Match 6: AUS : TUR - VALENZUELA (VEN)

16’ in and nothing of note (unless I missed something).

 

38' - Quite a few times Turkiye have tried to buy a foul and Valenzuela has payed them off maybe only once.

 

44' - Another VAR CK overturn, and it was sharp

 

HT and still not much of anything of note. A corner given turned into a GK in the 44’ via VAR (and very efficiently), but an understandable miss honestly. Valenzuela hasn’t had much to do, so can’t say he’s been amazing. But he also hasn’t been bad. The teams haven’t really challenged him in any way. So not a ton to evaluate yet.

 

There's a gaggle of Australians that have taken over the hotel bar I'm staying at so that's where I'm staying to watch the 2nd half.

 

54' - Openly shrugging to turn down a penalty appeal is both something in the category of "you can get away with it once you're this good" and amazing

 

63’. 10 fouls. No cards.

 

60' - That tackle inside the AUS penalty area could easily have been used to buy a penalty and yet the Turkiye player doesn't. This feels to me like Exhibit A for how well Valenzuela has navigated the match.

 

In seemingly a direct reply to the appeal from the Australian player appealing from the ground. It was entirely appropriate in the moment.

 

Oh for sure it works here. But we chastise officials significantly below this level for the same as it risks projecting the wrong message, namely "I don't know what happened".

 

80' - Strange miss from Moreno on a throw-in. Is the comm set not working?

 

86’. 13 fouls. First caution for SPA.

 

86' - First caution and it it's an easy SPA.

Edit: More evidence of Valenzuela's control is the victim's reaction: two seconds of frustration, followed by calmly adjusting his socks as Valenzuela shows the caution.

 

90+3' - A dink in the armor, recognizing a foul late as AUS were beginning a 2v1.

 

I think we ended with 17 fouls and one yellow. Nothing controversial. Nothing really of note, either. It wasn’t an impressive performance, but it’s mostly because the teams didn’t really give him an opportunity to shine. The teams just played the game. Maybe slow recognition of a foul late (which probably came through the comms). But overall, a good job from the referee crew.

 

90+6' - Again, what is the comm set for?

 

I think this is slightly unfair. True, no majorly challenging incidents. But some of that is downstream of his foul selection and player management selling the notion that trying anything on was a bad idea.

 

I just watched the replay this morning. He did the best overall job so far. No major incidents or mistakes, good consistent foul recognition and rapport with players. Good mobility and positioning. Large "presence" and personality helped!

PH

 

Yeah, I have never been much of a Valenzuela fan. But I think he did very well this game, and his experience showed. This woldl be one of those examples of a game where referee chooses the right fouls to call, deals with small things like throw ins, communicates with players, and basically earns everyone's trust so that he get away with waving off those to PK appeals later (there was one on each end). Basically the players liked what he was selling, so props where props are due: he made it look like an easy game because he didn't screw things up, and worked hard to get the small things right.

 

The only thing I would add is that he was a little bit lax with Australia's relatively transparent plan to minimise the game's effective playing time from about 35min on. Given the tools that FIFA have put in the hands of the referee, this was the kind of game where the counting could have been used to the benefit of the match - but it wasn't really, Valenzuela was going through the motions with his counting but nothing more. This is a pretty minor criticism all told.

Overall his refereeing was very convincing.

 

Valenzuela first gives a finger wag to say no foul. The arms and shoulders and the slight shake of the head say, "What do you want from me? There's nothing there."