Videos, analysis and discussion about the refereeing of FIFA World Cup Mexico 1986
Analysis: Match-by-Match
Analysis of the officiating in each of the fifty-two matches at FIFA World Cup 1986 can be found in the comments below. Full list of appointments can be found here.
Good performance by the Swede in the opening game. His manner aroused respect from the players whom were simply focused on playing football, I liked his diligent and focused impression (mostly very good foul recognition) and his use of sanctions was good. Some small problems at the end, biggest area for improvement was wall management (49').
Fredriksson was ready for a second assignment in the KO stage. Both linesman, Roth and Codesal, were also good. There were no 'KMIs' in this game, so no "Big Decisions" montage! I did however write a longer report about this game, which can be accessed in the link below.
Match 2 - Spain vs. Brazil, Christopher Bambridge Big Decisions: https://streamable.com/71dheg
Poor Chris Bambridge - the Australian having shown that he was very capable of handling such a top clash was unfortunate to face an impossible incident in the fifty-third minute, the ball crashed down off the crossbar and over the line, but linesman David Socha was correctly with the second last defender, and couldn't see it!
The match, and Bambridge's performance, turned on that moment. The referee bore a couple of crazy mobbing incidents poorly (inc. regarding this missed goal), and his technical accuracy fell thereafter. Ultimately, this performance was too controversial, and Bambridge was not appointed for a further match as referee.
I think we can compare the Aussie's style to Ali Bujsaim in WCs 98/02: a quite shining X-Factor and being visibly 'at home' in top clashes, excessive - but successful - gestures and mimics, ability to connect with players despite cultural difference, a foul recognition more orientated on game flow than pure accuracy but still good, and coming from a politically valuable nation. A real shame for this missed goal, to be honest.
The other linesman, big-name Dutchman Jan Keizer, faced controversy too - while it seems that the games' only goal, for Brazil, was offside, I am not quite sure the angles give a fair representation of what happened, and I would back well-positioned Keizer in this instance. Otherwise, both he and Socha showed to be very competent with the flag over the piece.
Wasn't the interpretation back then--as the announcers referenced--that "level" was offside? I think that's the point about the Brazilian goal. I think it was invalid then--quite clearly, in fact.
Socha's inability to call this goal (which, as you note, is understandable) ended his career. I don't know the story well, but suffice it to say that USSF and CONCACAF didn't give him any support. So he became a recluse to the referee world. I'd be interested to learn if you can find any more information about exactly when he stood down but he essentially disappeared. A man who officiated at two World Cups and an Olympics, who was by far the most decorated US referee ever, simply left the game. He never served as an administrator, assessor or instructor. His experiences never helped future generations, so whatever happened in the aftermath of this game left him incredibly bitter.
This still, as a replay was 'loading' (you'll see what I mean), convinced me that the angle used by the BBC to indicate the goal as clearly offside was at least enough of an optical illusion to back Keizer: https://imgur.com/a/UwcsYyx
Socha: that's sad to hear :/ and surprising - he wrote a piece in a series of essays which FIFA used internally to review the officiating at WC 1990, so I had assumed he stayed involved at least on an instructor level. Maybe some others who were around at the time (Ed Bellion? He ran some sort of blog IIRC) might know sth.
Match 3 - Canada vs. France, Hernán Silva Big Decisions: https://streamable.com/4lddao
Canada were pretty unlucky to be beaten on their WC debut; the Chilean referee faced a relatively easy game which he officiated well.
++ referee Silva was always looking for a chance to play advantage, by being close to potential foul incidents where the afflicted team were in possession, allowed him to minimise freekick decisions which impeded the flow of the game; my favourite element of this performance
+ disciplinary control was good (19', 28', 34', 49', 57', 80', 83'), the warning at 49' probably should have been a caution, but the Chilean clearly acted against the heavy tackle, good; no warning at 28' was his biggest mistake
* foul recognition was decent, but in the choppier moment (match's beginning), I felt his technical accuracy was a little weak
* Silva's manner reminded me of his compatriot from WC 1998, Mario Sánchez Yantén; very serious, determined, and respected by the players; Chile's 1986 representative kept talks with the players to a real minimum, but could communicate effectively enough with them (49', 57') when needed
* fitness was no issue at all, but the Chilean referee preferred to stay in the centre of the pitch in running the game
All in all, a second appointment ought to have been open for Silva, but I can agree with FIFA in deciding that in more troubled waters, this referee might have lacked the skills to succeed. Of his Central American linesman, Guatemalan Méndez was the weakest so far (when he wasn't getting dead cockerels off the FoP!), and Costa Rica's Berny Ulloa Morera was totally quiet.
Match 4 - Argentina vs. Korea Republic, Victoriano Sánchez Arminio
While the result was never in question, Sánchez Arminio faced a very challenging assignment in this rough game - and unfortunately the Spaniard was well off the mark with his performance.
From the first minutes, that was clear - having already born a deliberate tackle foul on Maradona (2'), a blatant holding by Argentina no.14 which according to the tournament guidelines should have been a caution (3'), South Korea no.12 went in for a violent kick on Maradona at 5'. A yellow card was in order, but SA only gave him a pro forma 'that's one, no more' warning to calm down the furious Argentina players.
When he fouled again, Maradona from behind at 13', and a blatant holding on the star player at 18' - the Spanish referee gave a freekick only. Both no.12 and the other persistent offender, KOR no.10, always got away scot-free. Disciplinary control didn't really exist in this performance, there were two random cautions at the end of the first half and the start of the second, but besides that, nothing was off limits to the players.
Sánchez Arminio was a very distant leadership figure, and because he couldn't really access the players, he just let everything go. To put it bluntly, the ref just let them kick the sh*t out of (not only, but mostly) Maradona. Very poor performance. The positives: jumping in well at 64' with a warning, and three pedantic freekicks given to help match control (54', 65', 86').
While Jesús Díaz had a very doubtful flag at 70', and Gabriel González a tight, wrong, but important, flag at 83', in general these were positive linesman performance by these CONMEBOL officials - Díaz worked very well as a team member and González played a good onside at 85', amidst widely convincing respective displays.
Match 5 - Soviet Union vs. Hungary, Luigi Agnolin Big Decisions: https://streamable.com/51i42d
Contemporaries expecting a tight game were shocked to see the Soviet team trounce their opponents by six goals to nothing in the extreme afternoon heat. No decisions taken by the officials were ever going to change the destination of the winning points, but not the easiest afternoon for referee Luigi Agnolin nonetheless.
This was a typical Eastern clash - no player-player conflicts, but a lot of heavy tackles and challenges. The key to success in this one was staying alert, and ensuring the players (of Hungary) didn't try to hurt their opponents. Two correct penalty calls, well-timed warnings, appropriate whistle tones, a strong presence and excellent fitness were the tools which got Agnolin out of a slightly tricky situation unscathed. Mistakes in foul recognition were rare.
The top Italian was safely through for a second match. As for his linesmen - George Courtney worked well as a team member, played two very good onsides (29', 31') and one probably poor offside (20'). Overall, the Englishman was probably the best so far in this role. Horst Brummeier was (defensibly) waived down by Agnolin when he flagged a freekick at 15'! In the second half, the one when the Austrian was challenged, he seemed to compute offsides okay, though his sideways movement wasn't great.
Match 6 - Morocco vs. Poland, José Luis Martínez Key Incidents: https://streamable.com/qewffk
Lowest key match of the tournament so far for the Uruguayan referee, whose style I really warmed to - simply taking as many correct decisions as possible, and defending them with natural authority. Despite not being the best athlete at the tournament, he worked *very* hard with his running, and moved really well. His manner was serious, but never too distant.
The key moments of the match from the montage above:
(58', 60', 70, 78' - penalty appeals) 11' - correct no YC in 1986 15' - while the warning was blatantly pro forma, I really appreciated, a) his correct initial reaction to this foul, and, b) he connected during this verbal admonishment 16' - it seems everyone, referee included, misjudged this scene; replays would probably have shown a(n modern) SFP by the Poland player 33' - Martínez's lack of prevention can be explained by his haste to be in a position to judge offside, as linesman were instructed to patrol the goal line from freekicks to be shot at goal (as it happened, Idrissa Traoré forgot anyway :D); correct YC from the guidelines/LotG 69' - the one scene where the ref was slightly overcome, VC-ish incident and the referee wasn't really on top of it, looking isolated 72' - getting the game back on is the best solution after uncarded LoR/SPA-ish incidents; well done
Martínez found himself in the same position as Neji Jouini in 1994 - a very good referee, whom FIFA feared would probably arouse too much attention in a KO stage game, despite having the class to handle it. I would have loved to see this referee in a game like Mexico vs. West Germany; he was pretty unlucky, to be honest.
As for his Francophone linesman - Joël Quiniou, besides an ostensibly wrong flag at 30', performed quite competantly, but I was less convinced by aforementioned Traoré. Malian official appeared incorrect to flag at 22' and 50', besides playing an important onside from a simply terrible position at 79' (-> guessed). Still, no important mistakes from either, in a quartet that seemed from their interactions, to be very genuinely harmonious and congenial.
Match 7 - Belgium vs. Mexico, Carlos Espósito Big Decisions: https://streamable.com/1h1599
A question of survival for the Argentine referee - more than once, this very tense and edgy game threatened to spiral out of his control, but by his fingernails, Carlos Espósito managed to cling on and just about get through. It really wasn't pretty though, and it should have been his only match of the tournament.
This was such a classic weak performance in so many ways:
- a way too high number of missed incidents, especially off-the-ball fouls (some of them VC-ish) on players who had just released the ball, which the ref should really have caught with his trailing eye
- many smaller and even some larger player-player conflicts not dealt with properly, Espósito preferring to let play continue or not issuing any warnings before the game restarted again
- any warnings given were simply reactive, no identification of problem players
- total carte blanche regarding dissent, besides one arbitrary warning and then a random caution at the end
- not existent management of DtR; Espósito even pointed to his watch on one occasion ("you'll get the time back"), actual additional time... less than thirty seconds [FIFA ordered refs to keep it to a minimum as a guideline, but even so]
- simple lack of courage in some scenes, he saw a deliberate/reckless late charge at 53' and explained away that it was just a 'coming across incident', and ignored a blatant Belgium freekick on the edge of the box (84') because it would have caused too much of a stir
-> Carlos Espósito was saved by his presence in this game - a couple of (random) warnings in the 1H, and reactively shouting at some moments in the 2H (such as in a penalty appeal in the above montage) - otherwise he would have certainly failed. All three goals were at least somewhat controversial (really handball?; clear offside before corner?; repeated throw-in?), too.
On the one hand, we can say that Argentina's referee faced a very challenging game and, arguably, didn't fail the test, therefore recommending himself for higher tasks. On the other, there were elements of this performance which were even excruciatingly weak, and the overall picture just wasn't convincing in my view.
I guess we have a similar case to Felix Brych in BELPOR at the last EURO (a '6 vs. 4' argument). Given the pull of AFA, I guess it would be naïve to expect anything other than a second game for Espósito after this performance without clear / visibly decisive mistakes.
As for his linesman - Carlos Silva Valente was quite good, whereas Rómulo Méndez struggled a bit. Both were relatively busy, as team members and computing offsides too, when they controlled the halves that Mexico respectively attacked into.
55' especially :D - to be fair to Gerry Harrison, he commentated the game really well overall (and was very fair / reasonable when discussing the officials).
A small sidenote, the BBC commentator who I clipped into the ESPBRA HL, Gerald Sinstadt, died today aged 91 :( - a true legend of broadcasting here, RIP.
[there were too many incidents to make a proper MtG separate video for this game, so I uploaded the full HL video to YouTube. If you have a spare half-an-hour, I'd argue it is well-worth the watch! Link below:
Wow, he barely reacts as the players wreak mayhem all around him! Almost nonexistent presence. If this guy was Argentina’s no. 1 in the 80s, what changed for them to produce so many good refs in the last 25 years?
Match 8 - Algeria vs. Northern Ireland, Valerij Butenko Relevant incidents: https://streamable.com/bm07v9
Counting in the Soviet referee's favour was his excellent fitness, especially sprinting (think del Cerro) and 'Arnie'-like presence, hence, nobody really messed with him - but this was a disappointing performance. Decisions were too unpredictable, isolated as a leadership figure, unable to calm everybody down; the result was lots of confrontations and VC-ish incidents as you can see in the montage. The two freekicks leading to the goals appeared correct/supportable respectively.
A second match would have been inappropriate after this performance. André Daina looked good as linesman on the near side, whereas Zoran Petrović had a couple of doubtful flags on the afternoon.
Match 9 - Portugal vs. England, Volker Roth Relevant incidents: https://streamable.com/fntesi
Top class performance from the (West) German referee! An excellent use of sanctions (I'd only rather YC at 88' for the tackle), taking action against rough fouls as FIFA demanded, in a widely enjoyable game. His manner was top drawer and reminded me of Viktor Kassai - his gestures and presence pointed to a man who was ultra-sure in his decisions, but his top down authority never went over the edge to arrogance. A real pleasure to watch.
Unfortunately however, Roth made the first clear referee mistake of the tournament - Portugal were denied a clear penalty at 85'. Fortunately for the FGR ref, the Iberians were already winning, and did hold out to win. Sh*t happens though, and to be fair, I was also fooled initially from the live sequence. I don't think this should count against Roth too much in the bigger picture.
Two officials who were to both achieve World Cup infamy in the future stood as linesman here - Bogdan Dočev generally convinced with his ability to determine offside, whereas Jamal Al-Sharif was a bit more doubtful. Both functioned as a good team members though, in what appeared a pleasant refereeing team to be a part of.
(FYI: I am not going to create anymore game-specific streamable clips; all of my previous ones (inc. EURO 2020, WC98 et al.) have all been removed; full game HL will be on YouTube instead)
Match 10 - Paraguay vs. Iraq, Edwin Picon-Ackong Full HL: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o4-a8FZvoJ4
Wow, what an excellent referee this man from Mauritius was - his feeling for when and how re. warnings was exceptional, his manner and presence top drawer (can you guess which other WC referee he reminds me of? ), foul recogntion just very good; we reached genuine masterclass level in this performance.
But Picon-Ackong is remembered for ‘disallowing’ an Iraq goal before halftime. Actually, he was EXTREMELY unlucky and didn’t really make a mistake - you can view the sequence in the HL, but EPA blew his whistle some seconds BEFORE the corner was taken - but nobody really heard it with the crowd cheering, and hence this ‘disaster’ occurred.
Iraq were really furious and Picon-Ackong’s race was run. His 2H performance was a bit worse than the first, but still on a high level. What a great shame that this completely top-class referee was written off as a hopeless CAF token - we reach ‘Moreno level’ tragedy with this episode.
His linesmen were from CONCACAF - David Socha responded well after hitting the headlines in his last match, (seemingly) being correct in disallowing two Paraguay goals in the 2H, and working well as a team member.
The same cannot be said of Berny Ulloa Morera - he did well to protect his team leader at halftime, but he was clearly wrong to disallow a PAR strike in the 1H. Other officials showed that they COULD compute crossovers competently, and the best linesmen in 1986, I believe, would have gotten this call right.
Ulloa Morera’s later progress makes Picon-Ackong’s removal all the more disappointing. :/
In Ulloa Morera's defense - he probably had no idea, at least in so much as words, what the flash-lag effect or a 'crossover' was. But even so...
And, *spoiler alert*, it wasn't the last time that the Costa Rican would make such a glaring mistake at this tournament.
Answer to my question btw: Bujsaim; staying on top of the incidents in a hectic way, whilst being able to combine a friendly manner with a supercilious leadership style (especially mimics / gestures). And, IMO, we are talking about a complete carbon copy between the two in this regard :D.
I’m actually kind of puzzled why the “disallowed goal” was such a controversy. I’m pretty sure I could hear the whistle just before the corner is taken on the highlights. It also looked like it was mainly the Iraqi bench (who were presumably less able to hear the whistle due to distance) who were up in arms about the decision, more so than the players on the field.
Also, after seeing some of the terrible offside decisions in this series, I’ve been paying more attention to ARs in present-day games and so many of them are amazingly good.
Match 11 - Uruguay vs. West Germany, Vojtech Christov Full HL: https://youtu.be/L4IIufAQT0o
Czechoslovakian Christov, the referee sporting the most decorated palmares amongst FIFA's squad in Mexico, handled this (very enjoyable!) game really well - he was completely prepared for the kind of match he would face, and delivered a strong performance.
Uruguay set their stall out early, and so did our match official - clear warnings at 1' and 3', before then South American champions scored. Christov was brilliantly preventative in the 1H, always running in to prevent conflicts, act against DtR, etc. The players knew they were dealing with a serious referee. The 2H was easier as the game stretched and players tired.
I really liked this performance! Many a lesser referee would have had huge trouble in this game, but Vojtech Christov made it look rather easy in fact. Given his experience (chosen to open WC 1982 as referee and close it as linesman; EURO 1984 final too), and evident class, it is hard to reason why Christov wasn't taken forward for a ko stage game. Some hypothesises:
- FIFA assessed Diogo's tackle as a clear RC (29') and non-negotiably so (timestamp: https://youtu.be/L4IIufAQT0o?t=608)
- his leadership style was generally considered too abrasive (I think we can compare him to Puhl in this respect?)
- the assessor in the stands found fault with this performance on an MtG level; if so, quite unfairly, points for improvement being: rare tactical mistakes in 1H, arguably too 'ballsy' management of injuries, ignored clear encroachment at 85'
- he irked FIFA internally for some reason, or he made some heinous error at Díaz's or Daina's side (but why give him BRA vs. FRA QF as linesman then?)
- Christov was planned for the Azteca semifinal, but when Belgium reached it and created a repeat of the 82 opener which he handled, FIFA opted to compensate controversially-eliminated Mexico instead
-> my explanation actually would be thus - FIFA's idea of what a good referee(ing) is changes from WC-to-WC, and I hope my previous blogs managed to explain accessibly. My guess is that FIFA saw Christov as a 'firefighter', but not their go-to man for sonorous clashes. There were certainly more 'invisible' referees in 1986, if one wanted to go down that route (and, judging by the appointments, FIFA did).
So, unfortunately, this high class referee was frozen out for whatever reason. Christov, at least, reached the highest echelons in other tournaments. As for the confederationally balanced namesaked linesman - Chilean Silva Arce looked good, whereas Portuguese Silva Valente less so. CSV flagged a non-active player at 58', waived down by his ref, and some of his offside calls appeared a bit dubious generally. In any case, both were far from disastrous.
Match 13 - Italy vs. Argentina, Jan Keizer Full HL: https://youtu.be/rh4yved8NcA
Wow, what a high difficulty of game which Keizer had to face in this tie! Quite genuinely up there as one of the hardest games amongst all the WCs I've covered - a real war between the players, presumably there were scores to settle from Spain 82 too, which combined with a fast-paced game, a very high number of foul duels to assess, and a high number of problem players to manage and monitor. No small task then!
And Jan Keizer awarded a penalty in the first few minutes (link: https://youtu.be/rh4yved8NcA?t=108). The Dutchman was quite correct in my view - the defender actually controlled the ball with his hand, and was correctly penalised. Linesman Alan Snoddy actually had the situation clearly in his vicinity, but he left it to further away-Keizer to make the call; the Northern Irishman only after seeing that his team leader was going to blow, then put his arm across his chest.
On the whole, I thought Keizer reffed it really (really) well indeed. His leadership style was one of the best and most natural I've ever seen (maybe THE most natural) - such calm, elegant, undemonstrative assurance was beyond a pleasure to watch. Tactical approach was spot on too:
1) he acted against 'crafty' actions with whistle tone, warnings, facial expressions/tone; 2) he held his nerve in the tense minutes after Argentina equalised 3) PERFECT use of sanctions of the 2H
The only mistake he made was missing a very late foul by Vialli (modern SFP probably) who was later chopped down for the third booking, and he could have better recognised striking fouls to make the game a bit calmer.
In general, I was simply stunned by the quality which Jan Keizer brought to the table in this match. In every aspect of refereeing (base decisions, tactical approach, personality / manner), we simply watched a masterclass-level performance in this game. Without any doubt, Jan Keizer is one of the best referees in football history!
Chapeau.
Two interesting selections as linesmen, both sporting perhaps amongst the highest political value amongst the 36 refs there. Antonio Márquez Ramírez performed strongly both in computing offsides and as a team member. Aforementioned Alan Snoddy much less so - he flagged a phantom offside at 73', and wasn't that convincing working as a team member. No reasonable person would bring the early penalty into that discussion, though.
I actually didn’t like this performance as much, mainly because of the missing striking offenses (there were a lot of them). Impressive management of the players, though I didn’t like some of the exaggerated gestures.
Match 14 - France vs. Soviet Union, Romualdo Arppi Filho Full HL: https://youtu.be/vBNRTl9VjYM
If the simultaneous game to this one was characterised by a notably high number of foul infringements, this encounter was remarkable for exactly the opposite - both France and the USSR just wanted to 'get on with it', and the result was an aesthetic, pretty modern piece of football, but that didn't necessarily mean an easy ride for the Brazilian referee on another searingly hot Mexican afternoon.
Arppi Filho was a very good ref and he handled this game assuredly. His disciplinary control was the best so far - a true law-enforcer(!) - and his foul recognition strong too, though he could have used 'delayed whistle' a few times to his advantage. His elegant running/fitness was top drawer, and his manner aroused the players respect. In terms of KMIs, he faced a couple of penalty appeals (7'/02:15 -- 18'/04:00) and a potential RC/'SYC' (72' -- 13:30).
This referee certainly had the 'X-Factor' necessary to go very far in this WC. Neither of the two linesmen did anything to impede their progress in that role either - Victoriano Sánchez Arminio and debuting-Shizuo Takada were very quiet due to the game's nature, but worked well as team members in the smaller scenes in which they are required. It would have been great to see this crack trio work a KO stage together!
Wow! This game didn’t seem to be that difficult, but I really liked this performance. Arppi Filho is probably the first ref from this series that I’d describe as ‘cool’ or ‘stylish’. Love the relaxed and understated gestures he uses.
Match 15 - Korea Republic vs. Bulgaria, Fallaj Al-Shanar
This game should be one of the cult FIFA World Cup finals matches.
Reasons: a) the incessant rain under which it was played and in the 2H, the condition of the pitch was farcical b) it comprised two of the most unfacied/unfashionable teams of the tournament c) the game was actually decisive for who would progress to play hosts Mexico in the R16 d) the underdogs nearly won! e) to say that the level of football was agricultural would be a polite formulation but, most pertinent to us, f) the game was officiated by a completely incompetent referee, Fallaj Al-Shanar from Saudi Arabia, whose eccentricities were all part of the fun on a surreal afternoon in Mexico City
If I were assessing Al-Shanar's performance on 'my' scale, I would assign a mark of "2" for this showing. Some of my favourite moments from this football spectacle:
If far-sided linesman Valerij Butenko was trying to out-do his team leader's incompetence, then he did a pretty good job, showing a total inability to compute crossovers which included two really poor offside calls. Ioan Igna, holding the yellow flag, to some extent had the game exclusively in his hands in the final stages, determining a number of extremely promising Korea attacks offside. The majority of these decisions appeared correct / supportable, but some were rather controversial from my position.
Any time you hear someone argue that the politics of FIFA or the overall standard of officiating has gotten worse over time, or that referees were more likely to punish "X" correctly back in the day, show them this. Hell, show them snippets of any of these matches or highilght packages of many of them. But this game? Just wow. The 5th highlight you flag is particularly egregious (he misses an SFP tackle and decides to have bodily convlusions to coerce the Bulgarians to just play on) but the whole thing was atrocious. This was a nightmare. It is a stark reminder that there clearly are "modern" and non-modern eras of refereeing. And 1986 is firmly in the non-modern era. There are at least some plausible arguments that 1990 and 1994 straddle the two.
Indeed, I think decades from now we'll simply just look back on the 1990s as the big transition period. I would posit that so much attention was paid to the poor quality of 2002 precisely because things had improved so much during the 1990s and expectations were higher (and more cameras and better production meant mistakes were much clearer). You could have put almost any WC2002 match back into WC1986 and no one would have said a word. Yet right now, for many who aren't at least 50 years old, it's probably seen as the nadir for international refereeing.
Full agreement from me regarding the first paragraph. To add: If you saw Al-Shanar's mistakes in SCO vs. DEN and then note he was at Al-Sharif's side for England vs. Paraguay in the R16... scandalous. The teams and the watching world deserve(d) better.
Wow! I actually think the best current referee from my home state (New Hampshire), who’s done college and possibly USL2 (4th-tier) games is definitely better than this Al-Shanar fellow. I’m not even convinced he’s better than an average high school official from here nowadays (some of whom are quite bad). Hard to imagine what the other Saudi refs from this time must have been like …
Match 16 - Hungary vs. Canada, Jamal Al-Sharif Full HL: https://youtu.be/4WJBngGbckw
A 'must-win' game for both Hungary and Canada, whose result ultimately rendered both nations eliminated. This was an easy-going fixture to referee for the more-favoured of Farouk Bouzo's two Arab referees.
With his excellent fitness, Jamal Al-Sharif did enough in Irapuato. The only minutes which really needed careful attention were those after Hungary's second goal, where it could have gotten nasty. That Al-Sharif had no real disciplinary plan besides cautioning what would nowadays be red cards actually didn't matter for this encounter.
This game is most notable from our officiating standpoint for producing the first red card of the tournament (86' -- 12:15). No SYCs back then, but having already been cautioned, Mike Sweeney was dismissed via this route after a blatant holding offence. Al-Sharif followed the guidelines to the letter - though he ostensibly had forgotten that he'd booked Sweeney early in the 2H - and the Canada player walked.
Scandal-aside, the Syrian was probably always going to get a KO stage appointment (as argued for his powerful compatriot Bouzo) but this 'strict' following of the instructions, at a tournament where the refs seemed a bit too adept at ignoring them, was the icing on the cake. No matter that it actually had no sporting relevance at all (in a game nobody cared about with the result already decided).
So Al-Sharif made the grade for the next phase. So did his two linesmen as it happened - Zoran Petrović had the near-side, and made a clear mistake to deny Canada a very promising attack at 67'; besides that he was okay. Aussie Chris Bambridge looked the most complete of the whole officials squad in the role so far, a very good team member (eye contact and so on) and faultless according to my record in determining offsides.
Match 17 - Brazil vs. Algeria, Rómulo Méndez Full HL: https://youtu.be/pIDTgrwu0os
What a thrilling match! Played in the right spirit, full of attacking football, a potential upset and the result undecided until the end - this was the World Cup at it's brilliant best (I couldn't disagree more with the RTÉ summariser at the end!). Guatemala's Méndez was the referee, one of five who returned from Spain 1982.
Relevant match incidents: 03:25 - potential YC for LoR holding (19') 04:10 - potential YC for LoR handling (25') 04:50 - goal to Brazil disallowed for foul challenge (32') 06:25 - potential YC for LoR handling (38') 06:55 - potential YC for reckless tackle (39') 09:00 - potential YC for SPA holding (52') 11:30 - warning to Algeria no.11 after foul (71') 12:05 - potential penalty to Brazil for blocking (74') 12:20 - potential penalty to Brazil for blocking (75') 12:40 - potential penalty to Brazil for foul tackle (81')
I really liked this performance by Rómulo Méndez! He reminded us that yellow cards are just bits of paper, and he managed to (genuinely) stay on top of the incidents simply by his conviction and personality. The players 'bought into' his relaxed approach and the result was a fantastic spectacle. A brilliant natural the like of whom - for better and for worse - would be very out of place in modern refereeing.
Appointing him for a KO stage match would have come with some measure of risk, but it was a chance that the Guatemalan referee definitely earned with this performance. The fear that in a harder match it would blow in his face, the ignoring of the guidelines, his abdication of common-sense in getting H. Sánchez booked at Espósito's side and the lack of lobby for him probably all played a part in that not turning into reality.
The nature of the game meant it was a pretty quiet one for both linesmen - especially Martínez (URU) who besides one smaller 'team member scene', had not much to do. Quiniou (FRA) was busier, and he would have realised a full expected level performance were it not for two poor flags at the end of the match (82', 85'). This was the Frenchmen's last participation at Mexico 86' with the flag.
I’d agree with the belief that Mendez would have trouble in a hard game, at least if he didn’t change his disciplinary approach. He probably did enough to merit a KO appointment on this performance, but I wouldn’t go as far in my praise.
Match 18 - England vs. Morocco, Gabriel González Full HL: https://youtu.be/kmeaIjyeWL4
This game os most famous here for the Ray Wilkins' first half red card for throwing the ball at the referee. Clip link is below. What happened is this: Wilkins was flagged offside by the Argentine linesman Carlos Espósito, but seeing the ref with his arm up (-> IFK call), believed he had been awarded an attacking freekick for 'foot up'.
Upon realising that wasn't the case, Wilkins threw the ball at González. Credit to the man in the middle, who instantly processed what had happened - this might sound stupid, but on an expectation-recognition level, esp. as the ball actually bounced just before the ref's feet, it was relatively easy to lose the moment. González to his credit didn't, and instantly went for the red card.
Analysing the performance as a whole, I would say that Gabriel González did relatively well. This was a very challenging game to referee for much of its' playing - (lots of foul duels, lots of 'borderline' disciplinary incidents, players getting frustrated / fractious) - with a lot to technically analyse. We can summarise it like this:
Neg: >100°F conditions forced this non-athlete type ref to cut corners, most problematic was management of the game leading up to the weak first caution; we can also mention positioning, some missed incidents (fouls), doing 'bare minimum' managing problem player Wilkins resulting in this RC, also in separate encroachment, then sarcastic applause scenes in 2H
Pos: not surprising to note his regular appearances late in the Libertadores, González was clearly an accomplished ref; generally good use of sanctions, clear focus on LoR holdings (probably emphasised internally mid-way thru GS); impressively staying on top of incidents, respected by players; and the courage /decisiveness to eject Wilkins
-> Overall, I'd say that we reach an 8,3 / 7 level performance where the starting mark would be 8,8-ish, if everything was perfectly handled; IMO a bit short of a KO stage appearance, but absolutely no shame at all in this performance by Gabriel González, a pretty decent job indeed, given the context especially.
Linesman: there were no scenes where it was actually possible to assess Espósito's / Kirschen's offside calls(!); the East German was busier, both worked quite fine as team members.
Match 19 - Mexico vs. Paraguay, George Courtney Full HL: https://youtu.be/Qe4KbyuUpOc
One of the most fascinating pieces of refereeing I've ever seen. George Courtney's prevention was as extreme as it was skilful - seventy-eight (yes, 78!!) fouls whistled in a still-standing WC record - as he mostly prevented this Latin duel from turning into the complete fight which it threatened to degenerate into throughout.
Going deep in foul detection (understandably this wavered a bit for the last half-an-hour), brilliantly judged tones in player interactions, a disciplinary control which optimally synthesised warnings vs. cards, and remarkable concentration / fitness skills - Courtney was simply superb.
Most crucially however, the English referee had to decide upon two very tricky Hugo Sánchez penalty appeals - clips are below. Courtney played on in the first half scene, but he pointed to the spot in the second, giving Sánchez the kick to win the game, only for Mexico’s star striker to miss. Would be very interested in other’s views!
Both scenes were ambiguous enough in any case to give Courtney the benefit of the ‘clear match error doubt’, and quite rightly FIFA kept him in the running for a knockout stage appointment (which was actually mandatory after this showing). I would strongly recommend watching the full match if anyone gets the chance!
England’s representative was assisted by two top European officials - Fredriksson and Igna - neither of whom had a too sizeable body of work. They worked well as team members, but did make evident mistakes; the Swede in a tough crossover scene, Igna however missed a clear elbow in his vicinity. The strike was worthy of ejection in my opinion.
I recently watched the first 30 minutes or so of this game and was hugely impressed. I especially liked the way he cautioned for failure to respect the distance: R: ‘back up’ Player: ‘what was that?’ R: ‘you know what I meant! Here’s a yellow!’ He was calling even the smallest tugs and any challenges looking remotely dangerous, but also allowing advantage at every opportunity. It seemed like almost every few seconds there was a duel or challenge requiring a decision. I’ll have a look at the penalty calls.
My first impressions are that 39’ should’ve been a PK and that 88’ looked like a fair shoulder charge, and yet he gave the opposite decision in each case!
It looks like Courtney got only 2 European cup centers, mostly being used in the Cup-Winners Cup or UEFA Cup while Hackett was usually favored for the premier competition. Courtney was also overlooked for Euro 88 in favor of Hackett. Seems like UEFA preferred Hackett and FIFA preferred Courtney, maybe?
I think you are right - though it is worth noting that UEFA did take Courtney to EURO 1984, where he directly handled the Denmark vs. Spain semifinal.
I meant to add this in addition to what I wrote above about Espósito vs. who followed - the whole idea of 'number ones' from certain countries as we know them today wasn't really the case 'way back when'.
However, to really 'grasp' this idea properly, I think you have to understand that probably the idea of even having a 'number one', as we understand it today, at least in the modern sense, is not just "wrong", but is actually "not even wrong" / a "category mistake".
UEFA, I am quite sure, relied very much on national association recommendations more than their own assessments. Look at the refs selected for eg. EURO 84/88 - simply just one referee from all the big associations, plus one 'wildcard' who starred at the previous WC.
The concept of a number one referee from each nation implies that a) there is enough data (performance analysis) to make that judgement and b) that UEFA really wanted to do it. I really don't think they did, preferring to rely on association's judgement and subscribing to general idea of 'turn-taking' (such as Hackett to EURO 1988 over Courtney as you say).
Analysing who got more European Cup vs. CW/UEFA Cups is also a bit of a faux analysis IMO (not trying to take anything away from what you said, to be clear!(!!) - it implies that there would be more attention on European Cup game x, than UEFA Cup game y.
I don't think anybody looked deeply into performances enough to really even, in their minds, want to or even think it possible to have real 'country no.1s', the notion of keeping associations happy and turn-taking was much more important.
Perhaps FIFA were a bit different. I think they paid more attention to sending observers to obscure games, focusing closely on performances in their youth WCs, and simply wanted to take the best to their WCs, while also satisfying political considerations of course.
I guess FIFA's vision came closer to what we consider today as 'country no.1s' than UEFA, but I still think it is quite distinct. Let's say in the 1980s/90s, FIFA might choose Letexier over Turpin for the next WC, if they were really convinced by the former.
I hope that I explained that okay! For similar reasons, I think analysing the performances from past WCs, especially so far back as 1986, is a kind of 'category error' - these referees had only to satisfy FIFA assessors (and, I guess chiefly, politicians like Blatter) in the stands.
Analysing their performances by video, when they themselves weren't trained by video, is kind of unfair and a 'category error', if you know what I mean. Even the top referees tended to have one rather blatant 'moment of madness' in all the games I saw so far.
Satisfying an assessor in the stands era of refereeing is very different to 'surviving video analysis' refereeing. This is very painful when seeing linesmen who have no concept of the 'flash lag effect', and make sooo obvious mistakes because of it. It is only because of video and so on, that we ourselves can pick that out.
I think this concept is most fascinating in the English commentated games, when blatantly incorrect offside calls are determined correct by them. Nowadays, showing EXACTLY the same replays (no lines, slow-mo etc.), the commentators would call them incorrect.
I hope that I didn't just waffle on in this comment and managed to make some coherent enough points; as perhaps comes across, I find these 'philosophical' elements rather fascinating indeed! :D
This is very interesting and explains a lot, such as why so many different English officials got only a few UEFA club competition matches each in the 1970s. Clearly UEFA must have been relying on the National FAs considerably.
When re-watching (college) games I attended in person, and I’ve found on many occasions that the referee comes out looking worse on video than in my immediate post-game impressions, so it definitely makes sense that refereeing was much more of an art than a science back then.
Match 20 - Northern Ireland vs. Spain, Horst Brummeier Full HL: https://youtu.be/dN1YeU8qfsw
Spain avenged their famous defeat to Northern Ireland by beating them 1-2 in the decisive game of Group D. While short of a 'showstopper', Austrian ref Horst Brummeier got a good assignment here - great atmosphere in the small stadium and a game of moderate difficulty. Brummeier responded well, with a strong performance.
++: very receptive to threats to match control by taking quick action (whistle tone and warnings), able to interact with players by issuing clear warnings, preventative against DtR (one of the best so far in this regard), perfect use of sanctions
--: somewhat limited athletic profile, a bit charisma-less and hence a quite distant / slightly 'aloof' impression, not able to access sophisticated gestures
Every referee has his limits though, and the Austrian was a bit unlucky not to get a KO stage assignment for my money. A wholly strong performance from the whole refs team including both linesman Agnolin from Italy and Németh of Hungary (some (very) good onsides for 1986 played by both), and a proactive Mexican 'fourth official' too. A completely satisfying impression from this match's officiating!
Match 21 - Poland vs. Portugal, Ali Bennaceur Full HL: https://youtu.be/ruQSyMz6NRY
In refereeing retrospect, this game takes on a 'United States vs. Portugal 2002'-kind of significance. Ali Bennaceur had to face a pretty weird match to be honest - the loudest fans were English (they had little interest in the action, preferring to shout, amongst others, "let's all do the conga"), and as in all of Monterrey's fixtures, the climate often brought proceedings down to walking pace.
The Tunisian referee came out of this encounter rather well in my view, though it wasn't too challenging with relatively few foul duels to assess and nought inter-player conflict. Bennaceur was impressive and de facto faultless for the first hour, setting very clear boundaries for both teams. The game stretched after that, and the ref's technical accuracy decreased a bit, but nothing too criminal by any means.
A 'exotic' trio of officials for this all-Euro clash raised some eyebrows, but mistake hunters were to be disappointed. Ali Bennaceur delivered an assured performance, with very little to criticise. Obviously the Tunisian's origin played in his favour, but Bennaceur was without doubt a quite capable (World Cup-level) ref in his own right.
The linesmen Shizuo Takada (Japan) and Edwin Picon-Ackong (Mauritius) both performed well too - with Takada playing probably the onside of the tournament so far at 2', though neither were challenged too much. Both looked (at least) in the upper midfield of a hypothetical 'linesman ranking' amongst the FIFA squad in Mexico.
Match 22 - Iraq vs. Belgium, Jesús Díaz Full HL: https://youtu.be/HjJ-Uhy0AJ4
Tough gig for the Colombian referee in a very chaotic match. In general, Jesús Díaz was up to the task - despite a small handful of bizarre decisions at the end, he applied the laws strictly and confidently to keep control of a volatile encounter. Despite his short stature, he was able to arouse the protagonists’ respect.
Below are timestamps for the game’s two key decisions - to award Belgium a penalty (19’), and to eject Basil Gorgis moments after cautioning him (52’).
It was a highly challenging game for both linesmen too.
- Christov, V. (TCH) played a really good onside at 89’, but he was definitely mistaken at 45’ in a very important scene, but the Czechoslovak’s most important call was at 35’ where he denied Belgium a game-changing third goal. The decision seemed incorrect, but we can’t be sure, as he might have flagged for the off-camera attacker, who could (theoretically) have been offside.
- Sánchez Arminio, V. (ESP) faced even more situations than his teammate, and in general had higher accuracy too; a number of notable calls were taken correctly (12’, 34’, 46’, 50’, 90’). His only mistake was a wrong flag at 73’. In his two group stage games on the line, the Spaniard managed to convince quite decisively.
[there are some errors online about the cards given so here is the correct sequence: 20’ for IRQ no.1 (DtR/UB); 30’ for IRQ no.4 (foul chal.); 43’ for IRQ no.7 (striking); 49’ for IRQ no.5 (foul chal.); 52’ for IRQ no.14 (*potential MI); SEND OFF 52’ for IRQ no.14 (dissent // ‘OffInAbus’); 67’ for IRQ no.15 (agg. behvr.); 78’ for BEL no.14 (foul chal.)
-> in general, Díaz used his sanctions very well to act against Iraq’s rough play; 78’ was a de facto incorrect balancing call]
I would argue 52' is a case of mistaken identity. #14 commits a rather rudimentary foul. #22 then appears to stomp directly on the leg of the prone opponent. It would appear that Diaz looks away while this is happening and then reacts simply based on feel, and possibly chooses to send off the player he just cautioned.
Also, the manhandling of the official by the Iraqi players seems excessive, even by the standards of those bygone days.
Agreed. Díaz was one of the best IMO at this tournament and FIFA made a good choice to appoint him again, but I think this was the last WC where you could 'get away' with such a mistake and still progress.
From 1990 onwards, I'm pretty sure this incident would have resulted in the Colombian being rejected, as it would have generated too much controversy. The lesser focus on each individual game from before then (+ even more political) saved Díaz's WC.
NOTE: Iraq no.7 Haris Mohammed spat at Jesús Díaz after Gorgis was ejected, undetected by the Colombian, but not by video evidence after the match. FIFA suspended Mohammed indefinitely.
Match 23 - West Germany vs. Scotland, Ioan Igna Full HL: https://youtu.be/nPQbiuBTs2w
Good performance by the phlegmatic Romanian referee, in what was a football-focused game. Igna solved both the choppier start of the 2H and end-to-end remainder of the second period with no issues. Disciplinary was solid/good, but the procedure for both 1H cautions were a bit questionable (04:40, 07:10).
A former top player himself, Igna read the game excellently, especially in terms of positioning and movement. Able to stay in the background, understanding what the game required from him, it is No surprise that FIFA really warmed to this ‘X-Factor’ referee, who was heading for higher tasks in Mexico.
Interesting games for both linesmen - Alan Snoddy was visibly a bit nervous at Jan Keizer’s side on his tournament bow, but performed very well here - determining a number of key and sometimes tricky scenes correctly. His only blot was failing as a team member at 31’ (04:40^).
On the other hand, Bogdan Dočev however had a complete nightmare, with a number of poor mistakes (13’, 37’, 42’, 83’, 84’). The Bulgarian was an experienced referee who did fine in his other group round inset as linesman, but this performance was actually weak enough to have ought to end his Mexico 86’ with the flag.
Match 24 - Denmark vs. Uruguay, Antonio Márquez Ramírez Full HL: https://youtu.be/tGqVbUJNDZo
Careful consideration for which match the host nation’s referee would take at Mexico 1986 resulted in it being this very one - and Márquez Ramírez faced a frenetic game full of goals, six of which were scored by the famously-clad Denmark side (to a resposte of only one). The fixture turned on Miguel Bossio’s twentieth minute ejection.
Here are timestamps for all the bigger incidents to assess the Mexican ref’s performance:
Márquez Ramírez showed he was a very good referee in my eyes - a distant authority but still able to communicate with players, closely following play and following incidents, and very good approach to sanctions. Mexico’s representative was one of those in FIFA squad who possessed an ‘X-Factor’, and he deserved a knockout stage appearance at this WC.
Highly challenging game for both linesmen. A bit less so for Jan Keizer, who got his key call right - to disallow a Denmark score at 26’. He did make some mistakes though. Romualdo Arppi Filho faced a high number of calls which most of his WC 1986 compatriots would also have gotten wrong (25’, 44’, 75’), but the Brazilian didn’t leave the most satisfying impression either all the while.
Match 25 - Hungary vs. France, Carlos Silva Valente Full HL: https://youtu.be/C9UZqyasXmE
After their Soviet tonking, Hungary needed a point to squeeze through to the knockout rounds due to their inferior goal difference - despite showing comfortably their best performance of the competition, they lost 0-3 to a simply more able France team, and were hence eliminated.
Basically untried Carlos Silva Valente was the referee (I am 95% sure was the replacement for Brian McGinlay in the final list of referees for Mexico), with his linesman being former and future European Cup final refs respectively. How the system in the old days worked! The officials faced two crucial calls on this afternoon:
> Was Swiss linesman André Daina correct not to award Hungary a goal here? (47') https://youtu.be/C9UZqyasXmE?list=PLJNDTL9UhkPtE-OJNe7HTQvWo-AlPPDRE&t=635
> Did Silva Valente (Daina's vicinity too, maybe) miss a clear penalty to Hungary? (58') https://youtu.be/C9UZqyasXmE?list=PLJNDTL9UhkPtE-OJNe7HTQvWo-AlPPDRE&t=735
On the whole, the Portuguese official got a bit lucky with this assignment - he got a very dynamic game which played okay with his style. Ultra-distant presence, some bizarre calls, zero prevention; anyone playing ‘neck lanyard; whistle-in-mouth-style; Mottram/Lennie 1.0’ bingo would not have been disappointed. 58’ aside, Silva Valente evaded serious trouble though.
Very challenging game for Alexis Ponnet, especially as the second half grew older. He did play a very good onside at 67’, but besides that, he assessed even simple crossovers incorrectly; slightly poor, even by 1986’s standards. Daina was quieter, but also more convincing.
Match 26 - Soviet Union vs. Canada, Idrissa Traoré Full HL: https://youtu.be/sWrhdgPILjM
With a win against a second-string Soviet side, Canada would probably have sneaked through the backdoor into the knockout rounds, but as it happened, they ultimately finished the whole competition with not a point nor a goal to their name having been beaten two-nothing. Three creditable performances actually merited for Canada, who haven't qualified since; the USSR finished atop the group.
A gargantuan ice-hockey clash between these nations on the football pitch this was not; comfortably the easiest game of the tournament for referee Idrissa Traoré, and fortunately so as well - I think the Malian was the weakest official amongst the whole FIFA squad.
A few factors contributed to this poor impression of the referee from Mali: - a complete lack of game-feeling; verrrry pedantic over throw-in locations with the game ultra-calm - some totally phantom free kicks, especially early on - a real lack of body tension in gestures gave an amateurish impression - slightly ‘crazy’ approach to positioning; running around ‘like a headless chicken’
We can also observe three penalty appeals of note from the game: > 34’ - https://youtu.be/sWrhdgPILjM?list=PLJNDTL9UhkPtE-OJNe7HTQvWo-AlPPDRE&t=337 > 78’ - https://youtu.be/sWrhdgPILjM?list=PLJNDTL9UhkPtE-OJNe7HTQvWo-AlPPDRE&t=641 > 87’ - https://youtu.be/sWrhdgPILjM?list=PLJNDTL9UhkPtE-OJNe7HTQvWo-AlPPDRE&t=672
I wonder how Traoré would have gotten on in a game even of reasonable challenge; I fear, worse than Al-Shanar. It does need underlining how pedestrian this game was - and how limited the Malian ref presented himself too. As for his linesman, one of whom as it happened was said Fallaj Al-Shanar (the other, González) had even less to do than their team leader, and hence performed on an expected level.
Finally, two interesting notes about Traoré. 1) he was banned for life after a hilarious-sounding (though not to him) bribery episode at AFCON 1990 where the Malian apparently didn't report it because he genuinely didn't realise that it looked like someone was trying to manipulate him; and, 2) his son-in-law is three times WC assistant referee, Dramane Danté, also from Mali.
Indeed, all three penalty appeals were correctly refused IMO, but some of those calls were bizarre, and the scene where he runs too close to the play, ducks and weaves when he belatedly realizes it, then gets domed by the ball is pretty comical.
I agree regarding 78' (defender wins the position by good movement and then plays the ball fairly) and 87' (impossible to assess), but I think 34' is more of a penalty than not. The ball has gone so the question is does the goalkeeper crash into his opponent with careless (play on) or reckless force (penalty).
Personally, I'd err more towards giving it than play on, but both calls are acceptable IMO.
Well, after watching it again, you’re right about 34’. I just wasn’t surprised that he refused it, given how the tournament had been officiated to that point. Clearly a penalty nowadays.
An explosive game for the American referee - the hardest of the tournament so far.
Group B was on a knife-edge (3-2-2-1 pts) heading into the final round of matches, with this tie ultimately being the blockbuster one. Korea sensed their chance - their physical gameplan employed vs. Argentina returned, and in the end they came pretty close to a seismic achievement; as Bulgaria lost by two in the other game, a point would have taken the plucky underdogs through to face hosts Mexico.
After (a bit unfairly, or at least unluckily) arousing attention as linesman in Spain vs. Brazil, Italian media had put huge pressure on referee David Socha even before a whistle blown. The American official faced an extremely challenging match, intense from the first whistle. I liked his approach! He worked hard to ensure that things didn’t get out of control in very trying circumstances, and mostly succeeded.
Here are the relevant incidents to assess Socha’s performance:
Linesman no.1, Jamal Al-Sharif from Syria, performed well. He was an active and enthusiastic team member, reporting offences in his vicinity, though on a couple of occasions the accuracy of these calls was a bit doubtful. Linesman no.2 was Joaquín Urrea Reyes, one of the Mexican reserve squad.
Nothing against him personally, but I found this random appointment a bit irritating; at least the two games which Edgardo Codesal stood in with the flag made it obvious that these were 100% political choices. Urrea’s hardest minutes were at the game’s end as Italy pushed for more goals. A couple of important offside calls were doubtful, but the television footage does not give enough data to decide conclusively.
The penchant of referees in that age to immediately move to the "get up, you're not hurt" is jarring to look back upon. Mannerisms that would like you get stricken from any elite list with ONE use were employed 10+ times a game. How things change.
Agreed. It's a shame - if Socha displayed the courage (7', 18', 32') to take "brave and unpopular (correct) decisions", then this would have 100% been the best performance so far.
