Poor match by the CR. Two missed PK's is unacceptable in a Final. I sincerely hope he missed them and did not simply not award them because of the score. None of us are fortune tellers.
Well, it's pretty clear he relied on his AAR on the first one. Not sure about the second one. But that won't stop you from implying that he might have ignored penalty decisions to artificially keep the game close? Wow. I also find the assessment that Proenca was "poor" to be bewildering. As I said earlier in this tournament, you can probably make an argument that every single top international match has a missed or debatable penalty or red card. So this one had two penalty decisions that were questionable. Other than those two decisions, Proenca was always completely in control and managed a match that, if overseen by a lesser referee, might have gotten out of hand. Yet some will sit at home, with the benefit of replay, to label the refereeing "poor." I never did go back and post longer thoughts on the two matches I got to see in person (Czech v Portugal and England v Italy), but I'll offer a little bit of what I felt here. It was amazing to watch two referees like Webb and Proenca control games from in the stadium. Webb, at all points, was in complete control and you could see the respect that all players had for his decision-making. The two yellows, from a management perspective, looked spot-on. Proenca was very similar in the other match (though my seats weren't quite as good, so a bit harder to read his interactions). Both just inspire confidence naturally. And the ARing was spectacular--in particular I was across from Mullarkey for the game in Warsaw and watching just how focused and good he is was eye-opening; he takes "world-class" to a different level. The AARs are also constantly talking and interacting--something you don't see on-camera often (though, I admit, I still think fearful of making big calls)--though they do seem to take disparate physical approaches. In Webb's game, for example, Atkinson was very deliberate and walks almost the entire time whereas Clattenburg was more frantic in his movements and seemed to be trying to show that he was more involved (might it have to do with their respective futures?)... same could be said for the two Portuguese AARs, the more active one being the guy who squatted on the KFTM. Another thing I noticed were the warmups, which I got to observe for Proenca but not Webb. The quintent is out there with a very deliberate and orchestrated warmup together, using discs to mark their spot off at the halfway line opposite the benches. All five warmup together and then break to their respective areas, to warmup some more--at this point, Proenca ran the field several times on his diagonal, through both sets of teams warming up. That was very interesting to me. Both teams gave him the right to pass with no complaints and, on his end, he didn't go out of his way to interrupt anything, either. Another point I observed was the fourth official, who truly did not seem like part of the team. He doesn't warm-up and he really didn't communicate at all with the team (note how he doesn't come out in the walkout anymore, now that there are 5 on-field officials). In the game I saw, Cakir was between the benches during the warmup, talking to some UEFA officials and just sort of being a gatekeeper/administrator. I don't even think, unless I missed it, that he went back into the locker room between the warmups and the kickoff. Anyway, I say all that just to offer a report--none of it should be earth-shattering but I'd be happy to answer any questions that people might have. More importantly, though, being in the stadium and not watching each replay multiple times to determine whether or not a referee was "poor" was refreshing and a reminder of what good refereeing and good match management truly is. Yes, there are mistakes that will doom you, unfortunately (like the no-goal in Ukraine v England) but even those are understandable in real-time. My point is that these are the best referees in the world, refereeing the best matches in the world. And they do it very, very well. As I've said before, they cannot be above criticism (I was harsh on, for example, Thomson, in the run-up to this tournament, as he had a very tough season) but it's also absurd for any of us to sit here and call a performance like tonight's "poor." Proenca has earned his spot amongst the world's elite and I'm sure he'll be very happy with tonight's performance. They say not to let perfect be the enemy of the good. At this point in time, with UEFA officiating standards and performances, I'd say not to let perfect be the enemy of the Elite.
Sometimes, I don't get you. First, we officiate as a team. As a CR, if your AAR misses a call, you miss a call. Second, I asked a question and, if I implied anything, it was that he did NOT ignore, but missed the PK's. Third, the job of the officiating team is fairly simple, no means easy, but simple. Enforce the rules and don't let any of moments you improperly enforce or fail to enforce have an impact on the score. If you miss two penalties - for whatever reason - or miss an obvious goal or call a non-goal a goal, you had a poor game regardless of your performance the other 89 minutes. However, in this case, we had not only two missed pk's, but we also had tactical fouls not cautioned, PI not cautioned, clean tackles called fouls, etc. The fact that these guys are at the top of their profession does not change the fact that they do have poor performances. You often fail to recognize that. This was one of them. Earning your spot, and having a good specific game have zero to do with one another. I said he had a poor MATCH not that he was a poor official. The former is true, the latter is not. Nor does the latter prevent the former. I'll leave it at that.
Was there some sort of advertisement on the refs jerseys? I saw some writing, but couldn't make out what it said.
Similar to several country's jerseys, it looks like they embroidered the match details on them - Spain v Italy, Euro 2012 Final, Kiev, Ukraine, etc.. I bet the referees keep them as souvenirs.
I think it's really harsh to say that Proenca had a poor game. It would have been interesting to see what would have happened if the match was more competitive. He might have had some problems if the game was more competitive, but you know what? Referees sometimes deserve some luck as well. The right team won, the referee didn't influence the outcome of the game, players were kept safe and it was a spectacle. They can't miss the handling on the Ramos header. You gotta get that one right. I think you are being really harsh to say he had a poor game especially if you compare it to the slop and thuggery we see in MLS on a week to week basis. I think Proenca will be able to sleep at night. Am I the only one who felt Proenca got soft on Italy after Motta got hurt and Italy went down to 10 men? He seemed to give them a free kick every time they lost the ball and any time an Italian defender was put under pressure deep in his own half, Proenca bailed him out with a free kick. My only complaint about Proenca's performance was adding 3 minutes of added time at the end. I think you need to use some local men's league refereeing skills there. The game is over as a contest, Italy wants to get out of there and not be humiliated any more. Spain wants to start the party. Just add one minute and get out of there. Overall, UEFA really must be pleased with the refereeing at this tournament. None of the knockout games had any refereeing controversies. Very few red cards. There was respect from players towards other players and towards officials. Overall a good tournament from a refereeing standpoint.
This post really confuses me. You start out by saying Proenca didn't have a poor match, but then go on to state 1) he missed the handling, 2) he got soft on Italy when they went down to 10 men, and 3) he added time at the end of the match. So, do you think he did well or poorly? With regards to the added time, I think he had to add 3 minutes. Not adding proper time is always a no-no, even if Spain has controlled the match and Italy has no chance of getting a shot off, much less scoring 4 goals in that time. I have mixed feelings about his performance. I think he missed a card or two and some fouls, plus he missed the handling (or one of the refs missed it). Could have done better.
The problem, as I see it, is that you view refereeing as a science, not an art. Every game has clean tackles called as fouls. Nearly every game has potential tactical fouls ignored. And a healthy portion of games have cases of PI that get a blind eye turned to. If every single "mistake" that you want to pick out actually got called, we'd be talking about 9-10 yellows and 2 penalties or so as an average game. And then people would be talking about how the referee injected himself in the game and made it about him. Refereeing is not just calling everything "correctly" (leaving aside the fact that "correct" is a value judgment--reserved to the referee--for the vast majority of decisions he has to make). That's the point I was trying to make. And what is the standard for a "missed" penalty? When does judgment go out the window? Is it completely unreasonable to think that the AAR made a judgment call that the first incident wasn't deliberate handling (a judgment that both you and I disagree with)? I ask because Proenca and his team also "missed" the holding on John Terry in the penalty area in the QF. Did he fail in that match, too? Because if your analysis here holds, England should have won--assuming they converted a penalty--and Proenca should have been on a flight home. Did Skomina fail in the Netherlands v Denmark game, where he ignored a near-carbon copy of the first penalty shout from the Final? If he did, he directly affected the outcome... yet he was still awarded with a QF match. I don't know what you don't "get" about me. We just disagree. Proenca did not have a poor match. He didn't make any match critical mistakes and he managed the players very well. Would it be a 10.0 from the assessor? Of course not. But that seems to be the standard that many use on here when analyzing performances. And it's not realistic.