Putting a Swedish ref on a bronze medal game involving France...no problem. An American ref on a gold medal match involving Mexico...not a chance in hell. Clatts wouldn't surprise me. Someone mentioned the home nation ref usually gets a big knockout game.
Clattenburg gets the final. Thanks to EnglishRef for the update. Ref: Mark Clattenburg (ENG) AR1: Steve Child (ENG) AR2: Simon Beck (ENG) 4O: Bakary Gassama (GAM) 5O: Angesom Ogamariam (ERI)
Not a merit based assignment, but the politics worked out. For my money the Italian and Columbian had much better performances (and of course, Geiger).
Hopefully all goes well. I don't have an issue with the assignment in so far that it's nice to give the match to the host nation's referee to manage. However, I'm sure we are all in agreement that Clattenburg as GTReferee points out was not the best referee in terms of performance in the tournament.
Getting the ball first on a tackle does not mean that there isn't a foul. What about a goal keeper getting out to punch the ball and hitting the player in the head with the elbow? What are your thoughts?
I would never even think to drop the ball there and I doubt Clattenburg did either. Offensive throw-in by the team losing late in the game and the second ball essentially comes in just as they throw the ball in. You'd be tossing away all credibility if you went with a dropped ball.
Goal during the 3 min added time. Long(ish) restart which included a booking. Shouldn't the ref add some time?
The TI restart was not properly taken w/ the permission of the referee b/c the ball was already on the field (or was about to interfere) . . .
That's what I thought, but the Mexican player--Reyes #13--literally kicked the ball away behind the goal as Hulk went for it. Seemed like an easy caution to sell on Reyes. Of course, it would have been Reyes second! I thought Clattenburg overall had a good match. He got himself in a little bit of trouble insofar as managing Brazil, because he didn't punish PI or misconduct as early as they would have liked. But for the most part he called a flowing, sensible match. I just think that last bit of decision-making after the Brazil goal was a hiccup. It's one thing to book a player for the technicality of going for the ball when it's not your kickoff after a goal. But Reyes kicked the ball away toward to stands. How much more blatant can "delaying the restart" get?
Don't think so. Looked like it was a MEX def who kicked the ball over towards the corner of the field once he grabbed it out of the net.
Match recap on the Olympics website is showing the 90+1 caution going to Leandro Damiao. I'm not sure if the Olympics publish the game report, so we probably won't know what it was for.
FIFA report also shows it to Damiao. It had to have been dissent (probably about not booking Reyes). That's really the only option. I genuinely can't understand why he didn't just get rid of Reyes at that point. That would have been an easy card. And not tossing him would have created problems for extra time if Brazil did somehow tie it up. http://www.fifa.com/mensolympic/matches/round=256027/match=300197697/report.html
I thought his body language of "I'm in charge" was wonderful, especially with two teams with many players whom I'm guessing had poor English or worse.
Agreed on Clattenburg having a good match. His foul recognition was good and in the second half he got all the cards except the last one correct (Reyes). Brazil is a petulant team. They give it as much as they take it. It was pathetic to see the two Brazilian players arguing with each other on the foul near the top of the penalty area late in the match.
New to the forum, 5th year ref. Is is there any good reason to book someone who's getting the ball from the net to speed up the restart, as opposed to delaying it?
There was an attempt by FIFA to make it a mandatory caution at an international youth tournament several years ago. Essentially, the theory is that it doesn't actually speed up play because it isn't their kickoff and they can't restart. The actual directive was that any deliberate touching of the ball when it wasn't your restart was an automatic caution. Thankfully, that experimental directive didn't get adopted (the drawbacks to the directive seem obvious, but apparently FIFA needed to see them for itself). There is now an instruction to book players from the attacking team if they try to collect the ball after a goal is scored and they do so "provocatively" (or in a provocative manner... someone else will probably be able to dig up the instruction). So, the "good" reason to do it would be if the attacking player going to collect the ball is turning it into a confrontation and escalating a situation. That didn't happen here. But, then again, the player who went for the ball didn't get booked--another player did--which is why I think it was for dissent.