Match 28 - Argentina vs. Bulgaria, Berny Ulloa Morera Full HL: https://youtu.be/I-HW0ZWV5CI
A narrow Argentina win suited both teams down to the ground, so referee Berny Ulloa Morera (pronounced: eww-zhow-uh Morera ;)) faced a pretty sleepy game. To be fair, I warmed to the Costa Rican's style quite a lot - elegant gestures, closely following play, relatively distant impression + ability to connect with the players on their level reminded me of Michael Oliver. This young referee would have been a nice choice to ref the third place playoff.
Some challenging scenes for both linesman Romualdo Arppi Filho and José Luis Martínez. Besides a blatant wrong flag at 35' (crossover), the Brazilian did fine, correctly assessing active vs. passive offside positions (it would be v. different nowadays!). Martínez was actually wrong to disallow an Argentina goal at 72', but nobody at the time realised, simply determining this call as correct. Uruguay's official did basically well besides.
Match 29 - Paraguay vs. Belgium, Bogdan Dočev Full HL: https://youtu.be/blDGWK4ylI4
What a chaotic game for the Bulgarian referee! Paraguay and Belgium scrambled to a two-each draw, the fact that both were already de facto through was outmatched by: 1) a frenetic crowd in a tight stadium; 2) relatively speaking, a very small pitch allowing a lot of end-to-end play, and; 3) a ref who couldn't really calm the players down.
I liked Dočev's aesthetic impression (very elegant gestures, muscular/fit physically), but he struggled on an MtG level - he couldn't really connect with players as a distant leadership figure, and most crucially, he didn't slow the game down at its delicate moments(!!), leading to inevitable tension. Scenes like 19' were a de facto disaster (missed violent stamp on star player Nunes before 'horrific' dropped ball m'ment), but on the whole the Bulgarian did okay(-ish).
Three scenes stand out as very interesting indeed:
(54') - Huge and crazy confrontation https://youtu.be/blDGWK4ylI4?list=PLJNDTL9UhkPtE-OJNe7HTQvWo-AlPPDRE&t=775
(73') - Indirect fk shot straight into the goal https://youtu.be/blDGWK4ylI4?list=PLJNDTL9UhkPtE-OJNe7HTQvWo-AlPPDRE&t=1019
(82') - Paraguay coach ejected (*I believe, this a WC first(?)) https://youtu.be/blDGWK4ylI4?list=PLJNDTL9UhkPtE-OJNe7HTQvWo-AlPPDRE&t=1302
The Bulgarian ref could be glad that two strong linesman were at his side for a match which turned out to be highly challenging. Ali Bennaceur, working with Dočev for the first of three consecutive matches, played a great onside at 25', and but for a slightly angry reaction at 88' slightly spoiling it, left a very good impression. Hernán Silva seemed to take good offside decisions, and keenly reported fouls in his vicinity too.
Did they give the wrong restart at 73’? It looks like a FK was given near the edge of the penalty area, as if offside was given (like the commentator guessed). But that would be one of the worst offside calls of the tournament if that was the case. Shouldn’t the restart have been a goal kick?
Match 30 - Iraq vs. Mexico, Zoran Petrović Full HL: https://youtu.be/pi950UU8igY
The least intense of the Mexico group games by some distance, but young referee Zoran Petrović still had to face a tie that was quite mentally demanding and had a little bit of niggle in it. High concentration was needed and the Yugoslav succeeded - good foul recognition and very good use of cards as a mgmt tool (besides a missed caution at 12:35/63') saw him through.
The most important call was to allow the game's only goal (which saw Mexico top the group), and Petrović was correct to do so (10:35). The ref did look as though he was about to blow up for a defensive freekick, but to do would have been a mistake - the defender actually fouled the attacker, not the other way around.
Iraq, I believe, had accepted their (not-yet-confirmed) elimination before the match and only entered the pitch not to be 'humiliated' - for rather harrowing reasons - and a one-nothing defeat wasn't too bad for them. Both linesmen rarely had to adjudicate on their attacks, and besides one clear mistake (and quite important) by the Italian, Németh and Agnolin worked well, both impressing as team members.
Match 31 - England vs. Poland, André Daina Full HL: https://youtu.be/VNfB-YmLxl8
Gary Lineker's first half hat-trick turned England's World Cup around, and left Poland teetering on the edge of elimination. Having been perceived to underperform, both of these European 'big hitters' were under high media pressure at home, and yet they played a competitive game largely devoid of tension and aggro - so a relatively easy job for referee André Daina, besides the Monterrey heat.
Daina reffed the game well, with there being little to remark on a technical level. The Swiss referee focused more on game flow than managing the game/players, leading to a small number of slightly-chaotic feeling scenes, but nothing really major in the bigger picture. It would have been better to assess this ref in a harder game, but overall I'd say it was fair that his WC stopped here.
The most important decision taken by the linesman in this match was on the side of V. Christov, when he disallowed an England goal at 17' (05:00) - correctly so. Both Christov and H. Brummeier were relatively quiet, until a very challenging last twenty minutes of the game for the Austrian, ft. a great crossover onside (68'), a poor crossover offside (88'), but generally a solid impression wholly speaking.
Daina, a former Switzerland international (player), has quite a sad story:
- Regrettably, being in charge of the Heysel European Cup final the year previous essentially destroyed the Swiss referee's career - noted for making two very blatant mistakes in the match itself, in addition to struggling to deal with the deadly tragic events in the tribunes (friends reported he struggled to sleep and even eat in the months after), Daina's credibility and particularly motivation seeped away; he retired from the top level the season after this World Cup :/
- In an interview about his career and Heysel in 2005, he stated this to a French newspaper: "Pour être honnête, je nourris de nombreux regrets par rapport à ma carrière. Je n'ai pas su en profiter. Je n'ai pas beaucoup aimé voyager, quitter ma terre. Je n'ai pas savoir mes petits succès, pas même le Mundial mexicain où, obnubilé par mes responsabilités, je me suis étiolé. En fait, j'ai assez mal vécu l'arbitrage. J'ai entretenu des illusions, je suis entré en conflit avec le système, je n'ai vu que mes performances, et pas le plaisir que je pouvais en tirer. Au fond, je n'ai jamais cessé d'être en souci."
Match 32 - Portugal vs. Morocco, Alan Snoddy Full HL: https://youtu.be/SLFajFPE5tQ
Morocco sensationally finished ahead of their three European counterparts to top Group F and become the first African nation to qualify for the next round of the World Cup finals. England's win in the other game ensured that a draw in this tie would see both nations through, but a loss meant automatic elimination. Portugal were decisively defeated (1-3), and were sent packing.
Referee Alan Snoddy found him in what would later be Jan Wegereef's shoes in the Far East. The rookie Northern Irish referee was appointed to fulfil this fixture before a ball was kicked, and FIFA obviously didn't anticipate such an imperative match, with difficult teams to handle too. This appointment was quite unfair on Snoddy; his talent, but moreover inexperience, shone through in a challenging match.
While we can praise the Northern Irishman for his excellent fitness, quite strong game-reading ability (whistling more pedantically / being closer to play in hotter moments) and good DtR mgmt, this was not a good performance. Most notably in how he solved two Portugal penalty appeals at 54'/58' (10:30/12:05), but also there were huge deficiencies in managing the game and the players, very visible in the HL^.
This would be the last linesman assignment for both Valerij Butenko and Volter Roth at this tournament. The Soviet official wasn't terribly challenged, but Roth faced four very big calls, in each he denied Morocco a very promising attack with his flag; in all four scenes he was incorrect, as attackers had timed runs perfectly, only to be denied by the German ref's offside decisions.
Hold on... Wegereef was appointed to Uruguay-Senegal before the tournament started?! Is that what you are saying?
I mean, I think I called ahead of time that that match would be one of the most difficult in the tournament at the time. It seems shocking to me that FIFA didn't see that. If they made the assignment before understanding the consequences of the match, that's even worse.
The first 36 appointments of the tournament (to give each ref his first game) were made and released before the start of the competition. It's a terrible system IMO used by FIFA in all WCs pre-2006 besides... Italia 1990, bizarrely, where they sensibly released the appointments in 6 match packages each time, before defaulting to type for USA 94'.
On Wegereef specifically - he, together with three others from Europe, were treated as a 'collecting experience' group whom were only getting one game regardless, and they all basically got the same fixture in their eyes, between 'less sonorous' exotic teams:
Michel' - Paraguay vs. South Africa Vassáras - China vs. Costa Rica Hauge - Cameroon vs. Saudi Arabia Wegereef - Senegal vs. Uruguay
This is what happens when you a) prioritise politics over practice, b) appoint all the referees in a zoomed out way to games without giving it much thought and c) appoint for MD3 before MD1 has happened!
It gets more absurd when you think about it more - Melo Pereira / López Nieto / N'Doye / Wegereef were appointed for the MD3 clashes that they were *just because they were the ones that happened to be happening first*, not for any other reason!! For instance, the next day's SWEARG eg. was a 'fresh' appointment.
FIFA had such an excellent group of referees in 2002 (NOT assistants), probably the strongest ever IMO, and still managed to stuff the whole thing up... :/.
Match 33 - Northern Ireland vs. Brazil, Siegfried Kirschen Full HL: https://youtu.be/cZI-NVi-Wv4
A point would have taken NIR through, but despite playing pretty well they lost 0-3 to Brazil, in a feel-good bowing out of the World Cup; they haven't returned since. Brazil finished with a 100% record having won all three games, and finished atop Group D.
A nice tie to referee for East Germany's Siegfried Kirschen, who was in charge. The match was never challenging in terms of player management, and only challenging on a foul recognition level for the first 15-20mins, and Kirschen did fine. The E. German ref stood out chiefly for his very strict match practice; his line against impeding fouls, upper body contacts and sliding tackles was a bit too much for my taste.
His thesis for match control was similar to André Daina's, prioritising game flow over taking the initiative. While that doesn't sit as my favourite vision of refereeing, I would agree with FIFA that Kirschen did have an 'X-Factor' which, say, Daina, lacked, and can understand why the governing body thought highly of this East German official.
Reminiscent of matches 13 and 14, an interesting and seemingly 'hand-picked' trio was conceived. Kirschen was joined by Idrissa Traoré from Mali, who showed a rather poor performance both as a team member and in computing offside (his last field appearance at WC 1986), and George Courtney from England, an odd choice for NIR, who performed well, besides a de facto irrelevant crossover mistake, flagged at 18'.
Match 34 - Algeria vs. Spain, Shizuo Takada Full HL: https://youtu.be/1wlS1hQe8s0
Algeria were quite a bit closer than the 0-3 final reverse suggests than getting the point they needed to squeeze themselves into the knockout stage fold, but despite the importance of the game for the North Africans, it never really felt like blowing over on the pitch in Monterrey.
That is at least partly thanks to a convincing performance by Japanese referee Shizuo Takada, who became the first referee from his country to handle a WC finals tie in the process (Yoshiyuki Maruyama ran the line on a couple of games at the last Mexican WC sixteen years previous).
Here are the relevant incidents to assess Takada’s performance:
Takada was unlucky - he was a good referee (the best of AFC I’d say), but with no lobby behind him, this was his last assignment in any role at WC 1986. The same was true for his first linesman, Edwin Picon-Ackong from Mauritius; despite some mistakes (32’, 45’) generally he performed quite well with the flag.
The performance of the other linesman, Argentina’s Carlos Espósito, is quite remarkable. In the first half, Espósito had to take a few quite important decisions, where the evidence pointed towards being mistakes, without being clear. At the start of the second half, this poor impression intensified as he made a number of basic crossover mistakes (48’, 56’, 58’).
And then. I can only presume someone gave him as crack course on the flash-leg effect somehow during the 2H, because after sixty minutes, Espósito was quite excellent! He had a very high volume of calls (63’, 64’, 68’, 70’, 71’, 82’, 83’, 84’) and played inspired Spain’s second and third goals; he totally turned it around! His only error, at 83’, was understandable for 1986.
On the form of the last thirty minutes, Carlos Espósito was the best linesman of the whole refs squad by a long, long way! The Argentine was the only member of this trio to receive another appointment, though he was to never run the line in a World Cup finals match again. Contrary to the first hour of the match, he went out at the top! :)
Match 35 - Denmark vs. West Germany, Alexis Ponnet Full HL: https://youtu.be/xZLhf5vjqjc
Uruguay's wretched goal difference ensured this heavy-weight clash would only determine positions one and two, and given the apparently easier route of the runners up, contemporaries wondered if the game would be 'Gijón-esque'. Nothing of the sort - Denmark won a quite brilliant match by two goals to nothing, joining Brazil as the most impressive teams of the whole group stage.
Referee Alexis Ponnet had a superb game - despite not sporting the most aesthetic running gait, nor sophisticated gestures, the Belgian ref's excellent style was something to behold. The players ALWAYS followed his leadership style, perpetually looking for advantage / chance to let the game flow, setting clear boundaries in disciplinary measures.
A real pleasure, Mr Ponnet, this brilliant game wasn't possible with you - chapeau!
Four KM incidents for him: 08:15 - potential penalty to Denmark (tackle); YC (simulation) to Denmark no.15 [36'] 09:45 - penalty given to Denmark (tripping) [43'] 19:00 - potential penalty to Denmark (tripping) [67'] 23:40 - red card given to Denmark no.15 (violent conduct - stamp) [89']
Chris Bambridge gave a second generally strong impression acting as linesman, playing good crossover onsides, but the blots in his copybook read: poor offside call at 76', doubtful boundary call at 83'. The Aussie overall enhanced the impression he is one of the best with the flag in Mexico.
Erik Fredriksson had the most important linesman call of the day - his decision to disallow a Denmark goal (17') was probably wrong, but tight. Ponnet actually missed one of his (correct) flags at 87', with Fredriksson correctly spotting an active play (in 1986) if the resulting corner had gone in - play had therefore restarted - the Belgian ref was in trouble. Fredriksson looked sound overall.
Thoughts on 36'? That's an, um, interesting simulation decision.
I also love how the commentators say Matthaus made "more of it than necessary" when he got kicked in the groin. I mean, maybe. But how about not kicking guys in the groin?
To be clear, I thought Ponnet was superb at least congruent with, or perhaps even in spite of, his penalty area decisions. I'd underline the RC as excellent still, especially in 1986 and the very subpar dealing with VC incidents across many games.
36' - it is definitely not a dive! In some kind of way, I guess Ponnet didn't see it wrongly, there was no contact. But that is only because the attacker hurdles the tackle and has no where else to go(!); the caution is completely wrong, crystal clear foul. The impeding bit of the tackle seems outside to me(?), though disappointing that there wasn't even one replay at all.
It’s not quite analogous, but Ponnet did two very difficult and rough UEfA club matches that I’ve watched in the past (on YouTube): 1986/87 Gladbach vs Rangers in the UEFA Cup, and 1982/83 Aston Villa v Barcelona in the Super Cup. I’ve only seen extended highlights of the former, which don’t show all the cautions given. Apparently Ponnet told the press afterward that he should’ve, with hindsight, sent off a Rangers player in the first half for VC (which would’ve been completely correct). He only gave a caution because he thought the game would calm down. In the latter he sent off 3 and cautioned 10 or thereabouts, and probably could’ve sent off 2 more. That game was a very impressive performance by him IMO.
Match 37 - Mexico vs. Bulgaria, Romualdo Arppi Filho Full HL: https://youtu.be/kZaK23i3V2A
High pressure for the officials kicking off the elimination phase at the Estadio Azteca - near 115 000 people in the stands generated an electric atmosphere cheering on the hosts in the famous cathedral of football in Mexico City. What a pleasure such an occasion must have been to have been a part of.
Not that the pressure weighed in any visible way on Brazilian referee Romualdo Arppi Filho in charge. Bulgaria were subdued and never really looked like winning but take nothing away from the very convincing performance of Arppi Filho, who won the players' respect and trust with his officiating (see great scene at 49' / 15:30 eg.).
Arppi Filho's technical accuracy was really strong, with mistakes being rare indeed. While it appeared the Brazilian ref lacked 'interpersonal charisma' (eg. 30' / 06:35), actually that didn't matter - elegantly gliding around the FoP, perfect use of card(s) and sporting a highly sovereign manner, his style as a whole was one of charisma.
The biggest issue with this performance is that I think Mexico's second goal probably should have disallowed for a clear impeding offence on the goalkeeper (19:30). Perhaps you could argue that the keeper was going the wrong way anyway and got distracted by an irrelevant 'fight', and then was fairly beaten? No scandal IMO in any case.
BBC's Barry Davies perhaps summed up this performance best, Arppi Filho didn't face a terribly difficult game, but at least some of that fact should be praise towards him; the Brazilian ref had the courage to "be his own man" in a quite incredible context. A great performance, well done Mr. Arppi Filho!
The carefully balanced linesmen, Méndez from Latin America and Igna from Eastern Europe, were pretty quiet on the day. I don't think the Guatemalan even indicated one onside, and he was right to do so at 82', a very good onside. He worked well as a team member. Igna wrongly flagged a couple of times (21', 86'), but no matter in the end.
Match 38 - Soviet Union vs. Belgium, Erik Fredriksson Full HL: https://youtu.be/Fz2I-fZe8gg
An all-time World Cup classic with good reason (an in-full must-watch for all football historians!), with Sweden's Erik Fredriksson in charge of this seven-goal extra time thriller. The end-to-end play amidst rising tension meant a challenging task for all three officials.
There was a lot going on here, so I will break the analysis into three separate parts for each member of the on-field trio, starting with linesman Victoriano Sánchez Arminio.
The game is most controversial though not for decisions taken by Fredriksson himself, but for the Spanish linesman’s two onside calls which resulted in equalising goals for Belgium in the 2H. Actually, he likely got both right, but managed to put himself in the line of fire for what he did in the second situation:
#1 (15:45) - simply a correct call, defender no.5 plays the attacker onside, very good decision for 1986 when many would have panicked and flagged!
#2 (25:00) - VSA stops his gait and raises his flag 80%-ish before relenting and allowing the goal, a media disaster...
Some points to make re. number two:
- knowing what we do now about crossovers, I'm almost certain that on an objective level, VSA ultimately made the right decision to validate the goal
- even despite this, why he changes his mind is quite terrible; he obviously wasn't sure either way, and with nobody having noticed his flag, he considered the probabilities (his perception vs. others, nobody looked out to him) and decided to reverse
- do you think Fredriksson a) noticed the flag?, and, b) should he have gone out to speak to SA to decide on a final decision together?
- this is a bad one, but this sort of thing does happen even to the best, such as Brych's long time AR Stefan Lupp in 2015 (clip: https://youtu.be/C8htvXO2z3Y?t=431)
Sánchez messing up the second equaliser actually distinctly reminded me of Martin Hansson’s WC playoff. Forgotten to time, but the implicated assistant ref faced a really manic few minutes before the ‘Hand of Frog’ incident occurred, in a specific set of circumstances which are comparable to our WC 1986 match here.
The Swedish team in Paris were put under extreme pressure in an incident where Anelka dived in the penalty area in a 1-on-1 incident, right in Nilsson’s vicinity - it was obvious that Hansson/Nilsson weren’t really sure, but went with goalkick after some moments of deliberation.
Using a pyschological term, the feedback that the officials got (crowd, players) would have put significant doubt their minds (for our purpose, Nilsson’s). We can add that Nilsson had to face a pretty tricky offside call, solved correctly, literally one minute before the famous incident, too.
Of course, it is partly absurd to compare the work of a late 2000s specialist AR with a 1980s-era ref running the line, but here it works I think. In the minute before the 2nd BEL equaliser, VSA was caught slightly behind play, and simply guessed an offside call - he was surely blatantly wrong, and the feedback (players / crowd / subs behind him) said so too.
In Sánchez’s / Nilsson’s minds, they probably doubted that they got the extreme pressure right moment right (allowing Belgium’s 1-1*; not granting Anelka a pk), and were not totally fresh from a call just taken (offside mistake in León; tricky offside call denying a goal); hence these big mistakes which followed.
The ability to ‘park’ previous decisions, in two different ways, is so important succeed in refereeing(!): - long-term, letting a big decision that you think you’ve gotten wrong earlier in the game make you doubt your perception, feel more negative for the rest of the match - short-term, moving on from the decision you’ve just taken asap, when the ball starts rolling again, being focused not on the previous decision, but the next one
These kinds of pyschological competancies is not only what differenciates officials between categories in refereeing, but are visible in determining successful wider life settings too!
Back to Sánchez Arminio specifcally: besides the infamous hesitation actually performed quite well(!), with the only mistake I noted by him being the aforementioned scene a minute before (76'). He even worked quite well as a team member (53’), and to underline the onside for the first equaliser was simply very good for 1986.
Two blackout minutes cost him dearly; as one of the best group stage performers with a quite strong association behind him, SF / final on the line was maybe in reach, but having aroused attention by raising his flag and then putting it down on a goal put paid to his whole tournament.
Some interesting in-box decisions which Fredriksson had to face through the game:
03:10 - missed freekick to URS, not penalty, at 4’ for an outside-the-box tripping offence
04:35 - just an accidental elbow, right?
19:10 - probably a missed penalty to URS for handling (62’), perhaps more EF’s vicinity than linesman Socha’s given which (ostensibly outstreched; no replay) arm it seems to hit
36:00 - penalty given to URS; essentially a carbon copy of Badilla’s call against Bolivia, maybe a brilliant call as the defender didn’t get away with a crafty push, maybe a terrible one as it was a nothing coming-together between two jumping players; even with replays, we have no idea really(!), so ref should be supported
40:20 - I am pretty sure that Fredriksson just missed a 119’ corner to the Soviet Union and not a penalty, but not convincing handling of the whole scene (-> he wasn’t mentally, even physically, fresh to assess and then solve this incident)
Finally, I know that referees got guidelines from FIFA to this effect, but Fredriksson’s compensation of lost time in this game was atrocious:
1H - he blows for HT exactly at 45:00 as Belgium are on a (very) promising attack
2H - he would blow also exactly at 90:00 but for allowing a freekick taken while he checks his watch; then gives an attacking freekick (supportable / correct) which when is behind for a corner ≈10secs later, blows up
1ET - after an attacking freekick is blocked out for a throw-in just past 105:00 blows, and then is a bit pedantic in ordering an immediate change over, fair enough I guess, but common-sense says it was a reasonable request to rest for a minute or so and take on some water during this particular game…
2ET - the worst; after a goal, a penalty argued about and then scored, blatant time-wasting by Belgium and twice visibly showing to the audience that he was stopping his watch, blows the final whistle at… +120:45 when the Soviet Union had a corner :/
To be fair, Fredriksson was NOT the only one(!!), but it was very irksome (like with Quiniou) in this knockout tie. And the idea that FIFA wanted this game being curtailed early is absurd, as Arppi Filho actually worked out.
Presumably Fredriksson’s time-keeping approach was with a view to getting the final. Earlier in the day, Romualdo Arppi Filho was much more sensible (also in view to the guidelines and their general spirit), blowing up at approaching +93:00… and he ended up with the final! :)
This reads as a lot of criticism of Fredriksson, which is unfortunate, because all things considered, he managed to keep it together relatively well given the difficulty of what he had to face in this epic game. He didn’t ref it badly! But I’d say that on the highest level, in the running for a WC final, this performance was a little bit short.
Like Sánchez Arminio, the American (appointed to this Soviet Union’s game; a detail worth pointing out) was one of the impressive linesmen in the group stage. And he managed to confirm that impression during this encounter, especially as a team member, where Socha was actually very modern (a compliment!).
Much less-so than his Spanish teammate, but Socha unfortunately lost it a little bit in the 2H. He clearly wrongly flagged at 83’, and in denying the Soviet Union a 1-on-1 at 90’ (though saved with both players apparently unaware of a flag up), the US official probably made a very important mistake.
If we were assessing with the integer marks system, a classic 6-level showing. Still, a deserved appointment for him to the R16, and one could argue that he was unlucky not to get another KO stage inset on the line to be honest (he was de facto out from the four QFs for different reasons).
119' is fascinating. I see what you mean about corner over penalty--particularly with the standards of those days (and the face he had already given the USSR a penalty in ET). But it's a very silly/dangerous tackle. He gets the ball with his left leg, but playing through the legs of his opponent. But the right leg is the lead leg for the tackle and makes no contact with the ball. It feels like the inverse of the challenges where a player gets the ball but then gets opponent with follow through. Here, he gets the opponent and THEN the ball. The way the LOTG used to be written, I think it was 100% a foul (making contact with opponent prior to the ball). Whether it should be a penalty or not at 119' of a WC KO match is a different question, but I don't dismiss the idea too readily.
As for Socha...
I also found it notable he got a USSR match. It seems almost impossible given the geopolitics of the day.
When you say he was de facto out of the QFs, I understand for three of the four matches. He wouldn't get Belgium again straight away. He wouldn't get Mexico. And he wouldn't get Brazil after the first round. But why not Argentina-England? Cultural attachment to US or US aid in the Falklands? That's all I can think of, but it seems a bit of a stretch. Though I guess, when looking at the composition of that crew, perhaps it isn't and FIFA went out of its way to find 3 officials whose country's had almost no involvement--even the Latin American country (CRC) doesn't even have armed forces!
BRA vs. FRA - Brazil from the group stage, also if Igna's interview is accurate, he was granted two 'Eastern' linesman at his request
MEX vs. FRG - Mexico
ARG vs. ENG - simply not a good idea in this, as you say, delicately balanced quartet, with the United States being perceived to be 'close' to England
ESP vs. BEL - Belgium again, Spain from the group stage
Though, FIFA obviously weren't verrrry fussed about the US-Mexico thing, as David Socha was appointed as 'fourth official' for the Mexico vs. West Germany QF (this role was not listed publicly until WC94, though).
Match 39 - Brazil vs. Poland, Volker Roth Full HL: https://youtu.be/nfgL11LQvWY
For the second game running, Volker Roth showed that he was a top class referee - with his serious, top-down authority style and very good disciplinary control, he managed to keep a hand on a tough game (his manner, even in running gait, again reminds me very distinctly of Viktor Kassai).
Roth faced a weird ambience on the pitch, the paying spectators had all come to see the Brazil show, but Poland played very well indeed, and the final score belies a genuine battle which the South Americans had to come through; the game turned on the decision to award Brazil a 29th minute penalty (06:00).
To be honest, I think that the German ref made a big mistake there. Ricardo Careca's touch isn't a good one, and by good play, the defender can win the position in the duel for the ball, before a coming-together of the two. From much too far away, Roth points to the spot - Poland can count themselves very unlucky in this episode IMO.
Some other incidents: Boniek is booked for actually a clear VC on Roth after the penalty scored (07:25); mass confrontation(s) in the hot minutes after the penalty (11:00); Poland penalty appeal (17:40); penalty appeal, then onside played for correct Brazil penalty (25:40); Poland penalty appeal then potential VC incident (28:50).
After working with Jan Keizer together in the group round, Alan Snoddy and Antonio Márquez Ramírez were paired as linesmen again. The Northern Irishman was quiet but now looked settled with the WC flag, and worked well as a team member; Mexico's ref played a good onside aforementioned, but struggled a bit in reporting fouls.
Agreed the penalty was wrong and a huge mistake. I think we would even call it a scandal in the 1998-2017 era (though VAR would hopefully fix it now).
Curious about the "clear VC." I see a hand on Roth's chest. While I would love to be draconian with these sort of things, I don't think that any FIFA referee at ANY WC would consider that "clear VC." In fact, in 1986 I think we're lucky a referee even gives yellow. But perhaps I am missing something?
I could actually easily believe that the penalty call wouldn't be overturned in PL or (more worryingly) at the EURO, to be honest; the contact is clear and a judgement call from the referee, and having reported his perception, I suspect it wouldn't reach c/o.
Here is another angle which the BBC showed of the situation: https://youtu.be/M-2bir1KCRA?t=348
About Boniek-on-Roth, the emphasis was on "actually", in how I tried to phrase it. I see it the same as you. Boniek aggressively walks towards the ref, gesturing in his face, and then pushes his arm out on his chest; though, still short of eg. the one on Kuipers at the last EURO.
Match 40 - Argentina vs. Uruguay, Luigi Agnolin Full HL: https://youtu.be/sr0F1wDGd64
FIFA were scared sh*tless of what might happen in the River Plate derby, so in an attempt to prevent (or at least, alleviate) the inevitable carnage, pulled out all the stops - Uruguay were punished for their behaviour vs. Scotland, and threatened with ejection from the whole World Cup by the governing body if there was a repeat.
The man entrusted with ensuring FIFA didn't have to act on their surely hollow words was Luigi Agnolin from Italy; besides maybe Brazil vs. Chile in 2014, I cannot think of a taller order for a referee in World Cup finals history (1950 final match? Battle of Santiago? Argentina games in 78?) than what this tie promised Agnolin here.
I wonder whether in my whole life I'll ever see a better refereeing performance than this one. Reports declared that Uruguay were "subdued", but I don't really see it like that - they had exactly the same rationale as against Scotland, but simply had to be much more crafty in execution trying to beat Argentina.
The match was crazy: an extortionate amount of fouls duels to compute with the game ready to explode after each one; a minefield of disciplinary incidents where he always used his munition (presence, warnings, cards) optimally, having to very closely patrol every single incident in an end-to-end game and scores of scenes where his personality was deeply challenged - Luigi Agnolin came through it all.
There is only one scene which makes a full ten in my mark scale potentially tricky, Argentina's disallowed goal in the 2H (31:20). It would be derided as ludicrously soft today, but the call elicits a fair reaction from the BBC commentators in 1986; "fair enough", even an expected decision.
Foot-up (IFK) was punished much more stringently back then than it is nowadays, and Maradona does move into the ball with loaded studs against the defender. Sure, Uruguay's man back does seem to get into a right old muddle, and perhaps it would be better to allow it, but for me the ruled-off goal is supportable at least (in 86).
Nowadays it would be impossible to not caution as many especially SPA/LoR, but also reckless, incidents and still survive (Agnolin was on top of them all, btw), and probably impossible to interact with the players in some scenes as he did (just watch eg. 36:50); matches, nor referees, anything remotely like this simply don’t exist anymore at the elite.
There is no doubt that Agnolin saved FIFA's skin, but by the same token, it was an inspired appointment too. The Italian received universal (besides disallowed goal) praise from contemporaries in the media, but they still didn't appreciate quite how good Agnolin was on a continuum, actually I don't think they were close, even in eulogy.
A perfect 10 (TEN) from me; thank you Mr. Agnolin [RIP :(], it was more than a pleasure to review your performance thirty-five years later.
The linesmen had a lot to live up to! Both appointments were slightly hard to fathom, George Courtney was obviously given the gig because he was highly rated, but did FIFA pay no attention to his origin (on two levels)? Carlos Silva Valente's merits were a bit exaggerated from my view, at least for this warzone match, too.
In any case, both didn't do too badly. Courtney fared well besides an incorrect (tight) flag at 50', at least if you believe the replayed angle over the live sequence at 56' when he denied Maradona a 1-on-1 (27:20). His good onside at 60' was in no doubt though. CSV was fine, besides an actually poor flag - even for 1986 - at 76' (33:15).
Match 41 - Italy vs. France, Carlos Espósito Full HL: https://youtu.be/eYpDCD43LtU
Back down to Earth :D; Carlos Espósito was not only quite fortunate that his group stage performance (Belgium vs. Mexico) wasn't rejected by FIFA, but furthermore that they decided to appoint him to referee the most sonorous football match of all the R16 ties, World champions Italy vs. European champions France.
Besides the obvious reason (AFA / Argentina), I can understand why FIFA didn't dislike his GS performance enough to put them off Espósito. His problem wasn't so much that he was a bad referee, but without doubt the Argentine was too weak a referee to really merit his two appointments (esp. this one) at WC 1986.
It was visible to me that his football understanding was actually pretty deep, as unpretty as BELMEX was at times, he always did enough to keep control, but somehow he doubted his perception / soft skills etc. too much, and his mission in all of his games was simple - survival. Technical accuracy didn't matter too much.
The weakness aforementioned came through very clearly in two KMI scenes in this match I think - at 77', no.10 Bagni escaped even a foul call with his clear (VC) stamp on no.8 Tusseau, and the ref turned a blind eye to what was surely a clear penalty for France at 48'. You can find the clips at 22:10 and 18:20 respectively on the HL.
While the second scene was essentially an extraneous incident with the battle lost-and-won (right in front of linesman JL Martínez too), early in the second half, it was quite probable that Italy could have turned the game around and won 2-1 after this missed penalty call. Espósito was lucky in that regard.
His disciplinary control, as in his first game, was excruciatingly reactive, to be frank. To his credit, the Argentine's clear warning, being quite justified in denying France an advantage, at 2', was very good [01:50]. But the rest not so much, with it feeling like cautions being given exclusively for tactical (temporal) value.
A scandalous tackle from behind (could have been exhibit A in a FIFA training vid for the WC98 refs) at 13' went without caution [04:50], as did an extremely flagrant and at least a bit brutal tactical foul at 28' [10:00]. It was obvious to me that the players worked out what sort of ref they had gotten; there were other 'moments' too [04:10].
But, to be fair to the Argentine referee, for all the limitations detailed, with his languid presence, and passive (but never too much so!) style, he managed to do enough to steer the game to a sound conclusion. The handshakes at fulltime shared between him and these top players were warm and genuine, which definitely says sth for him.
While without doubt Carlos Espósito was fortunate both times that he rolled the dice in reffing games at this WC, it is also to his merit that he could always do just enough to avoid failure as well. All things considered, I don't think you could reasonably say his officiating of this real top clash was any worse than decent.
Linesmen: an all-UEFA trio for the big South American clasico in the R16 meant a South American triad here, aforementioned Martínez and Díaz from Colombia on the line. Both were quite quiet, and in their four on-off scenes (1/3 resp.) which I noted, all were solved correctly. Any doubts about functioning as team members were minimal.
Match 42 - Morocco vs. West Germany, Zoran Petrović Full HL: https://youtu.be/H6DlTo_qjrE
A very different game to the other R16 ties - the stadium was less than half full and generated a flat atmosphere, those who were there started booing because they were bored, and Morocco chanced their arm that they could outlast their hitherto faltering venerable opponents with negative tactics in the Monterrey heat.
Zoran Petrović was the referee, the Yugoslav a young up-and-comer whom FIFA used this match to give a chance in the KO stage. While the commentators bemoaned how "boring" this match was, it was certainly not like the group matches in Monterrey - the game had much more intensity, and was not a walk in the park to ref.
Petrović did a good job. With his elegant, serious/unobstrusive style, he always managed to ellict the appropriate response to disciplinary incidents (in 1986), in terms of warnings and sanctions, but also whistle tones, gestures and so on. I felt rather robbed of extra time by the eighty-eighth minute winner, to be honest.
Some interesting incidents from the game:
28' - very good caution for PI to MAR no.3, the game needed calming down and Petrović correctly recognised that it was his third offence in less than 10mins [08:15]
34' - a good final warning to MAR no.3 after his latest foul [09:50]
36' - what seems to be a missed caution to FRG no.8 for simulation [10:30]
51' - play on; missed penalty to MAR vs. impeding gk by the attacker [13:35]
58' - scandalous tackle from behind, another WC98 refs vid, no card given [15:40]
65' - MAR no.2 is cautioned for a very blatant holding (LoR over SPA in 86) [18:05]
76' - interesting scene; a clear SYC nowadays, but given they didn't exist then, I agree with ZP, not enough for the 'SYC' RC back then, so a final warning for MAR no.2 [20:15]
87' - and finally, was the freekick that Matthäus scored justly awarded? [22:15]
Linesmen: the Moroccan association were politically weak, so they couldn't force more 'exotic' appointments vs. European teams, as say Mexico could in this WC, so not only did they get a less experienced UEFA ref, Petrović, he was joined by a(n Austro-Hungarian) Euro duo, Németh and Brummeier, satisfying DFB.
Nobody could really complain though as both were amongst the stronger performers as linesmen, and FIFA retained them late as SF / QFs respectively. That being said - I can't see how Németh's 20' flag was anything other than wrong [05:50]; Morocco had the ball in the net too. Besides that, good, though HB was a slightly passive team member.
Match 43 - England vs. Paraguay, Jamal Al-Sharif Full HL: https://youtu.be/z-VQ3JzY_eo
The difference in surroundings between the group stage game which confirmed Syrian referee Jamal Al-Sharif's place amongst the latter stage referees, and the knockout tie which he was placed in charge of, was rather vast indeed; even to such extent that taking place in the same competition being all that connected them.
A remarkably easy-going Hungary vs. Canada in the small stadium in Irapuato actually bore only strenuous relation at all to what Al-Sharif faced here - a tense duel between a big nation and a South American challenger (who kicked up quite a fuss in their last two GS fixtures too) in front of near 100.000 people at the Estadio Azteca.
