It's been drummed into us in England that a "careless" foul merits a free kick only (taken on it's own), whereas a "reckless" challenge should be carded. I absolutely put the first YC into the careless category, so can't agree on the need for a YC.
Unfortunately, the referee backed himself into a wall with the first yellow because i thought that the second yellow was fair. Was the attacker slipping and falling over? probably, but the defender still put his hands on him and extended his arms. Given the position on the field, i felt that the foul was tactical and deserving of a booking. The first yellow was a foul and quite soft. Unfortunately this is a black eye on what was an otherwise well-called match.
Huh? How the hell can you call a foul if the attacker is already falling and practically on the ground? The attacker would have fallen whether Papastathopoulos touched him or not. In fact, he had ALREADY fallen. Contact does NOT necessarily equate to FOUL. The foul is for tripping or holding, not for simply making contact. You absolutely can NOT have a foul call here, under ANY circumstances. Mickey Mouse 5th grade refereeing.
There is also the concept of trifling and incidental contact, which everyone here seems to have disregarded in their quest to absolve Carballo. The edge of Papastathopoulos right forearm nudges the left cheek of the Polish attacker as the Greek defender is rising above his opponent for a header. The contact was a natural movement of the Greek defenders arm, had no impact whatsoever on the play, and was in no way, shape or form dangerous to the attacker. The arm movement wasn't up and in, there was no hard to soft surface contact, no part of Papastathopoulos arm was pointed and/or aimed at the attacker, and more importantly, there's absolutely nothing careless about the way Papastathopoulos goes up for the header...NOTHING. The second yellow is a farce. The Polish attacker looses his footing as he turns towards the Greek goal and is already on the way down when Papastathopoulos makes contact with him. In fact, the contact was occassioned by the Polish attacker, not Papastathopoulos. The Greek defender simply pushed downward on the Polish attacker as he ran into his legs. And Carballo is no more than 10-15 feet from the play. Ridiculous. Absurd. As for those who don't believe a mistake like this should cost Carballo future games, see the African ref in the US-Ghana WC match...or what unfortunately happended to Roberto Rossetti after his ar messed up an offside goal in the last WC. See ya, thanks for coming, don't let the door hit you in the ass on the way out.
May I suggest to AEK chi that his continued full out typing of the Greek players full names is worth of about 100 taps of the rep button! Must be those ethnic Chicago rosters he sees all the time!
Damn, aek! Tell us how you really feel! I'm on record saying I simply do not understand the second yellow. 100% agreement. As for the first? I dunno. We've seen cards that are harder to explain. But let me pose you this hypothetical (just to understand your mindset a little better). Suppose those 2 yellows were to different players. Now, grade the referee's performance. (I think it was quite good.)
Who, thus far, has tried to "absolve" Velasco Carballo? I've yet to read a single person that says, in totality, there should have been a red card. You are saying all this while looking at a replay from the far side of the contact. While Velasco Carballo is looking right at it directly. And the Polish player certainly reacts like he was hit with more than a "nudge." Plus, he puts his arm on his shoulder to elevate over him. As I've said all along, I'll buy "soft" yellow card for those that want to argue as such. But to argue there is no careless foul here? It is just looking to pile on, in my opinion. How is hitting someone in the face with your forearm not, at the least, "careless?" The fact that the arm wasn't out deliberately might have to do with how you assess potential misconduct, but it's at least a foul. Again, while staying away from words like "farce," "ridiculous," and "absurd," I'm in agreement with your assessment. But I think it's worth figuring out what Velasco Carballo thought he saw. While pointing out that no one said anything about whether or not it should cost him a future game, I'll reiterate that it won't. This is not the WC. The two examples you cite are not good comparisons. Rosetti was in the knockout stage; there was no guarantee to see another match. And, in the first round, not all referees get a second match at the WC. It is fundamentally different at EURO. Remember last tournament, where Webb's team allowed an offside goal. They knew there tournament was over after the first round. But they still got a second match. Twelve referees and 24 matches. Velasco Carballo and his crew will work again, barring an injury. You don't give someone the EL Final, give them the Opener of the tournament and then pull the rug out from under them because he made a bad judgment call for a red card. It also bothers me that, as a somewhat high-level referee yourself, you seem to take joy in world-class referees failing or being cast aside for a single judgment mistake in a setting like this. As I've said before, I've got no problem with the Darwinian nature of how things occur at these tournaments (as it's the only way to reward the best performing referees), but it doesn't mean we have to be happy about it when a referee gets excoriated for a good-faith decision that proves wrong.
No Mass, I don't take ANY joy in Carballo's struggles...in fact, I was absolutely DISMAYED and SADDENED by his performance. But, he DID make three consecutive mistakes in less than ten minutes which completely changed the face of this match. Furthermore, he had plenty of "outs" at his disposal here instead of going to plastic. INEXCUSABLE. Lastly, I HAVE pointed out where he was spot on...and I DO agree on his fitness level...superb. That being said, THIS type of performance doesn't belong in the EURO's.
I noticed that also. It seemed odd at the time, but thinking about it more, having the kicker place the ball identifies him to the keeper, so maybe the referee should have waited and handed the kicker the ball after the substitution...?
I dont even know why I bother, since your handle obviously implies you're a Greece fan but I'll give it a whirl While that video is up, you can start it at 1:45 and it shows 2 replays of the incident. Is the polish player losing his footing? Probably - but Papastathopoulos helps him on his way down by putting his left arm around his body and his right arm on his back, then shoves him to the ground. Oh, and I know the 4Ds dont apply to FIFA/UEFA competitions but this is in no way an OGSO. This is a pass which got one-touched ahead and minus the foul, both players were in a position to fight for it. There was no clear possession or OGSO Have a beer, calm down and realize that a draw is a fair result for that game. Your team didn't get jobbed as much as you think.
Oh goodness gracious man, you must be the only guy in the world who sees a foul here. The Polsih attacker CLEARLY (not maybe) loses his footing on the turn and is on the way down BEFORE Papastathopoulos makes ANY contact whatsoever with him. You can't trip or hold a player here that's ALREADY 3/4 of the way to the ground. RIDICULOUS. ASININE. If you call that in ANY halfway competitive amateur match you'll never make it back to your car much the less get another assignment...and this isn't amateurs, this is the EURO. I also suggets you learn to evaluate what constitutes an OGSO. The fact that the four D's don't apply helps my position all the more so. The Polish attacker is moving towards the Greek goal while Papastathopoulos is moving in the opposite direction when contact is made. If this indeed WAS a foul, BUT FOR the foul the Polish attacker would have been clear through all alone. Lastly, the assertion that my bias affects my assesement of Carballo is absolutely ludicrous. I never ONCE intimated that Greece was wronged by the final result, or that they deserved anything more than a tie. Furthermore, its absolutely IRRELEVANT. I was simply assessing Carballo's performance and to make three mistakes like this in appx ten minutes, especially mistakes that affect the complexion of the match, is totally unacceptable at this level. I would say the same thing if Kazakhstan was playing Uzbekhistan in the Toilet Bowl.
He didn't pull a red card...he pulled a second yellow. That's how "out of it" he was by this time. In his haste to pull the yellow, he completely disregarded that it should have been a straight red if in fact he saw a foul. Its not a SINGLE mistake in judgment...its multiple mistakes in judgment all within ten minutes....all which change the complexion of the match. If you're looking for a moment of truth, this is it. Well by that token I would imagine we should give refs a pass on ALL mistakes, since theyre all made in good faith, unless of course youre intimating that some mistakes are made in bad faith. Good faith bad faith is irrelevant in this scenario. Carballo looked like a rank amateur here in the aforementioned ten minute time span.
He may have been 3/4 way to the ground as you might argue, but it is still a foul if a player puts his arms on another and pushes him to the ground. A player who loses the ball or by his position cannot win the ball doesn't just become fair game to be pushed over. I've seen bad calls get discussed before and you're playing the typical line of disgruntled fan. Hell Hath no fury like a fan scorned. you're focusing more on berating the referee, his level of quality and others on the board rather than discuss the call itself. if there's a camera or a replay which doesn't show papa extend his arms into the polish attacker, then I'll wait patiently to see it.
Papastathopoulos couldn't have possibly pushed the Polish attacker to the ground...he was already on the ground. And even if your line of reasoning holds true, then the foul can't possibly be cautionable..its a simple foul. In other words, the "foul" didn't deprive a meaningful attack. Either way, carballo completely BOTCHED it. Congratulations, you've talked yourself into a corner. As far as me being a fan, I'll let my history on these boards speak for itself. The final result itself is fair all things considered. Greece couldn't ask for more. Poland played much better in the first half and should have been up at least 2-0 at the break. Greece had the better of play in the second half and could have/should have scored one or two more goals. That being said, WHAT DIFFERENCE does it make? NOT ONCE did I discuss the final outcome or intimate that one team was hard done by the ref. I simply stated that Carballo completely botched the game in a ten minute span (despite being almost flawless the rest of the way) and changed the complexion (not necessarily outcome) of the contest. If you think pulling two ridiculous yellows in the last ten minutes of the first half on the same player isn't changing the complexion of the match, then I also have a bridge to sell you in Brooklyn.
Papastathopoulos came up through the youth ranks of AEK. I SHOULD know how to spell his name! LOL!!!!
Don't we want this? Making referees look for things is generally a good thing. If you see more reasons NOT to blow a whistle, I think I'd prefer that to finding more reasons TO blow a whistle. I'm not saying we should ignore the rules, but technicalities are technicalities and if you find any, then the rule no longer applies. There was a commenter that felt the Greek striker could have made a poor enough touch for the Szczesny red to not be a DOGSO situation due to going away from goal and being out of reach, and I agree. I thought his touch was out of reach for an immediate rounding and tap in myself in real-time. I just feel like common sense means more open games not "we need to crack down on everything in major tournaments" as the case seems to be nowadays. I think over-carding leads to more simulation, more fan frustration and intimidation that everything should be card, and a generally less-interesting product on the pitch.
Great question oldreferee...the kind that deserves discussion and debate, not the utter nonsense we read on this thread about the second yellow being deserved. My assesment wouldn't change on Carballo's performance all that much if, for instance, the cards were on Papastathopoulos and Papadopoulos. Lets examine this frame by frame. You're in the 35th minute or so of the opening match and you decide to pull yellow on Greece's big central marking back. You know that he's matched up against Polands big gun Lewandowski. You also know that chances are you'll see his number again during this match. If you're going to pull a yellow here and hamstring yourself the rest of the match, #1 be certain its a foul, #2 be certain its an offense which you can't sufficiently deal with via a simple talking to, and/or #3 be certain the offense itself is cautionable on its face. IMO, NOT ONE (much the less all three) of these criterion are satisified. Therefore, even if the next card isn't on Papastathopoulos, you've still, at a minimum, saddled him with a bs caution with about an hour left to play. The second card is absolutely LUDICROUS, irrespective of who its on. Let me first point out that Carballo has a phenomenal angle on it as he's on the inside of the play as the Polish attacker turns to the isnide and falls. He's also no more than 10 yards away. How he completely misses this given his angle and distance is completely beyond me. This isn't a foul in a U10 Boys game much the less at the EURO. It can't be a push or trip because the player has already fallen. If you call a push here, then you should be permanently deprived of your whistle and/or banished to Adult Co Rec matches and below. Since its not a foul, therecan be no caution. But even if you somehow miraculously see a foul here, you still have plenty of outs in not giving a caution and/or a second yellow. #1. It can't be a tactical foul, hence yellow, simply because no meaningful attack ws deprived as a result. The attacker was going down even if there had been no contact whatsoever. So you can get away with a simple foul call and no caution, irrespective of whether its to Papastathopoulos or not. If however, you know that Papastathopoulos is the "offender" while sitting on a soft yellow, all the more reason to not view this foul as tactical. #2. If you determine that a tactical foul exists and that the attacker would have continued his attack but for the defenders actions, then you pull a straight red as Papastathopoulos is the only thing standing between the Polsih attacker and Greece's gol/Chalkias. No other defender was in position to provide necessary cover. This is not a yellow but a straight red, if in fact a foul occurred. In his haste to pull a card however, Carballo completely lost his bearings and didnt realize Papastathopoulos was the "last man". No matter which way you look at it, this 10 minute span killed an otherwise solid performance.
You're arguing the Polish player was already on the ground when I've shown replays that he was off balance and still running. Who knows, he might have re-gained his footing had Papa not shoved him over with an extended arm. my first post said that the first yellow was undeserved and nowhere have I suggested that both fouls were fair or didn't change the match. now you're just making crap up it, so it is pointless to argue any further.
The Polish player was going DOWN. He lost his balance on the pivot and turn. NO way in the world was he getting up. No way, no how. In fact, he ran into Papastathopoulos on the way down before Papa even touched him. When you assess whether contact is a foul, you look at whether the contact caused the ultimate harm or whether the player was going to fall/trip anyway. To even suggest that the Polish attacker was going to get up is what really gets into the realm of making shit up. Nonetheless, you tell me what the yellow was for then? Reckless foul or tactical foul that breaks up a promising attack? And if its a tactical foul, how in Gods name is it NOT a straight DOGSO red? Carballo made a mess of the match right here.
I understand your analysis. My bigger point is that this guy made 100s of decisions in this match. 2 were maybe not so great. We can EASILY find that in each of the matches played so far. If those 2 yellows had been on different players, you could have still written your post. But every single fan/player/coach and I think most referees/assessors would have said you were picking nits because his overall performance was great. But it didn't go down that way. Both yellows were on the same player. So, what could have been just one more WTF? decision from a referee (that I suggest would have been long-forgotten by now) becomes a game-altering (maybe tournament-altering) decision (on a nothing play). [One of the side-effects of the way this went down is that we never even touched on the idea of swallowing the second yc, just to avoid the red. Would that have been good situational awareness or referee cowardice???] Bottom line, I can't get 2 thoughts out of my head: 1) Referee sins of omission are much more easily forgiven than sins of commission. Apparently this is true not only in the public eye, but also in assessment (and on this board ). I understand and support this, actually (both in my personal refereeing and in watching the pros). Except from an assessment pov. I think they should be treated the same, or nearly so. (n.b. this standard doesn't work for ARs!) 2) If a ref blows one big call (fails a game-critical decision), the rest of his work is for naught. This I don't support. It's an absurd standard to even propose at the sub-pro level. Geesh, no one would ever work. But, even watching the pros, I don't personally like it. Expecially not from one referee to another. Maybe it smells too much of being a fan to me. Maybe there's something about the pro game that I just don't get.