EURO 2012: Ukraine vs France


Year
2012
Ukraine

France 
Date
15-Jun
City
Donetsk (UKR)
Competition
Euro 2012
Stage
Group Stage
Reported by
Niclas E


Ukraine

0-2

France






Referee
Yellow
Card(s)
2nd Yellow
Card(s)
Direct
Red Card(s)
Penaltys
Björn Kuipers (NED)
5 (2-3)
0
0
0



 
GOALS
0-1       Jérémy MÉNEZ (FRA, 53’)
0-2       Yohan CABAYE (FRA, 56’)

YELLOW CARDS
Jérémy MÉNEZ (FRA, 40’), Evgen SELIN (UKR, 55’), Mathieu DEBUCHY (FRA, 79‘), Philippe MEXÈS (FRA, 81’), Anatoliy TYMOSHCHUK (UKR, 87’)

SENDING OFFS

MATCH OFFICIALS
Function
Full Name
Origin

Final Mark
Referee
Björn Kuipers
NED
67,1
Assistant Referee 1
Sander van Roekel

NED
77,0
Assistant Referee 2
Erwin E. J. Zeinstra

NED
90,0
Additional Assistant Referee 1
Pol van Boekel

NED
77,2
Additional Assistant Referee 2
Richard Liesveld

NED
69,9
Fourth Official
Tom Harald Hagen
NOR
75,0
Reserve Assistant Referee
Damien Macgraith
IRL
75,0
UEFA Delegate
Armen Minasyan
ARM

UEFA Referee Observer
Vlado Sajn
SVN

Blog Referee Observer(s)
Niclas E
GER


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
After four minutes and fourteen seconds, referee Kuipers decided to suspend the match for an unknown period of time due to a heavy thunderstorm accompanied by heavy rain in the area of Donezk. After 20 minutes of suspension, UEFA announced that the match would be kicked off not before 19:00 CET. This was the point of time when Kuipers re-started the match with a drop ball. The pitch was in excellent condition again, so that everything was in compliance with the necessary standards. The decision to suspend the match was correctly taken by Kuipers in order to protect the players.
The match itself was not that intense. Dutchman Kuipers booked several players for different infringements, but did not lose control. There were some tough challenges in the end, but finally, also the quick result of 0-2 after the break led to a more likely easy match to handle – albeit the special circumstances must be naturally taken into account as well.

·       Parameter Mark 1: Degree of Difficulty and Importance
AWARDED MARK FOR THIS PARAMETER
75,0


II. CONTROL
·       Comment
Kuipers was in full control of the match, even though one must state that the players were quite friendly. No upcoming riots and no bigger conflicts to solve. Therefore expected level. 

·       Exemplary situations that strengthen the general impression
Minute
Situation and Assessment



·       Parameter Mark 2: Control
AWARDED MARK FOR THIS PARAMETER
80,0


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)
Already at the very beginning, there have been some close situations to solve. There was a situation in the box when Karim Benzema (FRA) appeared in front of the goalkeeper and was stopped by an Ukrainian defender. It seemed as if latter had played the ball, however, slow-motions showed the opposite. He firstly touched the opponent and then the ball. Actually a penalty. His disciplinary management has been still ok due to some reasons (see grid). Some smaller weaknesses every now and then, but the majority of his decisions was good.

·       Important Decisions ((non)given cards should be mentioned, other important decisions in the opinion of the observer)
Minute
Situation and Assessment
5
Due to the fact that the fulfillment of his responsibility to protect the players was not guaranteed because of heavy thunderstorms and heavy rain, the referee suspended the match which was an adequate and sensible decision.
10
Benzema (FRA) enters the penalty area and is stopped by a defender. The defender – as replays obviously showed – firstly touched Benzema (FRA) with his sliding tackle and then the ball. Kuipers himself probably could not see it, but his AAR2 really should have done that.
12
first hard foul committed by Clichy (FRA), no card is ok, good way of admonition
32
missed a clear corner kick to France
36
important foul decision against Benzema (FRA), probably based on flag of AR2
38
tactical foul by an Ukrainian, not issueing a card is still justified
40
YC to Ménez (FRA) for a foul on Shevchenko (UKR). It was an allegedly tactical foul, however, it was only a small pulling, Shevchenko (UKR) was far away from a promising attack, was at a bad angle at the midfield line so that the YC shown is to be considered as an exaggerated one.
45
misses a 2nd YC to Ménez for a studs-up foul at the midfield circle, when the ball was already far away.
55
YC to Selin (UKR) for a foul, correct decision
65
Nasri (FRA) is fouled in the box, but Kuipers and AAR1 correctly apply the advantage rule which made a shot on the jamb (Cabaya) possible.
79
YC to Debuchy (FRA) for a tactical and dangerous foul, correct decision
81
YC to Mexès (FRA), who stopped an attack close to the box, probably also reported by AAR2, correct decision
87
hard foul by Tymoshchuk (UKR), yellow card. Compared to the foul that entailed a YC to Ménez (FRA), it should have been a red card, but apart from Kuipers’ inconsistent line of disciplinary measures, it was a correct call

·       Parameter Mark 3: Decisions
AWARDED MARK FOR THIS PARAMETER
60,0


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

Comment
Due to a lack of adequate movement, his positioning was not the best at all. He had problems to follow quick counterattacks, in the midfield he had no problem with that. His physical condition in general was actually ok.
Minute
Situation and Assessment
34
quick counterattack by Shevchenko (UKR), Kuipers has slight problems to follow that






·       Parameter Mark 4.1: Physical and Technical Aspects
AWARDED MARK FOR THIS PARAMETER
65,0


