EURO 2012: Greece vs Czech Republic


Year
2012
Greece

Czech Republic 
Date
12-Jun
City
Wroclaw (POL)
Competition
Euro 2012
Stage
Group Stage
Reported by
Pascal J.

Greece

?-? 

Czech Republic





Referee
Yellow
Card(s)
2nd Yellow
Card(s)
Direct
Red Card(s)
Penaltys
Stephane Lannoy (FRA)
6 (3-3)
0
0
0




GOALS
0-1       Petr JIRÁČEK (CZE, 3’)
0-2       Václav PILAŘ (CZE, 6’)
1-2       Fanis GEKAS (GRE, 53’)

YELLOW CARDS
Tomáš ROSICKÝ (CZE, 27’), Vassilis TOROSSIDIS (GRE, 34’), Petr JIRÁČEK (CZE, 36’), Kyriakos PAPADOPOULOS (GRE, 56’), Dimitris SALPINGIDIS (GRE, 57’), Daniel KOLAŘ (CZE, 65’)

SENDING OFFS
None

MATCH OFFICIALS
Function
Full Name
Origin

Final Mark
Referee
Stéphane Lannoy
FRA
80,0
Assistant Referee 1
Frédéric Cano

FRA
93,0
Assistant Referee 2
Michaël Annonier

FRA
68,0
Additional Assistant Referee 1
Fredy Fautrel

FRA
75,0
Additional Assistant Referee 2
Ruddy Buquet

FRA
81,0
Fourth Official
Matej Jug
SVN
70,0
Reserve Assistant Referee
Primož Arhar

SVN
75,0
UEFA Delegate
Nodar Akhalkatsi
GEO

UEFA Referee Observer
Bo Karlsson
SWE

Blog Referee Observer
Pascal J
SUI


Remarks concerning the final marks
The final marks that have been awarded by the Blog Referee Observer(s) for every official are aimed at expressing a general assessment on the respective official’s performance.
They comply with certain and different evaluation scales that are exposed and explained in the Referee Observation Checklist (a separate document).



The Referee

I. MATCH
·       Background
On this second matchday of group A both teams needed to take some points from this game. After the 1-1 draw against Poland the Greeks had been strongly complaining about the performance of referee Velasco Carballo. The Czech Republic had lost their first game 1-4 against Russia.
The Czechs managed to score twice within the first six minutes and then controlled the game. There were no major challenges for the referees, apart from the offside goal by Fotakis (41’). The match became a little more intense after Greece pulled one back in the second half, but only for a short period.

·       Parameter Mark 1: Degree of Difficulty and Importance
AWARDED MARK FOR THIS PARAMETER
65,0


II. CONTROL
·       Comment
Lannoy was always in control. He was very present and attentive in order to prevent upcoming conflict. There were however not many challenges in this respect.

·       Exemplary situations that strengthen the general impression
Minute
Situation and Assessment
4
Good verbal warning against Rosický
27
After the foul by Rosický, Lannoy reacts quickly to solve an upcoming conflict
47
Some irritations after an encounter between Jiráček and Holebas; Lannoy manages to keep control of the situation.

·       Parameter Mark 2: Control
AWARDED MARK FOR THIS PARAMETER
79,0


III. DECISIONS
·       Application of the Laws of the Game – Comment (advice: always refer to aspects like card management, infringement detection, the application of the advantage rule, holding in the penalty area after set pieces, simulation and lay extra ordinary high emphasis on match influencing or even decisive decisions)
Lannoy’s foul detection was actually pretty good, although there were some smaller mistakes towards the end of the game. His card management was very good except for the yellow card against Kolář which was exaggerated. The advantage rule was applied adequately this time.

·       Important Decisions ((non)given cards should be mentioned, other important decisions in the opinion of the observer)
Minute
Situation and Assessment
27
Good and important first yellow card against Rosický for a reckless challenge
34
Good booking for a malicious challenge by Torossidis, which was not easy to spot
36
Correct booking for a hard foul by Jiráček
45
Only 1 minute of added time in the first half. Too little considering the goals, injuries and Greece’s goalkeeper substitution.
47
After a foul by Jiráček on Holebas, the Greek player slightly touches the groin of Jiráček with his knee when getting up. The Czech player goes down theatrically. Not an obvious situation and almost impossible to see for the referee. Lannoy is quickly on the spot, correctly awards the free-kick to Greece and tells Jiráček to get up. Justifiable in my opinion.
53
Good advantage use
56
Correct yellow card for a foul on Papadopoulos
57
Rather harsh booking against Salpingidis. It looks like this decision came on the advice of someone else (AR2 Annonier?), as Lannoy initially only indicates a free-kick.
66
Yellow card against Kolář after an innocuous challenge. Lannoy signals persistent infringement; still the card seems a little exaggerated.
89
Čech is allowed to keep the ball in his hands for 16 seconds!
90+2
Lannoy whistles a non-existent foul by a Greek attacker in the Czech penalty area.

·       Parameter Mark 3: Decisions
AWARDED MARK FOR THIS PARAMETER
81


IV. STYLE
·       Physical and Technical Aspects
Criteria
+
Expected level
-
Always close to the play, follows play at all times, and does not interfere with play

X

Flexible Diagonal System
X


Able to anticipate the action
X


Enters the penalty area when necessary

X

Appropiate, efficient and economic Positioning also at set pieces

X

Physical Condition in general

X

Adequate behaviour in dealing with injuries (awareness of serious injuries, possible advantages applied,
card-timing etc.)

X


·       Parameter Mark 4.1: Physical and Technical Aspects
AWARDED MARK FOR THIS PARAMETER
80


·       Tactical Approach
Criteria
+
Expected level
-
The referee has a certain tactical approach, which is moving in the measures the Laws of the Game define, which is understood and consistent

X

The referee’s tactical approach is active, he is able to predict situations and to avoid conflicts by that
X


Personality and authority on the pitch
X


Adequate communication

X

Shows determination and courage in his decisions and has also tools to gain authority (adequate and clear gestures, using his whistle as kind of language) 
X


Shows respect

X


·       Parameter Mark 4.2: Tactical Approach
AWARDED MARK FOR THIS PARAMETER
85

·       Summary of both sections (if necessary, give the minutes)
Positive Points
1.
Excellent presence and preventing of conflicts

2.
Good positioning

Points for improvement
1.
A little too theatrical in some situations

2.


·       Comment on the cooperation within the referee team
Very efficient cooperation of the referee team, only the communication with the 4th official appeared to be a little more difficult.

·       Parameter Mark 4: Style (factorized (50%) sum of both partial sections)
AWARDED MARK FOR THIS PARAMETER
83


FACTORIZED SUM (FINAL MARK) – REFEREE
Parameter
Percentage
Mark
MATCH DIFFICULTY / IMPORTANCE
10 %
65
CONTROL
20 %
79
DECISIONS
40 %
81
STYLE
30 %
83

Final mark
80,0



Assistant Referee 1

I. MATCH
·       Comment
Cano had to solve a number of offside situations in the first half, the most important being the annulment of the goal by Fotakis. There were not many challenges in the second half.

·       Parameter Mark 1: Degree of Difficulty (only aspects concerning the AR1)
AWARDED MARK FOR THIS PARAMETER
85

II. DECISIONS
·       Comment
Some difficult situations to solve.  

·       Overview
Criteria
+
Expected level
-
(Non-)Offside detection (evaluated independently (!) from the difficulty of the (non-)offside situations)
X


Quality of other decisions with regard to the
application of the Laws of the Game
X



·       Important Decisions (of course heavy attention to be paid on (non-)offside decisions)
Minute
Situation and Assessment
12
Offside call against Samaras; correct
32
Close offside call; correct
37
Close offside call against Fotakis; very well seen
41
Headed goal by Fotakis from a mininmal offside position. Great call by Cano to annul that goal.
87
Good intervention to prevent a possible conflict by opposing players on the touchline.

·       Parameter Mark 2: Decisions
AWARDED MARK FOR THIS PARAMETER
95

III. STYLE
·       Physical and Technical Aspects
Criteria
+
Expected level
-
Physical Condition
X


Positioning and movement
X


Adequate alertness, mental awareness and concentration (e.g. decisions on situations happening in his area of vicinity)
X


Holds and moves his flag in accordance with the
Laws of the Game

X


·       Parameter Mark 3: Style
AWARDED MARK FOR THIS PARAMETER
95


FACTORIZED SUM (FINAL MARK) – AR1
Parameter
Percentage
Mark
MATCH DIFFICULTY
20 %
85
DECISIONS
60 %
95
STYLE
20 %
95

Final mark
93,0



Assistant Referee 2

I. MATCH
·       Comment
Almost not challenged; only one (albeit difficult) offside situation.

·       Parameter Mark 1: Degree of Difficulty (only aspects concerning the AR2)
AWARDED MARK FOR THIS PARAMETER
70

II. DECISIONS
·       Overview
Criteria
+
Expected level
-
(Non-)Offside detection (evaluated independently (!) from the difficulty of the (non-)offside situations)


X
Quality of other decisions with regard to the
application of the Laws of the Game

X


·       Important Decisions (of course heavy attention to be paid on (non-)offside decisions)
Minute
Situation and Assessment
72
Wrong offside call against Gekas

·       Parameter Mark 2: Decisions
AWARDED MARK FOR THIS PARAMETER
65

III. STYLE
·       Physical and Technical Aspects
Criteria
+
Expected level
-
Physical Condition

X

Positioning and movement

X

Adequate alertness, mental awareness and concentration (e.g. decisions on situations happening in his area of vicinity)

X

Holds and moves his flag in accordance with the
Laws of the Game

X


·       Parameter Mark 3: Style
AWARDED MARK FOR THIS PARAMETER
75


FACTORIZED SUM (FINAL MARK) – AR2
Parameter
Percentage
Mark
MATCH DIFFICULTY
20 %
70
DECISIONS
60 %
65
STYLE
20 %
75

Final mark
68,0




Additional Assistant Referee 1

I. MATCH
·       Comment
Not challenged

·       Parameter Mark 1: Degree of Difficulty (only aspects concerning the AAR1)
AWARDED MARK FOR THIS PARAMETER
60

II. DECISIONS
·       Overview
Criteria
+
Expected level
-
Important decisions in the penalty area (e.g. fouls like holding after set pieces, goal-decisions etc.)

X

Quality of other decisions with regard to the
application of the Laws of the Game

X


·       Parameter Mark 2: Decisions
AWARDED MARK FOR THIS PARAMETER
80

III. STYLE
·       Physical and Technical Aspects
Criteria
+
Expected level
-
Positioning and movement

X

Active involvement, adequate alertness, mental awareness and concentration (e.g. decisions on situations happening in his area of vicinity)

X


·       Parameter Mark 3: Style
AWARDED MARK FOR THIS PARAMETER
75


FACTORIZED SUM (FINAL MARK) – AAR1
Parameter
Percentage
Mark
MATCH DIFFICULTY
20 %
60
DECISIONS
60 %
80
STYLE
20 %
75

Final mark
75,0



Additional Assistant Referee 2

I. MATCH
·       Comment
Few challenges

·       Parameter Mark 1: Degree of Difficulty (only aspects concerning the AAR2)
AWARDED MARK FOR THIS PARAMETER
70

II. DECISIONS
·       Overview
Criteria
+
Expected level
-
Important decisions in the penalty area (e.g. fouls like holding after set pieces, goal-decisions etc.)

X

Quality of other decisions with regard to the
application of the Laws of the Game
X



·       Important Decisions
Minute
Situation and Assessment
6
Helped the referee and AR2 to confirm that the ball did not go out of play before the Czechs scored the second goal. This happened right in front of him.

·       Parameter Mark 2: Decisions
AWARDED MARK FOR THIS PARAMETER
85

III. STYLE
·       Physical and Technical Aspects
Criteria
+
Expected level
-
Positioning and movement

X

Active involvement, adequate alertness, mental awareness and concentration (e.g. decisions on situations happening in his area of vicinity)

X


·       Parameter Mark 3: Style
AWARDED MARK FOR THIS PARAMETER
80


FACTORIZED SUM (FINAL MARK) – AAR2
Parameter
Percentage
Mark
MATCH DIFFICULTY
20 %
70
DECISIONS
60 %
85
STYLE
20 %
80

Final mark
81,0


Fourth Official
·       Comment
Some substitutions could have been effectuated more efficiently.

·       Final mark
FINAL MARK
70,0


Reserve Assistant Referee
·       Comment
Not involved

·       Final mark
FINAL MARK
75,0


0 other reports: