March 8, 2017

Aytekin to referee Barcelona - Paris, Atkinson in charge of Dortmund - Benfica

German Elite referee Deniz Aytekin has been assigned to take control over FC Barcelona's return game against Paris SG combatting to equalize the 4:0-loss they suffered in Paris three weeks ago. Meanwhile, England's Martin Atkinson will be in charge of Borussia Dortmund against SL Benfica (0:1).


8 March 2017, 20:45 CET (Camp Nou, Barcelona)
FC Barcelona - Paris SG
Referee: Deniz Aytekin (GER)
Assistant Referee: Guido Kleve (GER)
Assistant Referee: Markus Häcker (GER)
Additional Assistant Referee 1: Daniel Siebert (GER)
Additional Assistant Referee 2: Benjamin Brand (GER)
Fourth Official: Mike Pickel (GER)
UEFA Referee Observer: László Vagner (HUN)
UEFA Delegate: Michal Listkiewicz (POL)

8 March 2017, 20:45 CET (Signal Iduna Park, Dortmund)
Borussia Dortmund - SL Benfica
Referee: Martin Atkinson (ENG)
Assistant Referee: Stephen Child (ENG)
Assistant Referee: Stuart Burt (ENG)
Additional Assistant Referee 1: Michael Oliver (ENG)
Additional Assistant Referee 2: Kevin Friend (ENG)
Fourth Official: Constantine Hatzidakis (ENG)
UEFA Referee Observer: Georgios Bikas (GRE)
UEFA Delegate: Tormod Larsen (NOR)

173 Comments:

  1. I didn't expect this appointments

    ReplyDelete
  2. Kuipers maybe a game in the EL.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yes I think we can expect some Elite in Champions League now. Kuipers, Orsato, Tagliavento...

      Delete
  3. Good and deserved game for Aytekin, while I didn't expect Atkinson for the match in Dortmund. This would have been Clattenburg's stuff, but after his decision Atkinson should be considered as England's nr. 1 at moment. Chances for 2018 WC?
    Kevin Friend AAR in CL after his bad day in Manchester United - Bournemouth.

    ReplyDelete
  4. I think Björn Kuipers will either get an EL game in this matchday or Atlético Madrid v Bayer Leverkusen CL match next week!! But Martin Atkinson should never have been appointed for Dortmund v Benfica after some very substandard performances in Europe this season so I'm indeed a bit surprised!!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Leicester-Sevilla is also possible for Kuipers. After the first leg result, it might need an experienced referee.

      Delete
    2. That's also very much possible I must say!! These are the two possible clashes for him considering the fact Collina hasn't appointed referees to teams whose matches they've already refereed in playoffs and group stage!!

      My predictions for the last 4 games will now be :

      Atlético Madrid v Bayer Leverkusen : Björn Kuipers
      Juventus v Porto : Sergei Karasev
      Leicester City v Sevilla : Daniele Orsato
      Monaco v Manchester City : Ovidiu Hategan

      Delete
    3. One exception: Aytekin refereed PSG already in the group stage.

      Delete
    4. Yes that's something I didn't notice!! Then maybe Kuipers is also possible for Juventus v Porto although Kuipers has already been to Turin on MD 4?? But I feel he will fit well in Atlético Madrid v Bayer Leverkusen although I personally felt he was best suited for Borussia Dortmund v Benfica in this round!!

      Delete
    5. I think there is no need of Kuipers in Atlético Madrid - Bayer Leverkusen.
      Hategan / Karasev are candidates for this game.

      Delete
    6. I missed out Jonas Eriksson in my predictions!! But then I cannot find a suitable game for him either!! Will he be given a direct QF then? Or maybe he will replace Kuipers/Orsato/Hategan?? Rocchi I think will miss out on a CL tie owing to his poor performances!!

      Delete
    7. @Chefren then would you prefer appointing Kuipers directly to a Quarter Final tie in CL and maybe to EL R16 this week?? Or would you rather have him in some other CL R16 tie??

      Delete
    8. I would appoint him in EL and then directly in CL quarterfinals.
      The EL game could be the German dery, both legs are possible.

      Delete
    9. Or Olympiacos v Besiktas maybe?? Might be a really hot clash which might need a very calm, composed and experienced Elite referee!!

      Delete
    10. @Chefren please share your thoughts about the possible appointments for the last 4 CL Round of 16 ties!!

      Delete
    11. Juventus - Porto: I see Karasev there, game seems to be already decided in favor of Juventus, a few chances for the Portuguese team, but it would be still a good game for the Russian.

      Leicester - Sevilla: after first leg's game, it is indeed possible to see an experienced Elite, Eriksson could be the right name.

      Atlético - Leverkusen: I don't think that the Spanish team will face problems, a good game for Hategan.

      Monaco - Manchester City: a very hot clash after first leg, and I think Rocchi could be there.

      Delete
    12. But Rocchi did have some dodgy games in the season in Europe so is he a perfect name for that game?? Might Orsato be an option for that game??

      Delete
    13. No, it would be too much (at moment) for Orsato. I'm sure he has been appointed for a game in EL on this Thursday.

      Delete
    14. A high profile EL clash won't be too bad for him either... I agree with you Chefren!!

      Delete
  5. And I must mention that Aytekin has a really great game... The tie is far from decided and Barcelona will try to apply pressure on Aytekin in every possible way so obviously Aytekin has a really big game up his sleeves!!

    ReplyDelete
  6. Very good appointment for Deniz Aytekin and deserved as well. He will face a very challenging match, Barcelona will do anything to turn the result from the first leg around. As Soham already pointed out, the pressure is on.

    Concerning Atkinson: could this appointment be the result of Clattenburg being out now? And there's something I noticed as well about his AAR's: is he not usually accompanied by Craig Pawson as AAR2. With him being absent, could that eventually hint that he might be appointed with Anthony Taylor in EL? (My guess would be Copenhague-Ajax in front of Herbert Fandel).

    On Kuipers: I think he will referee a EL Round of 16 clash and then go straight to the CL quarterfinals. I don't think that Juventus-Porto or Atlético-Leverkusen need a high-profile name. And he doesn't really fit in Monaco-City or Leicester-Sevilla with Bo Karlsson and Kyros Vassaras being present (they are still members of the Refereeing Committee, yes?).

    What I wonder about: what about Eriksson? Which match could he get?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. This comment has been removed by the author.

      Delete
    2. I'm very sad that Kuipers isn't likely to get a CL R16 tie even after a very good European season 😭 This means he is out of committee's favour at the moment in spite of a good season 😞 He deserved more this time round but will again end up with only 4 CL games in the season and that makes me sad 😞

      Delete
    3. Why only 4 games? There are semifinals as well and with Clattenburg not being there anymore, Kuipers should be in the run again for a CL semifinal (if Cakir doesn't do all the semifinals again, like last season)

      Delete
    4. But if he isn't trusted enough to take charge of a CL R16 tie then will the committee trust him with a CL semifinal?? 😞

      Delete
    5. I think your conclusion "This means he is out of committee's favour at the moment" is rather wrong - given that there are much more than 20 Elite officials for 16 games it is only natural you cannot give a match to everybody. He still has chances for Juve-Porto or Monaco-ManCity, though.

      For sure Kuipers will be among those who will take charge of more important games including a quarterfinal and maybe even a semifinal. And apart from that, I could also imagine to see him in the German UEL derby between Schalke and Gladbach (he would make the derby complete, as he lives approximately 100 km away from both cities.