·       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


Comment
His line of disciplinary management has been inconsistent. He did not find the right balance of when booking and when not booking players. A hard studs-up foul was encountered with a very small admonition by him and a smaller, allegedly tactical foul by the same player entailed a yellow card. He had some moments when he communicated with the players by eye-contact which led to authority. Nonetheless, there was no real effort undertaken to really lead the match and not just to react on the players’ fouls – in this match, it still worked.
Minute
Situation and Assessment








·       Parameter Mark 4.2: Tactical Approach
AWARDED MARK FOR THIS PARAMETER
65,0

·       Summary of both sections (if necessary, give the minutes)
Positive Points
1.
Respect, communication and authority

2.
Good colaboration with his (A)ARs

3.
Decision to suspend the match has been sensible

Points for improvement
1.
Movement and Positioning

2.
Disciplinary Management

·       Comment on the cooperation within the referee team
Some decisions have been made upon consultation with both (additional) assistant referees, especially AR2 was much involved in the game.

·       Parameter Mark 4: Style (factorized (50%) sum of both partial sections)
AWARDED MARK FOR THIS PARAMETER
65,0



FACTORIZED SUM (FINAL MARK) – REFEREE
Parameter
Percentage
Mark
MATCH DIFFICULTY / IMPORTANCE
10 %
75,0
CONTROL
20 %
80,0
DECISIONS
40 %
60,0
STYLE
30 %
65,0

Final mark
67,1



Assistant Referee 1

I. MATCH
·       Comment
No bigger challenges, one important onside decision but no real involvement in foul detection or other areas.

·       Parameter Mark 1: Degree of Difficulty (only aspects concerning the AR1)
AWARDED MARK FOR THIS PARAMETER
65,0

II. DECISIONS
·       Application of the Laws of the Game – Comment
Only two onsides to report.

·       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
34
good onside decision
56
Cabaye (FRA) is onside before he scores, good decision

·       Parameter Mark 2: Decisions
AWARDED MARK FOR THIS PARAMETER
80,0

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
80,0


FACTORIZED SUM (FINAL MARK) – AR1
Parameter
Percentage
Mark
MATCH DIFFICULTY
20 %
65,0
DECISIONS
60 %
80,0
STYLE
20 %
80,0

Final mark
77,0



Assistant Referee 2

I. MATCH
·       Comment
Often involved in the first half, important decisions correct, later not that much to do

·       Parameter Mark 1: Degree of Difficulty (only aspects concerning the AR2)
AWARDED MARK FOR THIS PARAMETER
70,0

II. DECISIONS
·       Application of the Laws of the Game – Comment
text possible !

·       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
11
Benzema (FRA) is flagged for offside, correct decision
16
Ménez’ (FRA) goal is correctly disallowed due to a clear offside position
18
Benzema (FRA) is adjudged to be in an offside position, very close, probably a correct decision, no clear judgment possible
36
correctly signaled a foul committed by Benzema (FRA)
48
Shevchenko (UKR) is in an offside position, correct
67
Milevskiy (UKR) is in an offside position, as he deflected a shot by one of his teammate, while being offside

·       Parameter Mark 2: Decisions
AWARDED MARK FOR THIS PARAMETER
100,0

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
80,0


FACTORIZED SUM (FINAL MARK) – AR2
Parameter
Percentage
Mark
MATCH DIFFICULTY
20 %
70,0
DECISIONS
60 %
100,0
STYLE
20 %
80,0

Final mark
90,0




Additional Assistant Referee 1

I. MATCH
·       Comment
No real involvement, probably consulted Kuipers once

·       Parameter Mark 1: Degree of Difficulty (only aspects concerning the AAR1)
AWARDED MARK FOR THIS PARAMETER
65,0

II. DECISIONS
·       Application of the Laws of the Game, Involvement – Comment
probably advised the referee to apply the advantage in minute 65.

·       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
65
Nasri (FRA) is fouled in the box, but the referee and van Boekel correctly apply the advantage rule which made a shot on the jamb (Cabaya) possible.

·       Parameter Mark 2: Decisions
AWARDED MARK FOR THIS PARAMETER
82,0

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
75,0


FACTORIZED SUM (FINAL MARK) – AAR1
Parameter
Percentage
Mark
MATCH DIFFICULTY
20 %
65,0
DECISIONS
60 %
82,0
STYLE
20 %
75,0

Final mark
77,2



Additional Assistant Referee 2

I. MATCH
·       Comment
Three involvements, all related to foul detection

·       Parameter Mark 1: Degree of Difficulty (only aspects concerning the AAR2)
AWARDED MARK FOR THIS PARAMETER
75,0

II. DECISIONS
·       Application of the Laws of the Game, Involvement – Comment
He should have seen the penalizable offence made by an Ukrainian defender on Benzema (FRA), correctly assisted the referee in a striker foul decision and finally, correctly advised him – if involved – to book Mexès (FRA).

·       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
10
Benzema (FRA) enters the penalty area and is stopped by a defender. The defender – as replays obviously showed – firstly touched Benzema (FRA) with his sliding tackle and then the ball. Kuipers himself probably could not see it, but his AAR2 really should have done that.
81
YC to Mexès (FRA), who stopped an attack close to the box, probably also reported by AAR2, correct decision

·       Parameter Mark 2: Decisions
AWARDED MARK FOR THIS PARAMETER
65,0

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
75,0


FACTORIZED SUM (FINAL MARK) – AAR2
Parameter
Percentage
Mark
MATCH DIFFICULTY
20 %
75,0
DECISIONS
60 %
65,0
STYLE
20 %
75,0

Final mark
69,9



Fourth Official
·       Comment
nothing to report

·       Final mark
FINAL MARK
75,0


Reserve Assistant Referee
·       Comment
nothing to report

·       Final mark
FINAL MARK
75,0


0 other reports: