Watching the game now on DVR, and admittedly during the pre-game coin flip I kept waiting for Carballo to yell "Karagounis! Karagounis!" Can't wait to see the action that's described here, but I'll be good and wait.
I think you are on the right track, but as MassRef has stated, Carballo is not really known for tight games despite the statistics that were rolled out. The referee for any opening match is an important and difficult assignment as you are tasked for setting the tone for the entire tournament. Everyone is watching (teams, referees, and fans) to see what is called and what is not and how directives or points of emphasis are applied and then they tend to adjust. In the case of the first yellow card, perhaps the goal was to set the tone for the tournament that aerial challenges will be closely scrutinized. It was a soft yellow and on replay possibly not even a foul. I understand MassRefs point about the forearm, but I am going to fall on the side that while a foul, that is typically not a YC at a high level. However, becasue this is early in the first half of the opener and the referee is tasked with setting the bar for the tournament, perhaps that yellow was based on instructions to the officials to try to take the dangerous aerial cahllenges out of the matches. In this case, it blew up because of a second soft yellow, but it may have sent the message that aerial challenges will be punished when reckless, which is not always the case in league play. Now, the second yellow card...well, I think he just didn't see the play well and made a very poor decision as a result. It was a poor, game cahnging decision and one which I think will be looked on more harshly than the first. Decision 2 was misreading a play while decision 1 was about protecting players...typically harder to criticize a referee that errs while trying to protect players than it is to criticize one who makes a bad decision due to analyzing it incorrectly.
I think this is probably dead-on. I still insist that, when they actually show the full replay, you can see the forearm slams into the side of the Polish player's face. All the replays they've shown since halftime only show the incident from when after the forearm-to-face contact was made. It might still be a soft yellow for some, but I'm absolutely certain that's what the referee saw and called. And he likely did so precisely for the reasons you note.
Not to throw gasoline on the fire, but is everyone sure there was no offside in the run-up to the second red card? Benefit of the doubt goes to the attacker and the AR for me, and one Pole was clearly somewhat late pulling up. Just wondering if any replays confirmed the accuracy of the decision.
I was watching over lunch at a sports bar so never had the best view, but because it's you and I know you and have even seen you referee in addition to having long soccer discussions, I will rewatch it on my DVR when I get home. And, I agree there was some contact to the face, but I just didn't think it was YC worthy in most matches at this level though I did think it was a foul. I think Carballo had to have seen something to justify his YC decision. I just wonder if he would typically have cautioned for it in another non La Liga match.
Well with that high praise, I fear I'm going to let you down. So let me add this caveat... while I believe there was enough contact to warrant the yellow, I wouldn't say this type of contact always gets a yellow. In a match with a lot of cautions or in a normal amateur match that hasn't had anything yet, you might not need to give it. And I think you are definitely onto something with the point about Velasco Carballo wanting to draw a line on aerial challenges because he had been instructed to do so. I just object to the notion from all the announcers that this was "innocuous" with "nothing in it." There was definitely a foul. And I'd say a decent-to-strong case for a yellow. We might be more on the same page than I first thought--which is no surprise--as I agree this isn't always given at this level.
At the about 2:30 in the highlights, looks like the play was onside. Not a perfect view, but good enough for me.... http://espnfc.com/us/en/news/1091039/poland-greece-tie-opener.html
Seeing it again with all the replays, particularly from the view closer to the goal, it's definitely not a foul. That said, and I know this will sound crazy, but if it's a foul it should have been a straight red.
Sure was *just* offside. Note though, the AR slightly ahead of the play. I wonder if he was even whether he would have called it.
Looked at it several times on slo mo hd- onside. Another really great offside (no) call. Personally, I think that sceszny misplays by coming out. Should have stayed home.
Anybody noticed some different things that the AARs did that they haven't done previously? I noticed that the ARs didn't go and check nets. They just went straight to their lines and the AARs checked the nets instead. Kind of makes sense. It's a little redundant for the AR to go and check the nets when there is a guy right there. I don't know if anyone noticed, but on the PK the AR just stayed on his line. He didn't go to corner of the 18 and goal line. Which again makes sense. Why have two guys look at the same thing in the same spot? On the refereeing itself, it was weird from Carballo. He let so many fouls go without cautions and then, I felt, just randomly threw yellow cards in there. No consistency. The second caution was not a foul, but if you do call it you kind of are locked into a decision there.
When you say "previously," do you mean in previous UEFA competitions with AARs or do you mean at previous EUROs? Because if you mean the former, I think you'll find that a lot of stuff you cite has already been occurring. It's worth noting that this pre-game ritual varies by confederation and federation regardless. It's also worth debating if it's even a useful ritual. But yes, with AARs, it makes sense for them to check the nets and not the ARs. AARs have been doing this for at least this season and it makes perfect sense. It allows the AR to stay even with the ball. Looks weird, because he breaks with the kick. But again, it makes sense. What is a little weirder is the corner kick on the far side. ARs don't take up position on the goal line or even with the ball... they take it up with the second-to-last defender, so in cases where there is no or only one defender on the post, they are off of the goal line. Were there really any fouls he called that needed cautions which he didn't give, though? He gave four--obviously the first two were controversial for most. But the second two were pretty clear cut. Did he miss anything else? Yes. And again, I think the case for a straight red is incredibly strong... IF you think it's a foul (which I don't). From a refereeing perspective, that might be one of the more interesting things.
I'm obviously saying in regards to previous UEFA competitions with AARs. This was the first time that I have seen an AAR check nets. I remember the AR not going to the usual spot on a PK in the Champions League Final when Robben took his PK, but still it's kind of weird.
Just finished watching, and while I respect mass ref's analysis, that first yellow wouldn't have even gotten a glance in an epl match, and the 2nd yellow was a disgrace. I also thought once he set the tone, there were much harder tackles that deserved yellows but weren't given (because bar had been set so low).
Probably need to do some clean-up on the opinions I've offered. First, to be clear, no way I think the Greek player should have been sent off. Don't want anyone to get the wrong impression there. Second, I agree the first yellow doesn't get a second look in the EPL. But this isn't the EPL. He hit him with his forearm on the way up. In the face. With points of emphasis and the like, that's a perfect opportunity for Velasco Carballo to give the first yellow of the tournament. It sets the standard, as Spaceball was referring to above. I honestly feel that's what happened. And I honestly believe it's the type of caution UEFA wants at this tournament and FIFA wants at the World Cup. It might be viewed as "soft," but I truly believe it's what the powers that be want and he'll get no complaints about that particular card from his handlers. Third, agreed there was no foul on the second caution. He just saw it the wrong way. But once he sees it as a foul, as someone else said, he's locked in... either to a second yellow for a tactical foul or, I'll say again, DOGSO. That's unfortunate because he's just flat-out getting it wrong. But it's reality. It's impossible to call a foul there without booking the player (well, anything is possible, but it's supposed to be impossible!).
This match/Carballo was an absolute travesty. Say what you want Mr. MassRef about Carballo getting MOST of the calls right, when it came to the moment of truth, he FAILED MISERABLY...and ruined a perfectly good game. His send off of Papastathopoulos should assure he doesn't get another match in the entire tournament. Let me preface my comments by saying the following: 1. The non call on the handling was 100% correct. No ref in their right mind at this level should call this a pk. 2. His caution to Holevas for a tactical foul was 100% correct. 3. His DOGSO red to Scezny was 100% correct. 4. The offside call on Salpiggidis apparent go ahead goal was also 100% correct. The above being said, Carballo was an unmitigated disaster. I've seen the replays COUNTLESS times..on American, Spanish AND Greek TV. In NEITHER instance does Papastathopoulos even commit a foul, much less a cautionable offense. As someone earlier mentioned, on the first play the only thing Sokratis is guilty of is jumping about a foot higher than his opponent. Any contact by Papastathopoulos arm to the opponents face is merely incidental. I was at an Irish pub watching the game with a large group of Irish, Czech and Polish fans....and NOBODY thought it was even a foul, me included. For a ref at THIS level to pull a yellow so early in the match for something like this borders on ludicrous. Not to mention that the ref hamstrings himself later. The second instance is absolutely LAUGHABLE. The Polish attacker is clearly on his way down (in fact, he's almost on the ground) before ANY contact by Papastathopoulos occurs...and that contact was slight at best. IF Carballo didn't see it, or had any doubt, he sure as hell shouldn't have called a foul here, especially knowing Papastathopoulos is sitting on a yellow. For arguments sake though, if Papastathopoulos HAS indeed committed a foul here, its a DOGSO red-not a second yellow. Two Caballo mistakes for the price of one. Mistakes that refs at THIS level should NEVER make. The aforementioned card fiasco changed the entire complexion of the game. No matter WHAT he did after this, Carballo couldn't recover. I hope he's sent his walking papers...as a message to all others, if nothing else.
Theres flat out NO FOUL, NONE WHATSOEVER. No way, no how. You just can't "see" it the wrong way at THIS level. Primarily because there was NOTHING to see. NOTHING happened. He guessed/got hoodwinked. TERRIBLE on his part. Nonetheless, if he DOES pull a card, it HAS TO BE a DOGSO RED. Look a the replay. Caraballo was completely clueless in this sequence of events.
I think this is exactly what I've said, just with--as usual--not quite the hysterical level of language. The only disagreement you and I seem to have is the first caution. Oh, and he'll see another match. I love other referees saying "he should not work another match in a tournament" even when they say, essentially, he got one single call wrong. I would love to see if all of us could hold up to the same standard. There are 24 first round matches and 12 referees. Velasco Carballo will get another match, as he should.
My crusade this weekend is to find full video of the full incident. Because he strikes him in the cheek with his forearm on the way up. It's one thing to say this is a soft yellow. But it's doing Velasco Carballo--and all referees who sanction aerial challenges--a disservice to say there was no foul here. Finally, someone agrees with me!
Complete match video: http://espn.go.com/watchespn/index?id=480444 1st yellow at 1:05:15. 2nd yellow at 1:14:10
Thank you. That very first replay. 1:05:29. You see his arm hits his face as they go up and before he puts his hand on his shoulder to elevate over him. I find it hard to believe anyone would look at that and say "no foul." His forearm hits his face AND he then puts his arm on his shoulder to vault himself higher. I probably was too strong when I used "slammed" earlier (at least I think I used that word). But the forearm goes into the face. And more importantly, our replay is from an angle that is the other side of the contact... Velasco Carballo, as all referees should note, is looking straight at it the whole time. And the Polish player goes down clutching his face with no real reason to simulate. The Greek player's complaints, even, are not "I didn't touch him"... they are (you can tell from gestures and body language) "there is a size difference, I didn't mean to foul him."
There are two items which I did not see mentioned in this entire thread. 1. Anyone have an issue with the substitute GK coming on just prior to the PK and picking up the already placed ball from the spot and shoving it back down on the grass such that the kicker now feels compelled to reset it? 2. The foul causing the first stoppage following the PK seemed to be one that actually deserved a caution.