      Delete
    6. This comment has been removed by the author.

      Delete
    7. I understand your point, Niclas... Actually I thought that the better performing referees are appointed more often and in big games so if Kuipers is given EL instead of CL then possibly he might be a bit out of favour and thus no chance for a SF match... But now that you are saying that Kuipers is possible for a SF I'm happy and I would wish that it's true (obviously it depends on how the CL QF stage goes for him)... Also the German UEL derby would be a good appointment as well, I remember him getting a Spanish derby in Bilbao v Valencia in EL last year!!

      Delete
    8. If everything was performance-based, Eriksson should not get more than a low-profile R16 CL match this season, IMO. However, you expect him directly in QF. The name is a factor that has to be taken into account too. Also, a possible strategy is to keep referees for potential sonorous matches by not appointing them early on to those possible teams. This could be Kuipers' situation. If an Elite referee is not appointed in this round, it can be very good news or very bad news, but not only the latter. It can mean that he is being considered for further rounds or it can mean that he is not considered at all for a KO stage CL match this season. For instance, Moen is likely in this second situation. However, I'd expect Kuipers to be in the first.

      Delete
    9. Thanks for the detailed analysis George... This gives me a lot of hope!! 🙂 I wish Kuipers all the best for any possible game that comes his way!!

      Delete
    10. I would say UEFA has approximately three or maybe four sub-groups of their Elite officials:

      1) A group with their stars who are experienced and high-profile (the Cakirs).

      2) A group with experienced officials who are no real options for the really big games but can get appointed to lower-profile games (the Collums).

      3) A group with young, aspiring officials for the future who can be tested in pre-decided games like Arsenal-Bayern (the Hategans).

      4) A group with officials who will not be appointed for CL K.O. matches by 99% (the Thomsons). There are 3 or 4 of them in Elite.

      Strategically it would be unclever to "waste" too many officials who are in 1) in UCL Round of 16. As you cannot appoint those who are maybe rather in 3) (the talents) directly for a quarterfinal, it is logical that they get appointed for R16. So 4-5 places are for them - so only 11-12 are remaining for almost 20 officials. So if you save someone, you save the "stars" if the matches allow it and due to the many high results of the 1st leg, UEFA is obviously in the comfortable position to save some of the high-profile officials for heavier tasks in QF and SF.

      Delete
    11. Excellent analysis Niclas and I've to say I totally understand and agree with every detailing in this above comment... Can you elaborate one thing to me as to who are the referees you'd assume are most likely in the sub group 1??

      Delete
    12. My sub group 1 would be: Brych, Cakir, Kassai, Kuipers, Marciniak, Rizzoli, Skomina and, if they are in a good form, Mazic, Eriksson and Atkinson.

      But that's only my personal view. Every elite referee has his qualities otherwise he wouldn't be there.
      And, as there are so many matches, it is very important to have a lot of reliable referees.

      Delete
    13. @Soham: https://drive.google.com/file/d/0Bwkc3sKcCNy9MXpRU1pTSW1mLTA/view

      Delete
    14. Thanks Niclas and David 🙂

      Delete
  7. On AAR2 Kevin Friend: https://twitter.com/sportingawayday/status/838026892414443521

    Who is the referee and who is the player in this role-game? :)

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Good body language, I think he has made his point perfectly clear :)

      Delete
    2. Indeed :) Eye-contact, finger-tip-gesture and empathic mimic. Not bad.

      Delete
  8. Aytekin is a good choice for match in Barcelona.Very experienced ref who has plenty of tough matches behind him,he is good choice and that's for sure.He will easily deal with PSG's time wasting and Barca players protests(Neymar,Suarez,Pique and others).

    ReplyDelete
  9. Mark Clattenburg will officiate the Saudi Cup's final on 10 March. Strange situation. He is active in England and in Saudi Arabia, where he is also some kind of a boss...

    Interesting quote: 'And we also understand that the County Durham-born official could yet referee at next summer's World Cup. It was assumed that Clattenburg — who took charge of the Euro 2016 final — had passed up his chance of being involved in Russia after deciding to quit the Premier League last month having become disillusioned with the politics of the Professional Game Match Officials Limited. But we can reveal that refereeing chiefs - including UEFA boss Pierluigi Collina — are exploring ways of getting the man voted the world's No 1 whistler to the finals. As part of his new role Clattenburg will set-up an exchange arrangement which will see referees from Europe's top leagues head to Saudi on one-off weekends — and in return he could be presiding over matches on the continent next season, opening the door for his involvement at the World Cup as a UEFA representative.

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-4284328/Mark-Clattenburg-ruled-FA-Cup-quarter-finals.html

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I don't know why but it doesn't seem fair to me!! 🤔

      Delete
  10. Correct first yellow card against Matuidi for a reckless stemp on the foot (5'). Good and necessary signal - the only question is whether a team benefit was given at all or whether Aytekin should have better stopped play immediately - as Barca will have to continue their attacks given the result, I can understand why he opted to give the advantage though.

    Correctly rejected penalty appeal for handball in 8' - handball yes, but far away from deliberate (deflected ball, no tension, natural position).

    In 11', another rejected penalty appeal for handball. Undeliberate to my mind given the videos and guidelines existing for this type of handballs, but surely more a grey area than the previous one.

    ReplyDelete
  11. Difficult situation involving Neymar around 37' - a penalty was possible.

    Atkinson with a crucial mistake in 41' - clearly missed 2nd yellow card against Dembele for reckless studs tackle. Apart from that, clear lacks of acceptance and authority.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I agree, missed clear mistake not to show the 2nd yellow. I think that a referee like Brych or a Spanish one would have sent Dembele off without hesitating.
      But all in all, I am satisfied with Atkinsons performance. I know his style and was expecting such situations.

      Delete
  12. Dortmund - Benfica
    11' (replay in 19' if DutchRef wants to make clips ;-)) - correctly rejected penalty appeal for handball (surely not deliberate, the player didn't be aware of ball position, the ball hit his hand from behind)
    38' - YC to Dembele (BOR) for dissent by word and/or action; fully correct
    40' - no 2nd YC to Dembele (BOR) for what looked like a reckless foul in front of AR1; the referees were lenient, we can discuss whether it was a clear mistake or still an acceptable call
    45' - Aubameyang suggests he was fouled off the ball, even if, the potential contact occured outside the box

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. 40' For me really compulsory studs contact above the shoe. No other option except yellow (= red). Maybe they are lucky that the UEFA observer sits on the AR2 side in Dortmund (not sure about that, though). Maybe he won't check the DVD for it.

      45' I think this type of crossed running paths is no foul and no punishable tripping. And as you correctly said, 1-2 m outside.

      Delete
    2. 32' - YC to Castro (BOR) for reckless stamp on an opponent's foot. One can say that although the hitting point was low, the player jumped in and his movements were out of control = excessive force was used. What do you think?

      Delete
    3. I understand your point and also had these questions in my mind when watching the replays. Force was moderate (minimum) due to what you describe as "jumped in". However, I think for UEFA the low contact area overweigh here and make it rather yellow (+ it was the first card in the game, so in orange cases better choose yellow). Interesting situation at any rate!

      Delete
    4. 40': I think, the studs contact on the heel was made with low intensity, because it was only the trailing leg. So not 100% reckless IMO.
      Mr Bikas will read it here, so no escape for the Englishmen ;)

      Delete
    5. Well, the contact was not strong, I believe Dembele didn't use much force in making this studs contact. However, same foul can be easily deemed as reckless - very late, opponent was a target, he was initially off the ground, then posed one foot on the ground but extended his jump and made that contact with an opponent. There are strong arguments for 2nd YC and some arguments against it (not full studs contact, maybe he tried to avoid it at the last moment (?), not needed in the game context - he will be ultra carefull now or will be substituted by coach and other players from his team won't be complaining whole the second half)

      Delete
    6. Maybe we are talking about two different situations? If I remember the situation correctly, then it was a stud contact on the lower shinbone area. Will check it.

      Delete
    7. Puh... Castro is the next lucky one staying on the pitch. Maybe the force was too low for a 2nd YC?

      Delete
    8. 72' - Now Samaris (BEN) escaped a 2nd YC for SPA. :)

      Delete
  13. I am impressed by Aytekin's overall performance in the first half. Very calm, full control. Well done so far in a game with a huge pressure.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Are you laughing ? YC for Cavani for words and gesture instead of a stonewall YC for Piqué (clear promising action - no defenders yet). Was here second YC and RC. The first one was also "orange" ( tackle from behind). Here for me, clear crucial mistake...

      Delete
  14. Good first half from Aytekin ,till now he made a decent performance.

    ReplyDelete
  15. Very tough PK for Barca. For me CORRECT decision by AAR2. After he felt, defender continued with his moving on the ground and interfered Neymar. No dive for me. One can say that foul on Neymar in PK area in first half was more penalty, but we didn't have good angle to prove that.

    ReplyDelete
  16. In my opinion correct penalty decision by Aytekin. He wanted to play on first, however, there was some input by Benjamin Brand and after that Aytekin decided to give the penalty.

    ReplyDelete
  17. 64: clear serious foul play from Neymar. RC missed again...

    ReplyDelete
  18. Dortmund's 4:0 could be tight offside - impossible to detect for AR2 due to 1,5-2m wrong/late positioning.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Exactly, tight offside but impossible to detect with that positioning.

      Delete
  19. Worldclass onside by Häcker....

    ReplyDelete
  20. Worldclass onside decision by Markus Häcker - 6:1! However, the second penalty is more than debatable, just a very, very tight contact.

    ReplyDelete
  21. Well, well, well... What happened there??? For me, absolutely no penalty prior 5th goal. But 6th goal... NO OFFSIDE and it was CORRECT DECISION. One defender in the middle... He was late and it was TOP CLASS DECISION from AR2, if he managed to see that all in that mess.

    ReplyDelete
  22. For sure but overall a very good performance in my eyes

    ReplyDelete
  23. Incredible game with so many challenges for the officials...

    Apart from many grey areas where you can have different opinions, I must congratulate Häcker for his onside in 90+6. Maybe the most important decision of his career? I am personally not convinced by the penalty leading to the 5:1, but probably it is justifiable.

    Aytekin impressed me in the BIG PICTURE. How can you stay so cool and calm in front of 90k supporters in such a game scenario? Immense emotional stability and massive personality.

    My deep respect.

    ReplyDelete
  24. On the whole what a great performance by Deniz Aytekin - perfect approach for this game, so calm, card selection was very good. Strong personality but also good empathy. Crucial decisions were seriously perfect, great recommendation by AAR2 Brand for the first penalty to BAR. I really really thought Aytekin became an 'Elite' Elite referee tonight, maybe he did anyway.
    But a nothing penalty at 91', again recommended by Brand, BAR#9 totally faked a foul.

    When UEFA appointed Aytekin they didn't expect this...
    On the whole very, very well done

    7.9 (8.5/6)

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Btw, what an amazing onside by AR2 Häcker for 6-1!

      Delete
  25. Anyone noticed the foul on Di Maria by Mascherano while shooting? They were 3-1. It seemed clear to me, but no replays were shown

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I too noticed that replays were conveniently omitted on that particular play. I believe Mr. Herman Munster simply turned a blind eye swallowed his whistle. Because if he had correctly blown, it meant PK and a send off for Mascherano.

      Delete
    2. On a more general note, considering even recent scandals about television replays regarding controversial referee decisions, do you think this could be a problem for VAR in a 'tight' situation and surely there must be safeguarding around it. I know they have access to all screens, but what is stopping someone cutting the film...

      Delete
    3. I guess VAR won't work like that. I guess the VAR will have the chance to see replays of every situation he has interest in. If he thinks that in Mascherano's situation there was a possibility of foul, he would replay that sequence even if it is not shown on TV. Or at least, that's how it should be.

      Delete
  26. What a game for Aytekin, I think that nobody expected such outcome, to be honest.
    Yes, Barça had still some chances, but if we think that in the 88' minute the score was still 3-1. I really can't believe that. A game for the history.
    Having said that, I think Aytekin took correct decision in 11' (no deliberate handball) and 67' (Suárez simulation).
    I want to check again the penalties whistled in favor of Barça and many other situations.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u7qY1oq7998
      First penalty whistled to Barcelona.

      Delete
    2. Clear penalty for me. No intention, but it was foul. Second one was very, very doubtful. No pulling (at first glance it looked that there was), no pushing, tripping??? Might be, but just might. Very soft. I have to say that I am glad that Barca is through, they deserved that.

      Delete
  27. Aytekin's 2nd penalty was ok for me since Suarez' foot was caught.

    ReplyDelete
  28. I want to see the Di Maria situation with the possible penalty a few minutes before Barcelona got the penalty. Very weird that the tv crew never showed any replays of that.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. "Conveniently" omitted. Just saw a replay on a highlight show and the German completely missed it. But it's impossible to spot when you are so far away from the play, which he was. He was at least 20-25 yards from the incident. Simply unacceptable for a FIFA level referee.

      Delete
  29. @RayHD: If you have any plans of making clips from any of both matches, let me know. As I recorded Barca-PSG I can make those clips right now. For clips of Dortmund-Benfica I have to wait till a download is available. What shall we do?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. OK, I will do Dortmund - Benfica. :)

      Delete
    2. Excellent 👍🏻 :-))

      Delete
    3. Great team work.
      Thanks a million!!!

      Delete
  30. I'm a little bit confused reading the comments here. Yes, Aytekin showed great personality and communication skills tonight, but he had two crucial mistakes influenting the outcome of the game. Furthermore there were three more situations (2nd YC Pique? RC Neymar? First penalty) I've a lot of doubts on. He took several crucial decisions against PSG and definitely Aytekin has an important part on Barca's win. My mark would be something between 7.2 and 7.4.

    Regarding the first penalty: Which kind of offence should that be?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Careless tripping, I would say.

      Delete
    2. For me it should be "tripping". Although it is undeliberate, he still trips Neymar and prevents him from reaching the ball.

      Delete
    3. We must discuss Messi's dissent and the Di Maria foul that was not called.

      Delete
    4. Tripping with his head? :)
      Was it really careless? For me not, tbh. I can accept the decision, but it would never be a crucial mistake, if he would not whistle.

      Delete
    5. You are probably thinking of the German translation "Beinstellen", but tripping is more general, meaning "to cause to stumble". So it's possible with the head.

      Delete
    6. http://www.macmillandictionary.com/dictionary/british/trip_2

      1 a)[transitive] to make someone hit their foot on something and fall down

      So yes, "he made Neymar hit his foot with his head and fall down".

      I see the discussion about if it is careless or not. I think both choices could be accepted.

      Delete
    7. Philipp, you're right - danke! ;-)

      George, valid point. For me it is not careless, but probably both is acceptable indeed, even if I wonder if an AAR should overrule the referee in such a 50/50 situation.

      Delete
    8. Another point for discussion is Aytekin's fitness and his positioning. He interfered with play for two times as he was too central, furthermore his both crucial mistakes, especially the missed penalty, were due to lacks of positioning and sprinting.

      Delete
    9. 8' rejected pen correct, 11' rejected pen questionable.
      1st pen he tries to crawl to the line to deliberately block Neymar's path (unlucky!). Wise to discuss with AAR if not 100% certain, he objected but was he influenced by FCB players? I do believe De Maria situation was penalty. 2nd pen is a clear elbow but only visible for AR/AAR. Brave to trust his ref team, or lack of leadership not overruling those calls?

      Lots of time wasting first 30min (warning/card to set a standard?), several YC/RC situations both teams. Difficult match, Aytekin did very well imo.

      Delete
    10. Gitzlo, I am glad that I wasn't the only one who noticed Aytekin's physical shortcomings. Throughout the match I saw him either walking or trotting. His acceleration was non existent. At no point did I see him break into an all out sprint. The type of sprint that was necessary to be closer to the Mascherano / Di Maria incident. I understand that it was late in the match and that his legs were probably feeling heavy. However that is when you dig deep and use what little you have left in the tank to force yourself to be in the best possible position to properly judge a crucial play. Unfortunately Aytekin lacked that internal fortitude and he's now left himself open to criticism.

      Delete
  31. Dortmund - Benfica (M. Atkinson):

    https://streamable.com/album/cvzo0

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. 11': Surely not a deliberate handball.
      31': Mandatory YC close to RC but still supportable.
      33': Advantage is OK, YC for the subsequent foul as well, but I would have liked to rewatch the previous challenge by Dortmund player when Atkinson played advantage. Perhaps another YC had to be issued there.
      38': Correct decision by Atkinson.
      40': Difficult to catch live, given also the fact that Atkinson was far away and a bit lazy (let me say that), but this was a clear YC in my opinion. The hitting point can't justify a NO CARD decision. The only argument in favor of Atkinson would be the intensity of the challenge. No excessive force and perhaps (luckily) player was not totally hit by the opponent, but in case of more excessive force, this should have been a RC, so draw your conclusions... clearly a crucial mistake for me, but not easy for Atkinson. I would assign some responsibility to AR1 as well, even though he reported the foul, he had to inform Atkinson about a mandatory YC.
      46': In this case, I agree with Atkinson, it is for me a different situation than the previous one. Player from Benfica puts his leg when Dortmund's player is already trying to play the ball, so in a way one could say Castro had less responsibilities for that, the force was not excessive, for me OK decision.
      48': Again, possible YC.
      71': Correct offside call, acceptable decision by Atkinson to give advantage as keeper got the possession of the ball.
      72': Mandatory YC in my opinion, challenge targeted to the opponent, tactical foul.
      85': Offside, with a correct positioning AR would have detected it. Unluckily, he was unable to follow the play.

      Well, what we can say is that Atkinson is a very lenient referee, I also remember in the past he had many matches with potential red cards for SFP, almost never issued.

      Delete
  32. Mascherano said: “It’s clear that I did foul Di Maria but I think that’s not the reason why we eliminated PSG.”

    https://www.thesun.co.uk/sport/football/3045821/javier-mascherano-angel-di-maria-penalty-area-barcelona

    ReplyDelete
  33. Aytekin's performance in Barcelona exposes what we as referee's all know very well. The fact that just 1 crucial mistake that influences the outcome of a match does indeed trash 90 minutes of an acceptable performance. Unfortunately for Mr. Aytekin's, his mistake was as a result of his poor positioning on an absolutely crucial incident. As someone has pointed out, he was at least 20-25 yards from the spot where Mascherano tackled Di Maria. At this level it is simply unacceptable for a referee who possess a FIFA badge to allow himself to be put into such a poor position. Had he simply gotten that call correct, it would have "glossed over" all of his other shortcomings that he displayed.

    ReplyDelete
  34. Collina took a gamble by putting Aytekin in charge at Camp Nou but unfortunately that didn't pay off and instead his errors also influenced the result of the game!! This should be the end of the season for Aytekin now!!!

    ReplyDelete
  35. OK. I have already watched all videos DutchRef posted on his Vimeo profile. The holding in 34' and push in 67' are definitely more foul than the holding/push(?) in 90'. The referee was simply inconsistent in assessing such duels. It has to be evaluated as at least one crucial mistake for wrong penalty in 90'.

    The rest:
    08' - correctly rejected penalty appeal for handball
    11' - most likely correctly rejecte penalty appeal for handball (in Poland it would have been a stonewall penalty!)
    42' - If you whistle a foul, it has to be a (second) yellow card to Pique!
    48' - Penalty. Tripping.
    64' - YC to Neymar is most likely still acceptable for UEFA.
    85' - I'm torn here. I would back the referee althogh I still have Mascherano's interview in my mind.

    Therefore, my mark is 7.4.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Aytekin was inconsistent and unfortunately he affected the result of this match!!

      Delete
  36. Barcelona - Paris Saint Germain / FIRST HALF (Deniz Aytekin)

    3' - Goal BAR (1-0); GLT
    https://vimeo.com/207555207

    5' - YC Matuidi (PSG)
    https://vimeo.com/207555588

    8' - Handball penalty appeal BAR
    https://vimeo.com/207555953

    11' - Handball penalty appeal PSG
    https://vimeo.com/207556070

    14' - YC Draxler (PSG)
    https://vimeo.com/207556265

    23' - YC Piqué (BAR)
    https://vimeo.com/207556418

    27' - Handball penalty appeal BAR
    https://vimeo.com/207556614

    34' - Penalty appeal Neymar (BAR); holding Meunier?
    https://vimeo.com/207556816

    42' - YC Cavani (PSG)
    https://vimeo.com/207557042

    45+2' Positioning and interference
    https://vimeo.com/207557310

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. 3' – correct goal

      5' – correct YC

      8' – Correct decision, no handball, no PK

      11' - Correct decision, no handball, no PK

      14' – Correct YC for SPA

      23' – Correct YC for reckless

      27' – Correct decision, no handball, no PK

      34' – Correct decision, no PK, mutual holding that was initiated by the attacker.

      42' - Correct YC for dissent. No 2nd YC for SPA.

      45+2' – Poor positioning

      Delete
  37. Barcelona - Paris Saint Germain / SECOND HALF (Deniz Aytekin)

    48' - Penalty BAR
    https://vimeo.com/207559272

    61' - YC Rakitic (BAR)
    https://vimeo.com/207559725

    64' - YC Neymar (BAR); reckless or excessive kick?
    https://vimeo.com/207559915

    67' - YC Suárez (BAR)
    https://vimeo.com/207560066

    85' - Penalty appeal PSG; Mascherano fouling Di Maria?
    https://vimeo.com/207560257

    90' - Penalty BAR en YC Marquinhos (PSG)
    https://vimeo.com/207560355

    90+4' - YC Verratti (PSG)
    https://vimeo.com/207560580

    90+5' - Second YC Verratti (PSG)?
    https://vimeo.com/207560683

    90+5' - Goal BAR (6-1); tight onside
    https://vimeo.com/207560798

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. 48' – Clear penalty, it is a pity the referee did not recognize it.

      61' – Correct YC to Rakitic

      64' – Correct YC to Neymar for reckless tackle.

      67' – Correct YC to Suárez for simulation

      85' – Based upon Mascherano’s sudden movement of tackling leg backwards I would say there was some contact. The contact was not strong, but it still might have been strong enough to make Di Maria loose balance when kicking the ball. If I had to make a call I would say it was a PK and RC for DOGSO.

      90' – No PK. Contact between defender and attacker was light and did not influence attacker’s movement or balance, but the attacker still managed to achieve what he failed to do in 67’ (simulation). He stopped his movement in search for contact with defender’s leg/any part of the body (again, just like min 67 when he left his leg back in search for contact with the opponent). His subconscious told him such contact was too light, almost invisible so he fell down and complained about neck contact.

      90+5' – Clear 2nd YC to Verratti for reckless tackle

      90+5' – With the world class call, the AR earned a place in historical UCL match

      Delete
  38. First of all thanks a lot for the videos, DutchRef.

    As indicated yesterday, of course there were numerous crucial and debatable situations to solve for the officials and now to discuss for us.

    I however disagree with some of you crucifying this performance as being below 7.4 or completely inconsistent (and also think some comments are going beyond fairness for the officials - I specially mean you, Soham, here - after such a game nobody of us would have survived) for the following reasons:

    8, 11 and 27': No deliberate handballs.

    34' borderline for me - the defender cannot complain about a penalty, on the other hand Neymar accepted and sought it. Aytekin too static and not creating the best angle, though.

    42' Is this a black-and-white SPA? For me, never. Both players stand to the goal with their back, Cavani would have to cover 30-35m on the sideline height. If you give a 2nd yellow card for this in such a game, I doubt you survive the debriefing. (of course I exaggerate... but I doubt that any of the real Elite refs UEFA has would give it)

    48' I cannot say whether he threw himself into the running path deliberately - but it is a clear careless action for me which would be a foul everywhere else on the pitch. Correct penalty.

    64' the force was probably low enough to deem it as a yellow card

    67' correct simulation, however also here Aytekin is too far away and does not create the best angle

    85' I cannot say anything based on these replays. What I am sure about is that I do not take the words of Mascherano after such a game too seriously. If the touch at the backheel was caused by di Maria pulling off the shot himself, then bad luck. If Mascherano produced a more punishable contact at the backheel by the sliding tackle, then I hope there will be replays to proof it. With this material, I doubt one can make a clear final judgement in the one or other direction. What is sure is that Aytekin is poorly positioned and has sprinting deficits.

    90' This penalty is, for me, neither clearly correct nor wrong. Considering the action in real speed, the push seems to be effective enough. In the replay, I doubt so but think the contact at the feet could be deemed as careless. On the other hand, Suarez makes a lot out of it. However you might see it: I think this call is acceptable. The difference to the previous situations could be a) the full speed of the action, b) the attacker would have been brought to ground even without him making more of it than necessary (this was not the case in the Neymar situation) and c) probably AAR2 shouted PENALTY into the micro...

    90+5: clear 2nd YC for me and to my mind the only CLEAR crucial mistake. In a situation where nobody cared. This does not make it much better, of course.

    90+6': worldclass onside

    === what remains is that I believe this was a very challenging game for the officials from the beginning to the end which they mastered enormously in terms of personality, calmness and control. In terms of the crucial decisions, I think all of them are supportable except the not given 2nd YC for Verratti (in a situation where nobody wanted it, however), or, with regard to di Maria, would need more videos to be clarified. What is definitely not acceptable is Aytekin's acceleration level and positioning in crucial moments - he might compensate that with his height and overview, but in some incidents you simply have to be close.

    Overall - I won't give a mark in this poor marking system that is unable to separate good performances from not so good ones due to the 7.9-regulation - this was the best CL match of the season and one of the best performances in my view. That among 7 or 8 debatable incidents you can have other opinions on some of them should be considered as normal.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The penalty given in 48' is very much reminiscent of the no-penalty call from Marciniak/Sokolnicki/Raczkowski in the ISL-AUT game at EURO 2016

      https://streamable.com/rujl

      Delete
    2. And as far as I am informed, that no-penalty call from EURO was deemed as acceptable/correct. I can't agree with it, though!

      Delete
    3. Unfortunately, it was not included in the RAP EURO 2016...

      Delete
    4. Indeed, both are careless albeit undeliberate fouls for me. I don't know how to express my feeling - I just think that in the Barca case the defender slightly "used" his stumbling to throw himself into the predictable running path of Neymar (in ISL-AUT, it was never clear for the defender that he might foul the attacker by that). Do you understand what I mean?

      About the RAP, thanks. Maybe they did not include it for strategic reasons.

      Delete
    5. Exactly! He tried to either cross Neymar's running path or clear the ball by head. In both cases it demands a deliberate act, therefore it is surely careless. In ISL-AUT it's not so clearly deliberate.

      Delete
    6. Decisions by both Marciniak and Aytekin (Brand) based on intuition and a big experience on what they 'felt', and I would say both are the preferable calls imo

      Delete
    7. 85' Seeing the incident several times now I believe Aytekin is not to blame for not making the call, nor for being out of position. He had a good position center pitch, then it was a quick counter. Only someone like Bolt would catch up(!). But, the AAR had a great view of the situation and he didn't move a finger. I do believe it was barely contact just after the shot. Pen and RC (direct or 2nd YC) surely missed.

      The AAR's are more important to make correct calls in todays football. Before it was either AAR or the choice of having 2 refs on pitch. Refs with military glasses to zoom in on situations when out of position? Hard to make clear calls 30-40m away from incidents.

      Delete
    8. Niclas, I didn't comment on his mark or anything but I personally felt that the penalty at 90+1' and the no penalty at 85' are incorrect calls and thus he had directly affected the result of the game and based on that his season should end here!! However that's just my opinion, no intention of crucifying any official or whatsoever!!

      Delete
  39. THANK YOU VERY MUCH, DUCTHREF!

    The most crucial situations for me:
    42' In my opinion that is the stop of a promising attack by the already booked Pique. Please stop the video in the moment of the foul.
    48' As I already mentioned, for me it isn't a penalty but I think we can judge it as 'acceptable'.
    85' This video shows it not so clearly, but there were some other replays in my TV too. It should be a penalty.
    90' Definitely no foul imo, but okay, he decided to award the penalty, but why a YC? DOGSO without any chance to play the ball = Red! If you look at AAR2 Benjamin Brand, he shows something with his elbow, so this is the "foul" they've judged.
    90+5' Reckless foul, which should be a (2nd) YC. But as nobody in the whole stadium wanted, I can understand Aytekin and it is an acceptable call for me in the tactical sense.
    90+5' WELL DONE, MARKUS HÄCKER!

    Once again:
    Deniz Aytekin did a great job regarding his personality, communication and body language skills. Anyway, there were some blatant lacks in positioning resulting in - for me - at least two crucial mistakes.

    But the message we can take along this night: Deniz Aytekin is able to handle such top clashes - and nevertheless I hope to see him in an UEL quarter-/halffinal again.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Regarding the 90' and DOGSO - to me it seems the attacker was not likely to gain control over the ball as he had to receive the ball perfectly and shoot in a split of a second. Those things happen, but not often and that is why they are not considered likely. And, I am sure that the same moment the attacker was touched by defender, he lost intention to play the ball and wanted to gain PK.

      Delete
    2. Suarez was in need to control the ball at first, GK was close, so I would opt for SPA.

      Delete
    3. Yes RayHD, the SPA was supposed to be my conclusion, I hope I wrote it correctly :)

      Delete
  40. Anyone can help me to answer the question: how UEFA judged the incident where Nasri kicked Neymar from behind (it should be RAP 2015.2), was it violent conduct or serious foul play?

    Of course, with reference to Neymar's kick yesterday.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. You were right, RAP 2015.2 it was :-)
      Nasri's action was deemed as a violent conduct, kicking the opponent with excessive force/brutality.

      https://vimeo.com/207626961

      Delete
    2. Thank you very much! One man tried to convince me it should be SFP, not VC yesterday.

      Delete
    3. If it is a red card, then for violent conduct definitely.

      Delete
  41. Didn't watch the match, just the highlights above, but from what I can see, Aytekin&Co. did an excellent job. That being said, I suspect this is the last time ever UEFA will appoint a 'junior' elite for a Barcelona game, regardless of the score ;)

    Three situations stand out:
    64': RC would of course be correct (RayHD: from what I remember, UEFA recommended RC in the RAP for Nasri). But I don't think YC can be deemed 'wrong' in real time.
    85': My question is: You are Aytekin's VAR in this situation. He whistles penalty; what do you tell your boss? These are the situations by which VAR will thrive or perish: if, at 85' in a tense top clash, the VAR cannot decisively help the referee, is there any use to it? And as VAR, do you have any information to validate or contradict the referee? Can you tell Aytekin 'Yes, it's a penalty'? Or, conversely, 'no, book Suarez for diving'? I suspect what the VAR would bring here is (by default) merely rationalization of the existing decision, for better or for worse. Whether that will induce more respect among players is...doubtful.
    90+5: Yes, that should be a YC+RC to Verrati.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. 48' and 85' are comparable on how AAR could act. They are surely there to be consulted and to help ref make a correct call. The benefit of having a good angle (often) and focus solely on a few tasks like goal line and penalty situations. 48' did show a very active AAR, perhaps influencing the call too much? The call did take some time, Aytekin was not 100% certain and the safe choice was goal kick which he originally called.

      85' the AAR didn't see there was contact and thereby no foul. Di Maria has somehow a poor reputation as a 'diver' and likely refs are very careful giving pens to such players (just like Neymar and Suarez).

      Delete
    2. "...I suspect this is the last time ever UEFA will appoint a 'junior' elite for a Barcelona game, regardless of the score ;)" – I think you're absolutely spot-on in drawing this conclusion, Emil!! Also I think this match wouldn't have gone to Aytekin in the first place if Mark Clattenburg was available for appointments!!

      Delete
    3. Wasn't Clattenburg appointed for that clash in the first place?

      And if so, it was UEFA's decision to replace him probably because they underestimated the match (due to 1st leg result).

      Delete
    4. Apologies: the "85'" refers to the foul on Suarez which was given. I got the minute wrong (never write before coffee) - I meant 90'.
      But it could of course apply to the foul/no-foul on Di Maria. These are the situations the VAR is meant to clarify - or at least, that pundits, players, fans will want it to clarify. So what do you do?

      Delete
    5. @edward, I share the same thought as yours... I don't blame Aytekin much for his couple of errors... UEFA is responsible for this as this pressure clash with the players like Neymar and Suarez at Camp Nou was always going to be a massive challenge for an inexperienced junior referee so it was always a gamble and unfortunately it didn't pay off... In hindsight, an experienced Elite referee should've have been appointed IMO... Aytekin did his very best and really the Committee is more responsible for the crucial errors rather than Aytekin himself!!

      Delete
    6. @Soham: My point is that one's own opinion does not mean that these are clear errors. Such grey area situations are up to interpretation. So I'd simply like to have an interpretation-based discussion of incidents instead of declaring opinions on game situations as factual mistakes. (and, what I even referred to more, was that this should be the end of his season, but it is only my opinion that this does not reveal much fairness). :)

      Delete
    7. Well Emil, 90' do make more sense perhaps. Having the 48' pen decision in mind, it certainly looked to me like the AAR would not hesitate the least to provide information to the ref. If he would disagree to the call when the ref was immediately pointing to the spot, that is an interesting question. Either way, it seems like he agreed or he was told by the ref why the call was made without objections (ARR later signalizing by the elbow to protesting PSG players).

      The ref must obviously have the final word, but if he is not 100% certain of a crucial decision, he would consult the AAR. What would the AAR do in general, any given situation - inform the ref no matter what? It would be bad for the whole team of officials if a wrong call was made that could be match deciding. I would love to see some statistics on better calls since AAR started. UEFA at least believe it is a vital part of the modernization of the game.

      What they'd talk about on the pitch over mic would be very interesting to know. I have seen a few analysis programs on TV with the ref radio broadcasted. You hear their reasoning in action. Very valuable for later when the experts are ready with the butcher block! The studio goes silent, dare say in awe of the ref's level of expertise (who is the real expert huh?).

      Would like to see hand signs like in hockey, maybe easier that way to understand for everybody the calls that are made. I would also dare say even some of these Elite refs could make mistakes (50/50 situations aside) in this particular match. Match itself enjoyable with poor def PSG and very lucky FCB.

      Delete
    8. @Niclas I do understand what you mean to say... Actually what I shared here were my interpretations, basically what I said is actually what I would have done if I was in Aytekin's place... Since my interpretation of the penalty at 90+1' was that the penalty call by Aytekin was wrong and Suarez dived, it logically seemed to me that Aytekin's season will end here because unfortunately that call (which I interprete as incorrect) directly affected the result of the match and qualifications!! I meant nothing more than this, it was just a conclusion drawn based on my interpretations of decisions!! Obviously my interpretations maybe wrong, I'm never claiming that just because I feel a couple of calls were incorrect means they're definitely incorrect! 🙂

      Delete
    9. All right and no problem, Soham! The end-of-the-season-thing just appeared a bit like a conviction without giving reasons for the one or other interpretation of a certain situation, but I know fully got your point and have recognized you meant it differently! :)

      Delete
    10. I'll also definitely try to present my views in a more clear and detailed manner from the next time, Niclas!! 😊

      Delete
  42. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  43. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

    ReplyDelete
  44. https://gfycat.com/KindlyAggressiveEyra
    Just found this while surfing on the web: another angle showing the penalty given by Aytekin at the end of the match. Look at the legs and feet. Is that enough?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. IMO: This is the opposite sideline close-in camera (first replay). Def is suddenly only watching his man, not the ball. Att is trying to hit the ball when it touches the ground. As he runs forward, look at the extended arm from the def hitting the att across his throat/chest (unintentional? enough force?). Also look at def left leg as he jumps(did it actually hit the back of the att left leg?).

      Also suspicious how def raises his arms and jumps afterwards. The def positioned himself badly, the att is closer to the ball. How does the ref see this? The att is first a few meters ahead to the left, crossing in just in front of def path. Def wants to screen ball clear to his keeper to catch. There is body contact, battle for the ball.

      What about the AR and AAR? Did they see something?
      Looks like ref did not consult his assistants on this decision. From his angle (15m behind? A bit far..but late in the game and he had just whistled for free kick moments before) he sees def arm striking the att. He is in no doubt, instantly deciding the call. Did AAR signal? I don't see Aytekin looking to him at all here.

      Did att swing with his right foot to make the shot? Not much contact needed for def to deny him that opportunity.

      Delete
    2. No. If the foul is given for anything, it has to be the elbow. And I must emphasise that in real time, it looked like a 100% clear penalty.

      Delete
  45. 1 crucial mistake te Mission 2nd YC could be duscussed but in my view he should giverschiedenen it and his warning was not enough. The 2nd YC in the e d of e Match his second mistake. But what a Match and I want to See any one here going home without mistakes. Great Teamwork great Personalien and game control. But that is no big surprise for me. Aytekin in the German League by far the best ref. and even Gräfe better than Brych in many matches this year. I am sure we will See Aytekin again in important matches and he completely deserves it. One of the best 7.8 ever.

    ReplyDelete
  46. My opinions on Aytekin's performance.

    3': goal, correct decision by GLT.
    5': correct YC, stepping on opponent's foot.
    8' - 11': no punishable handballs, correct decisions taken.
    14': clear YC, tactical foul from behind, stopping a promising attack.
    23': reckless tackle, correct YC.
    27': correct decision, arm was close to body.
    34': correct decision, not enough for a penalty.
    42': very blatant gesture by Cavani, asking for YC, it was impossible for Aytekin to close his eyes, however about the foul, I think that YC for SPA could have been given, but perhaps not a mandatory one.
    45'+2: some positioning problems, more reaction would have helped Aytekin.
    48': penalty call was clearly made by AAR2 Brand, this is the first thing I want to underline. And the question is: why? Wasn't Aytekin himself in a better position to assess the incident? watching a replay, you can see that AAR2 must "struggle" in order to assure a view of the incident, that happens on the other side. Given the fact that Aytekin had not whistled the penalty and he was ready to signal goal kick, I'm in trouble there. The penalty itself can be accepted, but it would have been by far better and totally different if Aytekin had whistled it without hesitation.
    61': correct YC.
    64': in my opinion it was a clear RC for VC, Neymar reacted and he was very lucky to get only YC, perhaps Aytekin could be backed, but for me RC. Should be a crucial mistake, I'm sorry.
    67': very good, correct decision, simulation.
    85': the contact in my opinion existed, in case of whistled penalty I think RC to be issued, but let me say very often we are deceived by the fact that the attacker is however able to shot, perhaps Aytekin didn't get the real perception of this challenge.
    90': watched and rewatched, I must be honest, I would never whistle such penalty, definitely not enough, I'm sure Suarez did it absolutely more than it really was. Having said that, difficult from the pitch to assess the challenge, but in my opinion no penalty. Correct decision would have been PLAY ON. However, at least in this case, Aytekin looked to be convinced about the call he made.
    90'+4: correct decision YC to Verratti.
    90'+5: missed second YC to Verratti, more than reckless tackle, I hope that Aytekin wasn't deceived by the particular situation (foul on GK in the midfield, this never happens), a clear YC and a missed sending off.
    90'+5: excellent by AR2, superb NO FLAG, crucial for qualification.

    So, trying to make a final assessment, I think that the match was very challenging in second half. If we isolate the first period of the game from the second, we can also notice that in first half all the decisions taken by the German referee were absolutely correct, or at least supportable. Problems came in second half. In occasion of the first penalty, I didn't like the management by Aytekin, he had to be sure about the call. The position where foul occurred was not in AAR2's area of responsibility.
    The second penalty is in my opinion wrong, as said, here one must go for the crucial mistake and I'm really sorry because this decision was more than crucial for Barça.
    Neymar had to be sent off for deliberately kicking the opponent as reaction, while Verratti was lucky to escape from a second YC (mandatory).
    Having said that: positive things were most of the YC issued, including Suarez simulation, the rejected penalty appeals for handballs and the management of dissenting behavior.
    In a so difficult game with so many controversial situations, I think it is impossible to get everything right, but at the same time there are clear points for improvement.
    Mark? Well, I can't close my eyes, and even with a more than favorable approach to referee's work, I think we can't escape from two crucial mistakes.
    But surely Aytekin will remember this game forever and it will be something from which to learn many, many things.
    Sorry for the long post.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thank you for your analysis, Chefren. I agree with all your points (maybe expect 64' when I can still accept a YC) and your final assessment.

      Delete
    2. Wonderful analysis Chefren. I fully agree with all your point of views. I have nothing to add.

      Delete
    3. Totally agreed!! Perfect analysis and I've nothing more to add!! 🙂

      Delete
    4. On why Aytekin had a worse position than Brand for the first penalty - imagine yourself into their positions. In terms of viewing angles, Brand was MUCH better positioned to estimate the impact and nature of the contact. Brand did have insight into the decisive contact - Aytekin not. This could explain why he relied on him (I base this on my own refereeing experience, maybe you disagree).

      I cannot agree with two more general things, even though I share your feelings in many areas, Chefren.

      You said that in your opinion the penalty was wrong (the 2nd one I mean). Yes, there are many arguments for that - and personally, as expressed yesterday, I would not have given it either. But I see some arguments for it. I for example see a clearly opponent-targeted move of the elbow. Which can absolutely been deemed as careless. But leaving that aside - this is not my point. We can have our opinions. But is this a 100% CLEAR situation? A 100% CLEAR mistake? Same goes for the situation in 85'. I have not watched a replay which tells that it is a 100% CLEAR mistake so far.

      This is what is disturbing me. Not being a penalty, a red card or whatever in OUR opinion does not mean that it is necessarily a CLEAR mistake. And categories like "it must be a penalty" or "it must be a red card" are, for my taste, not possible here as these are grey area decisions (interpreting the force of the Neymar tackle is crucial here, and I definitely see many arguments for not deeming this as excessive which would be needed to deem the kick as a red card offence!).

      The 2nd point is that many of (y)our assessments are based on slowmotions, which often help us, but also often blur the real impact of a contact. As Emil noticed: In live speed, it looks like a clear penalty. In full speed, maybe the elbow was decisive enough to fall. In slowmo, though, we see it slowed down 10 times and easily think Suarez CLEARLY dived. Also here, I would wish more empathy for what the referees faced in the real game situation.

      And finally... I fully agree with you. Maybe it is a 7.4, maybe a 7.8, maybe even above 8 - whatever. The important message should be that in such a terrific game - very challenging for 97 minutes - staying faultless would mean you are God.

      Therefore, emphasizing that I think the penalty was at least not necessary and maybe the worse of two/three possible alternatives, what remains is that Aytekin excelled in many areas and confirmed that he is a real alternative to Brych - no doubt that this does not help Paris at all.

      Delete
    5. Wonderful analysis Chefren. I fully agree with all your point of views. I have nothing to add.

      Delete
  47. For me,almost every big 50-50 call was in favour of Barcelona;2 penalties on Neymar and Suarez,Macherano handball in the beggining of match,triping Di Maria in 100 % chance.Only big decision that was in favour of PSG was to not sent off Veratti in last seconds of the match.

    How Neymar escaped RC I don't know,I mean he kicked PSG player(ball was way gone) because he was frustrated.Maybe it was too big of match to show RC or Aytekin wasn't brave enough.

    We all knew that it was gonna be a tough match for anyone who is in charge so I think this match was for the Elite of Elite refs like Brych,Kuipers maybe even Cakir.

    Aytekin to me wasn't bad,but he wasnt good either.

    ReplyDelete
  48. According to Marca, Collina is not amused:
    http://www.90min.com/fr/posts/4692906-l-arbitre-de-barca-psg-sanctionne-par-l-uefa-selon-marca

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I wouldn't trust such sources...

      Delete
  49. http://www.lequipe.fr/Football/Actualites/Pierluigi-collina-n-aurait-pas-apprecie-l-arbitrage-de-barca-psg/784215

    Referee Chief Collina is not happy to Aytekin. UEFA wants not appointments for Aytekin. But UEFA wondering.

    ReplyDelete
  50. The article from L'Equipe: http://www.lequipe.fr/Football/Actualites/Pierluigi-collina-n-aurait-pas-apprecie-l-arbitrage-de-barca-psg/784215

    Translation:

    APPARENTLY PIERLUIGI COLLINA DID NOT APPRECIATE REFEREEING IN BARCA-PSG
    UEFA could decide to not give any further Champions League matches to Deniz Aytekin, the referee of Barça-PSG.

    According to the daily newspaper "Marca", the responsible of the referees in UEFA, Pierluigi Collina, did not really appreciate the refereeing of Deniz Aytekin on Wednesday evening during the Round of 16 second leg match between Barcelona and PSG (6-1). Having the report of a referee delegate present at Camp Nou, the Italian should decide in the next days if the german referee will appear again in this competition this season. There is no sanction planned by UEFA in this case, but "suspensions" or demotions in competitions."

    Just translated it quite fastly, what do you think about this?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Similar to Chefren and although Marca is known for good sources even inside UEFA, I cannot imagine Collina flouts his duties and - via whoever - reveals his and the committee's view on a CL performance... I also remember reports from Turkish forms of media where Stark got 6.3 for ManU-Galatasaray, and as it later turned out, the mark was at least 1.0 better :)

      Delete
    2. http://www.marca.com/futbol/champions-league/2017/03/09/58c18bf322601d5d298b45f8.html

      I don't need an UEFA source to know, that his chances for a further CL match are quite low - just because he probably doesn't belong to the top 10, who are considered for the QFs and SFs.

      Delete
    3. Indeed, rarely seen any leaks to the press from ref evaluations. Seems fabricated as part of Marca's well-known anti-Barca campaign.

      Delete
  51. What would you expect from a piece of news in which the name of Collina is written incorrectly? And what if I told you that the one who wrote those "news" is a Real Madrid fan?

    One of the things that I find really disgusting about my country is that yesterday, Barcelona qualified. Instead of congratulate them, Real Madrid fans started to blame the referee. Real Madrid fans who have lost nothing!! You can see more news about Aytekin in spanish press than in french's, and what is even worse, some people who, supposedly, tries to analyze and comment referee's performances objectively was asking for Aytekin's retirement yesterday. Yes, as you read it. So I really doubt that those news about Collina are close to the reality. Is it possible that Aytekin doesn't get another CL match? Yes, it is. But I wouldn't have predicted him again anyway before last night. There are not that many matches left and I expect to see WC preselected referees in those matches, save next week's, in which he wouldn't have got a game anyway.

    For me there were two or three mistakes, points for improvement (fitness/positioning), but also MANY right calls by the refereeing team. I've seen worse in UEFA, tbh. And I see absolutely no reason for what happened in Spain.

    Sorry if this is off-topic, but I thought it would help to provide background to what Marca has published.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Well said. Better wait for official reactions from UEFA.

      Delete
    2. Totally agree with your thoughts George!! You're totally correct!!

      Delete
  52. Regardless of whether you believe what is being published or not. There is no doubt that Aytekin's shortcomings which in turn lead to his "possible" mistakes in the match. Have left him wide open for this level of criticism. I am reminded of the backlash that Tom Henning Ovrebo received in a match that coincidentally also involved FC Barcelona.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yet here in Spain, some Real Madrid fans have already started calling Aytekin "Obrevo2.0" ;)

      Delete
    2. Well, unfortunately for Mr. Aytekin, quite a few similarities performance wise do exist. So I am not surprised at him being compared to Ovrebo.

      A bit off topic, but what became of Ovrebo after that I'll fated night?

      Delete
    3. Honestly I think this comparison is absurd. It was PSG who managed to lose a 4-0 lead... not the referees.

      Delete
    4. Fanatics are fanatics, Niclas. They do not listen to reasons nor many times think for themselves.

      Delete
    5. Yes Niclas. PSG was catastrophic. But Deniz Aytekin - with a lot of controversial decisions almost ALL in Barça favour - has a clear responsability in front of the result : yes, completely agree with you about personality and self control, but also clear issues of positions and fitness. His choices, even in a high difficulty match - changed the score. So, please respect people who think there was here an obvious injustice. And Remontada was helped by the ref, even he is just an honest imperfect man...

      Delete
    6. Benoit, I fully get and understand your point. Of course I respect those people. All I have said is that the Ovrebo comparison is absurd in itself (and not more) :)

      Delete
    7. Ok Niclas ! Agree with that. :) Please note that Nasser El Khelaifi - in a recent interview - was very upset with Aytekin's performance. He spoke about "lack of lucidity" and added that Di Maria was penalty instead of last one where there wasn't foul on Suarez". We can easily precise that PSG président is''y known for comments about refereeing. These critical words are very rare...

      Delete
  53. The debate about this match and the performance of Mr. Aytekin had been great. Many differing views and opinions in regards to the many incidents. In most cases everybody is simply stating their own personal opinion, which of course they are totally entitled to. And the majority of people have not taken the topic personally. However there are a few (you know who you are) who have taken this debate quite personally. They act as if the criticism of Aytekin somehow directly affects them. So they've adopted an attitude that if you don't agree with them, then you're wrong. It's an open conversation/debate. Don't allow national pride, like/dislike of Aytekin, or fandom of either team dictate your opinion. If anything, base your opinion on The Laws of the Game.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Branding opposed views as personal defense, like/dislike- or nationality-driven is not the finest style either - but I am going to leave you in that belief.

      I agree with you: We are very grateful for the large variety of opinions and high quality of the comments which actually all were situation-based (leaving "are you laughing?, "Aytekin is a disgrace" and the humorously meant Herman Munster stuff aside :)).

      Delete
    2. I think that Nando's "Herman Munster" quip was meant purely as humourous to get a laugh. But if may be honest and candid. I too see the similarities. Aytekin's height, facial expressions, and the laborious movement that they both display. Neither the character not the referee come off as athletic.

      Delete
    3. Absolutely, and he caused a laugh :) Reminds me on the Rodriguez-cuiquidracula comparison.

      Delete
  54. Interesting: but we should not forget that the video is from a Barcelona page. With todays technology you never know if the video is manipulated. It is sped up for sure.
    www.facebook.com/story.php?story_fbid=1306638752736289&id=285344901532351

    ReplyDelete
  55. https://mobile.twitter.com/FCBW_A7/status/840275981550137345/photo/1

    ReplyDelete
  56. is such contact enough for a penalty?

    ReplyDelete
  57. I see now replays from Mascherano's foul on Di Maria. That's clearly UNACCEPTABLE that AAR1 doesn't alert Aytekin on this foul. The same thing for ref position, unbelievable to see on this action the lack of explosivity of Aytekin to try to be less far from action.

    ReplyDelete
  58. The stories in many papers continue to appear and not go away. UEFA's referee committee is doing itself a disservice by not clarifying the situation. This is the ideal situation in which a little transparency would work wonders.

    ReplyDelete

Copyright © . The 3rd Team
Theme Template by BTDesigner · Powered by Blogger