassai
7 (3-4) 
1 (0-1) 


UEFA Champions League 2011/2012
Semifinal, 2nd leg
Referee Observation Report

(ESP) Real Madrid
1:3 pso (2:1
Bayern München (GER)

MATCH FACTS 25 April 2012 • 20:45 CET • Santiago Bernabeu, Madrid • Attendance: 71.654

Function
 Full Name
Origin
Final Mark*
Referee
Viktor Kassai
HUN
68,3
Assistant Referee 1
Gábor Eros
HUN
70,0
Assistant Referee 2
György Ring
HUN
80,0
Fourth Official
Mihaly Fabián
HUN
80,0
Additional Assistant Referee 1
István Vad
HUN
80,0
Additional Assistant Referee 2
Tamás Bognar
HUN
55,0
UEFA Delegate
Dane Jošt
SVN

UEFA Referee Observer
David Elleray
ENG

BLOG Referee Observer
Filipe T.
POR

* 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
85-100
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):
Intense match, good conditions
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):
Kassai had no clear line for this match. Dubious card policy; not the best approach with the players. Both teams were very correct so no big deal for Kassai, but when needed we was not suitable to the task today.

In the parameter “Control”, the referee has been (therefore) evaluated with the mark:
75

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




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
The fake penalty for RM and the soft for BM are the most important calls to talk about. The first penalty: the BM player falls and he has his arm in a natural position. Second  aspect: short distance and no time to react for the BM player. Wrong call by the refs team. Of course, we need to see that a good goal opportunity was canceled by the BM defender.

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
5
Penalty to Real for an alleged, YC to Alaba, wrong call
26
Penalty to Bayern and YC to Pepe, correct
28
missed YC to Real’s #17
31
missed clear foul for Real
34
missed foul on Casillas, possibly a dangerous situation
65
missed foul for Real
70
wrongly awards a foul in favour of Real, if he whistles that foul the YC must be shown. However no irregular contact happened, therefore a wrong decision x2
102
YC, unnecessary
104
YC to Badstuber after a hard foul, dark yellow..if a red card had been the referee’s choice, it would have been 100% correct
115
dive call against Granero (YC), good call



In the parameter “Calls”, the referee has been (therefore) evaluated with the mark:
55




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.


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:
70


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 (normal: 80):
75


Referee

5. Final Mark

Parameter
Percentage
Mark
Control
25 %
75
Calls
30 %
55
Physical aspects and style
25 %
70
Neutrality
10 %
75
Match difficulty (page 1)
10 %
85

Final mark
68,3




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].


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 behaviour
64
wrong 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 1 has been therefore evaluated with the mark:
70,0


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].
2 situations: the 2-0 followed a very slight offside position, however, decided with the benefit for the striker, so no problem at all. Then there was a difficult situation when Marcelo made a run from his own box and passed to Ronaldo. However, Higuaín jumped over the ball and was offside. Ring raised the flag for active offside. Still an ok call.

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
##
comment



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:
80,0


Additional Assistant Referee 1

Brief comment on remarkable situations or circumstances (optional):


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):
80,0


Additional Assistant Referee 2

Brief comment on remarkable situations or circumstances (optional):
wrong in first penalty kick, ok in Granero’s simulation


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):
55,0


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):
80,0


Observed by Filipe T. (POR)
Date, Location 27 April 2012, Portugal

0 other reports: