You are on page 1of 7

© The Third Team –footballrefereeing.blogspot.

com

UEFA Champions League 2013/14


Play-Offs, 1st Leg

(POR) FC Paços de Ferreira 1:4 FC Zenit St. Petersburg (RUS)

20/08/2013, 20:45 CET – Estádio do Dragão, Porto (POR)


Goals scored: 0:1 Shirokov (27’), 1:1 André Leão (58’), 1:2 Shirokov (60’), 1:3 Degra (85’, o.g.), 1:4 Shirokov (90’).

Match Officials Name NAT Mark Mark* Difficulty


Referee Martin Atkinson ENG 8.3 0.0 Quite Challenging
Assistant Referee 1 Peter Kirkup ENG 8.5 0.0 Quite Challenging
Assistant Referee 2 Simon Long ENG 8.3 0.0 Quite Challenging
Additional Assistant Referee 1 Anthony Taylor ENG 8.0 0.0 Normal
Additional Assistant Referee 2 Michael Jones ENG 8.0 0.0 Normal
Fourth Official Stephen Child ENG 8.0 0.0 Normal
UEFA Referee Observer Georgios Bikas GRE
UEFA Delegate Michel Pralong SUI
Blog Observer Chefren ITA * mark without crucial mistake (7.8/7.9)

Evaluation Scale Level of Difficulty


9.0 – 10.0 Excellent. Normal: Normal match for the officials, few
8.5 – 8.9 Very good. Important decision(s) correctly taken. challenging situations

8.3 – 8.4 Good. Expected level. Quite Challenging: Difficult match with some
8.2 Satisfactory with small areas for improvement. difficult decisions for the officials

8.0 – 8.1 Satisfactory with important areas for improvement. Very Challenging: Very difficult match with
7.9 One clear and important mistake, otherwise 8.3 or above. many difficult situations for the officials

7.8 One clear and important mistake, otherwise 8.0 – 8.2.


Below expectation, poor control, significant point(s) for Additional Time
7.5 – 7.7
improvement.
Disappointing. Below expectation with one and clear important First half 1 Second half 3
7.0 – 7.4 mistake or a performance with two or more clear and important
mistakes.
*For fourth official and AARs:
6.0 – 6.9 Unacceptable. 8.0 expected level, 7.7 crucial mistake

Disciplinary Home Team Disciplinary Away Team


Minute Card Player Misconduct Classification Minute Card Player Misconduct Classification
7‘ YC 96 Unsporting behaviour (UB) 74’ YC 22 Delaying restart of play (DR)
84‘ YC 19 Unsporting behaviour (UB) 90‘+3 YC 14 Unsporting behaviour (UB)
© The Third Team –footballrefereeing.blogspot.com

Description of the match:


The first leg of 2013-14 UEFA Champions League Play Off, played between Paços de Ferreira and Zenit St. Petersburg at
Estádio do Dragão, Porto. The match was played there because Paços home ground, Estádio da Mata Real, did not meet
UEFA criteria for international matches at this level. For this reason, the attendance was really low: 4,466. The referee
appointed was Martin Atkinson, at the head of a full English crew of officials. Atkinson was back in UEFA competitions
after an absence lasted for the whole knockout phase of 2012-13 due to unknow reasons. The match in its progress
presented several important decisions to take, and, despite of the final score, it was quite challenging, also for the
assistants The atmopshere was absolutely calm and the referee had not pressure on him while taking important
decisions.

REFEREE

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

Comments:
The match had a very intensive beginning with several fouls whistled in the first minutes. Here Atkinson was able to notice
that it was a crucial moment of the game. A remarkable situation happened in the fourth minute, when there were
complaints by Zenit for a possible DOGSO situation: the referee showed alertness, with a correct evaluation. Then in
second half there were two penalty appeals by Paços. Even though the second one appeared very difficult to evaluate, the
feeling is that Atkinson took a correct decision. Not enough for a penalty. Apart from that, the match was always under
control in both halves. There weren’t riot or tense moments. Overall, a satisfying performance under this point of view.

Minute Description of the situation


On a pass by a teammate, Kerzhakov (Zenit) falls down after a contact with Filipe Anunciação (Paços) and he
is not able to reach the ball in a very favorable position. The referee lets the game flow. Even after replays, it
4’
seems that the decision is correct, because the contact is really slight and there isn’t a clear or blatant foul. It
might have been a good chance to score for Zenit.
Penalty appeal by Paços. Contact in area between Carlão (Paços) and Lombaerts (Zenit). The decision of the
68’
referee seems correct. Nothing relevant happened, the player fell to easily, no penalty.
Penalty appeal by Paços. Contact in area between Hurtado (Paços) and Hubocan (Zenit). With the ball away,
the feeling is that there isn’t a clear foul but a slight touch near the kneecap, which is not enough in order to
81’
whistle a penalty. Very dangerous action by the defender, but still acceptable NO CALL by the referee in a
difficult situation to read.

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

Comments:
The referee followed a clear line in his disciplinary control of the match. Two cards were given for blatant and reckless
tackles, then in the 74’ minute for a clear infringement of the rules, when Anyukov (Zenit) threw the ball away to waste
time. The card given to Ricardo (Paços) at 84’ was correct, too. So, a very good knowledge of the LotG. There weren’t
other situations in which a mandatory card was missed. Card management was consistent.

Minute Description of the situation

7’ Filipe Anunciação (Paços) is booked for a very reckless tackle. Correct decision.

74’ Anyukov (Zenit) is cautioned for having thrown the ball away to delay the restart of the play.
Ricardo (Paços) is booked for having stopped a potentially dangerous action. The situation was borderline to
84’ DOGSO but the YC is correct because there is another defender ready to take part in the action and the player
was not clearly going towards the goal.
90’+3 Hubočan (Zenit) is booked for a late tackle
© The Third Team –footballrefereeing.blogspot.com

3 Physical Condition:

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
--- 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:
Minute Description of the situation
The referee had a good physical condition. There weren’t situations in which an advantage might have been
Full time possible. His positioning and running were always at expected level. When he had to evaluate the second
penalty situation he was not that close and this is probably a small area for improvement.

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

We can’t know whether Atkinson was helped by AAR1 in second half, when he had to evaluate two possible penalties.
Anyway, the cooperation with assistant referees was good: they reported several situations to the referee, and they helped
him in taking important decisions, as happened for the (correctly) disallowed goal.

5 Personality:

The referee showed to be firm and sure in his decisions, and he often explained by words and gestures the reasons of his
whistles to players. He never appeared unsure. So, very good under this point of view. The players respected him and
there were never problems.

6 General comments, advice on performance and personality:

The performance was overall good. We can say something about the penalty appeals in second half, in order to justify the
mark we have given to the referee. The first situation (68’) is clear, no foul. The second situation (81’) is a bit more
difficult. The feeling is that Atkinson wasn’t able to notice the whole scene, he anyway decided to let the game flow, not
detecting a blatant foul. A decision that we can accept, but at the same time, he can improve trying to be more attentive.

7 Points discussed in the report:

Positive points: 1) Control of the game by showing authority and firmness in his decisions.
2) Knowledge of the LOTG, mandatory YC correctly given when required.
3) Cooperation with assistant referees.

Trying to be more attentive, in the meaning of being close to play when particular
Points for improvement: 1)
or difficult situations happen in penalty area.
© The Third Team –footballrefereeing.blogspot.com

ASSISTANT REFEREE 1

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

Positioning and Movement:

+ 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 was quite challenged in this match. He had to evaluate several important offside situations, in first half.
He took almost always the correct decision. Then, in second half a crucial NO FLAG whe Paços scored. Well detected
ONSIDE. For the rest, he showed alertness in his area of vicinity but nothing really relevant happened under this aspect.
Very good performance.
Please describe any special situation(s) with indication of the minute(s) – mandatory if you tick “-“ (negative point) in one of
the above boxes:
Minute Description of the situation
2’ Bystrov (Zenit) is flagged offside. Correct decision.

21’ Kerzhakov (Zenit) is flagged offside. Borderline decision, the player seems still onside.

25’ Kerzhakov (Zenit) is flagged offsde. Correct decision.

33’ Kerzhakov (Zenit) is evaluated to be in a offside position. Correct decision.

58’ André Leão (Paços) is correctly evaluated onside prior to score the 1-1. Excellent and very difficult NO FLAG.
© The Third Team –footballrefereeing.blogspot.com

ASSISTANT REFEREE 2

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

Positioning and Movement:

+ 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 second assistant was less challenged than his colleague but he had more difficult decisions to take. The first situation
was a very good and crucial decision, a goal disallowed for offside when Paços scored at 36’. Then, a borderline situation
in 57’: acceptable flag. The last one was a mistake, which denied a obvious goal scoring opportunity to Zenit, but as said,
extremely difficult to detect. Arshavin was onside. In addition to that, he also helped the referee reporting several fouls.
Basically, good performance with small areas for improvement.
Please describe any special situation(s) with indication of the minute(s) – mandatory if you tick “-“ (negative point) in one of
the above boxes:
Minute Description of the situation

36’ Hurtado (Paços) is flagged offside and a goal scored by home team is annulled. Correct and crucial decision.

57’ Bystrov (Zenit) is fagged offside. Borderline and difficult decision, probably very tight offside. Acceptable call.

63’ Arshavin (Zenit) is flagged offside. Mistake. It was an important chance to score.
© The Third Team –footballrefereeing.blogspot.com

ADDITIONAL ASSISTANT REFEREE 1

10 Additional Assistant referee’s performance (please mention some important decisions with reference to the
minute):

Positioning and Movement:

+ Expected -

--- 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 AAR1 might have been involved in the penalty situations, in second half. Nothing relevant was detectedin both cases
so we can evaluate his performance as expected level, sharing the decisions of Atkinson.
Please describe any special situation(s) with indication of the minute(s) – mandatory if you tick “-“ (negative point) in one of
the above boxes:
Minute Description of the situation
68’ and Potentially involved in both penalty situations, probably he followed Atkinson. No reasons to act in a different
81’ way, so expected level.

ADDITIONAL ASSISTANT REFEREE 2

11 Additional Assistant referee’s performance (please mention some important decisions with reference to the
minute):

Positioning and Movement:

+ Expected -

--- 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:
Nothing relevant happened in his penalty area. He was probably involved in a goal kick decision in first half. For the rest,
expected level.
Please describe any special situation(s) with indication of the minute(s) – mandatory if you tick “-“ (negative point) in one of
the above boxes:
Minute Description of the situation
© The Third Team –footballrefereeing.blogspot.com

FOURTH OFFICIAL

12 Comment on the fourth official:


The fourth official was not involved in remarkable situations, he executed in a adequate manner his duties about
substitutions and added time. Nothing extra-ordinary to report.