Looking deeper, anyone with even decent understanding of refereeing, having gotten past being impressed at the Syrian official's quite remarkable level of fitness, could have seen problems on the horizon for this man if he found himself in the middle of a challenging game, upon analysing his performance in Hungary vs. Canada too.
But no matter - an excellent refereeing politician, AFC refereeing leader since 1983 and WC78 ref himself, Farouk Bouzo, had put his compatriot Al-Sharif in his corner, and FIFA chose what they saw as the easiest R16 game possible for him (Morocco were Arab), and then could only hope for the best.
And any prayers that this game would go okay from any FIFA people wise enough to realise that they ought to have been praying seemed to have been answered in the first half. The game was very quiet, the only goal (England's) came with no outer controversy, and Al-Sharif had even given a very well-timed warning for a borderline tackle at 24'.
So far, so good then. But warning signs were there (even from 1’…) - it happened off-camera, but it appeared that England's Martin was given a caution rather weakly for DtR (37'). Paraguay themselves had transgressed in this regard (4', 26'), and the 1H ended a bit on edge, though with a decently-solved mobbing incident (39') in there too.
The second half started much fruiter than the first, but Al-Sharif could have acted against that in what was a key MtG scene in my opinion - a blatant deliberate charging incident at 47' would have been perfect to set a stall out (and balance the cards), however only a freekick was given by the Syrian referee.
Al-Sharif had to physically pull Paraguay players away from the confrontation this triggered, not even clearly warning one of them. Further incidents, deliberate foul from behind (52') and an off-the-ball striking (54') went unpunished, leading the (Paraguay) players further to the conclusion that they were facing a carte blanche.
England went two-nil up shortly after, and as Paraguay now attacked to get back into the game, Al-Sharif faced the 'moment of truth' in this match. He denied the South Americans a penalty (58'), and then faced an absolutely crazy mobbing that brought both the near-side linesman and 'fourth official' onto the FoP to protect their team leader.
At least a caution was sorted out to one of the Paraguay pack who harassed the ref, but in no way was Al-Sharif any kind of 'winner' from the scene, and he lost it after that (61', 67, 69', 71', 72’, 80'). After the third goal it’d calmed down, but this had now become one of the weakest performances in the whole competition.
Both England players and the referee were fortunate the crazy attempt at physical retribution (-> very clear RC to be given) such as at 90', which fortunately didn't make contact, was an isolated one. The clear score had saved Al-Sharif at the end, though even so, only three other referees had struggled on the level that he did here.
Looking back, General Bouzo's pushing of Al-Sharif is infuriating. He failed at all three of his WCs, showing little improvement (contrary to the later énfant cheri, Bujsaim) yr-to-yr. It is rather irritating that the Syrian ref was allowed to destroy (three) more WC finals games; he tried his best though, it is FIFA, not him, whom we should blame.
It is no accident that Al-Sharif got both two experienced UEFA officials (Ponnet as 1st linesman, Christov as r/l) and an Arab compatriot (Al-Shanar) in his team. The Belgian was a steady hand, the Saudi a much more hesitant team member - but both were sound overall in their computing of offsides, Al-Shanar surprising me with a very good onside even at 54’.
While Al-Sharif would go on to two more World Cups, this was the end of the line for Ponnet and Al-Shanar, with Christov going out of the WC stage on his next match, as linesman for the classic Brazil vs. France QF. Indeed - I can’t find any other match in any record at all for Fallaj Al-Shanar after this; he was quite young (39), but it seems he retired c. Mexico.
Match 45 - Brazil vs. France, Ioan Igna Full HL: https://vk.com/video/playlist/400374426_10
Say what you like about the effect of FIFA’s non-refereeing politicians on refereeing, but you can’t fault their intrinsic understanding. In appointing (or rather, anointing) the officials for the Brazil vs. France quarterfinal at WC 1986, they quite well grasped what kind of football occasion it would be.
They chose their perfect referee for it - Igna. Not a particularly big name before Mexico 86, the Romanian’s very relaxed and elegant style would perfectly compliment this match, if the teams wanted to play. And they did - contesting a two hour epic, a World Cup classic to this day.
Igna faced what was actually a very modern game, in that he had much, much fewer foul duels to assess than in (almost?) all the other games at the whole tournament. Both teams were just focused on playing, and it was possible as referee to simply foster a brilliant football match.
He had a game plan and deliberately changed the thesis of his approach from his West Germany vs. Scotland tie in the group round. Igna chose to be much more passive here, generally taking a real backseat and conserving his energy in the midday heat of this ultra-end-to-end encounter where possible (in eg. body tension for gestures).
Disciplinary control, as in cards / real warnings / tactical signals, was de facto totally absent from this performance (34', 46', 49', 50', 52', 55', 59', 87', 107', 111'), and by this tolerance, there was more rough play than which was actually necessary in this very fair-spirited match. Igna had no interest in taking control of / moulding the players' actions at all.
While I would stand by the view that he was a bit fortunate it didn't blow back in his face, there is no doubt that it paid off for Igna - the Romanian quite understood why he got this game and his brief in the appointment it from FIFA, and he helped create a wonderful football match.
Despite his extreme passivity, he ALWAYS noticed the moments where he had to step in and do just enough to prevent any flair-ups (a small one at 34' aside), and keep the players focused on playing football (eg. tense gestures at 61' + 69', quick whistle at 63' after agricultural tackle, a bit harsh but calming fk call at 79', running in at 87').
In that regard solely, this performance was a pure masterclass. Coming to a balance about it (on an MtG level), perhaps I can't share the complete enthusiasm of some (a question of taste!), but without any doubt I appreciated what was a very (very) good level of refereeing by Ioan Igna, who helped make a WC classic.
Although France won the penalty competition, perhaps Bruno Bellone might have something to say about that evaluation. An analysis of the key match incidents follows.
We can start firstly with in-box incidents in the match, starting with the three extraneous penalty appeals: 35’ - clear impeding foul, so missed attacking IFK (no dfk/pk offence as the laws were pre-1997) 85’ - borderline but the attacker does stop waiting to be crashed into, so very good play on call 104’ - impossible to assess this completely off-the-ball incident; referee fully backed here
74’: The first of the three big decisions. Igna was definitely right to award Brazil what could have been a decisive penalty at 74’. The goalkeeper simply wipes out the attacker in a clear foul. The ref was right on the spot to award this stonewall penalty. Of course, no sanction was in keeping with how it was back then, with no SPA, DOGSO etc to consider.
PKs: If the famous foul by Brazil goalkeeper Carlos on Bruno Bellone four minutes from time (which we’ll of course come to, see the next comment) caused some trouble for Igna on an LotG level, then that some player’s penalty which hit the post and was going away from the goal before hitting diving Carlos and going in, gave the ref an even greater one; there was absolutely no provision to either grant the penalty goal or rule it out in this situation!
So whatever Igna did, he was setting the trend for the future. Specific to this game, he made the sensible choice - calling this penalty saved from Bellone, who had so unfairly been charged out of a goal exactly by Carlos in extra time, would surely have de facto ended Igna’s international career if France went on to lose in the penalty competition.
In this regard Igna was fortunate that France did win. But his handling of the scene wasn’t convincing; this moment needed the ref to take the initiative, and make his decision very clear with obvious gestures. That was more-or-less the complete opposite of what Igna did do, he was extremely passive and like 116’, seemed to let the thing ‘get away’ from him, even if the final decision was basically the right one.
The infamous incident from this game is Brazil goalkeeper Carlos’s ultra-cynical foul on Bruno Bellone as the France substitute broke free four minutes from the end of extra time. Making the advantage signal with both arms (as Igna had many times previously in the match), Carlos got away with his unfair action without even a foul being called against him.
Regrettably, Igna messed up here. My detailed thoughts:
> With one player from each team down in the Brazil box, the corner from which France countered to get in 1-on-1 would have actually been better off not taken; of course(!), we know FIFA’s guidelines in this regard (and the defending FRA player got up too, attacking BRA’s not), but it did feel like Igna just let the game go on unhinged. He should have blown up and checked they were both okay before allowing the corner taken.
> Igna was kind of unlucky in a way; if he had a worse linesmen than Lajos Németh (who, like Vojtech Christov, was excellent(!) in this match), then Bellone might have been flagged offside and everything forgotten about this scene; but, Németh quite correctly played the France sub on (a top drawer call for 86), so the scene did come into ‘live’ existence.
> The referee visibly tired greatly in extra time, sticking very rigidly away from the channels of the FoP on all four sides, but he failed here not because he was physically tired (he actually got relatively close given the speed of the counter), but too mentally exhausted to properly assess it on a deep level.
It was a complex scene for 1986 (see below), and Igna didn’t really have the mental strength remaining to process what happened, and the decide “what the game expects”; he simply panics, lets the whole thing ‘get away’ from him, and is the loser (Carlos the winner), of the whole incident.
He signals an advantage, and there was no sanction when the ball went out of play (and Socrates nearly won it for Brazil too in the next attack!). One can wonder how much the concept of sanction-after-advantage existed in 1986, only one referee had done so in this whole WC… Igna. :)
Advantage at all was a complete mistake. What Igna should have used a delayed whistle, and come back to the original offence. He would have been quite correct to do so, Bellone tried to go on but simply couldn’t, and the defender could sweep up because he was tripped.
Bellone staying on his feet is what probably killed Igna. It forced him to do sth quickly once the defender came in, and he sh*t the bed and went with a totally wrong “advantage”. Courage was required to trust yourself to come back, even though, in theory at least, Bellone had a chance at goal after the foul.
Moreover, the whole handling of the scene lacks a big picture view. A clearly thinking top referee (and Igna was exactly that), would process that it was highly sour to allow the goalkeeper to stop a de facto certain goal by a completely deliberate foul, especially at the end of such a fair game.
One of my favourite phrases that I try to keep at the centre of view during my matches is “don’t be the idiot (ie. the fall guy)”. By allowing Carlos to get away completely with such an obvious offence, whatever the extenuating circumstances for Igna, the world viewed the ref as the ‘idiot’ from this key moment.
> As Jimmy Hill correctly identifies, this situation did present a big problem for the 1986 referee; what and why, according to the laws, should he sanction Carlos for this egregious action having awarded the freekick?
By the next WC, referees were ordered to eject perpetrators of professional fouls (see Fredriksson’s and Quiniou’s classic now-DOGSO reds), but because this was a charging, not tackling, action, in 86 Igna was indeed a bit stuck; if Carlos had kicked Bellone (ie. an SFP), it would have been different, but because the foul was actually careless, I guess Igna didn’t really know what to do.
And in this sense, Igna was just the unlucky one. This sort of thing could have happened to any referee, and this exact scene must have been a big reason why FIFA introduced the concept of “professional foul” WCs at Italia 1990. It takes a straw etc. However, given that he doesn’t even give the freekick at all, I would stand firmly by my view that the Romanian referee did fail in this scene.
> A small sidetone; with this decision also having increased the tension on the FoP (Németh had to sort sth out at 118’), Igna blew up for fulltime a full twenty-five seconds early (I checked too, no television clock errors), with Brazil on a very promising attack, indeed their players noticed the stadium clock and mobbed him a bit after this premature whistle (he played zero additional time in 1H, 2H, 1ET btw)
Just a conspiracy theory of mine, but I really wonder whether the Romanian (who I would detect as a referee in his career with a deep grasp of slightly ‘darker’ self-preservation in refereeing) knew exactly what he was doing and blew up to save Brazil scoring, and his own skin… but I could never say for sure!
And, in a roundabout kind of way, I'd like to make two more extended observations to balance the performance holistically.
1) There were many things excellent about Igna on this afternoon, with his very deliberate and successful tactical approach operated by the referee which fostered what is considered by some still to be the greatest World Cup finals match ever (Romania vs. Argentina in 94 for me ;)).
But, the drawback of this showing on the whole was how passive Igna was. Of course, a) it is understandable to take a clear backseat in such a game; b) it is understandable to try and conserve energy in such extreme heat of an amazing end-to-end encounter, and; c) nobody got hurt and nobody cared, or probably even noticed, about this in the disciplinary regard.
I’d argue that proper warnings etc didn’t have to be incongruent with Igna’s overall approach and so on (at least in theory - the heat + extreme pace for 86 might have rendered it de facto impossible). But until 116’, that was rather immaterial; being really passive was only really a point for consideration in terms of MtG amidst a very (very) good performance.
However, the passivity DID matter in the two big scenes at the game’s conclusion. It really hurt him at both 116’ and the Bellone penalty shot, one of which he failed in and in the other he got a bit lucky. And here is the wider point - with Igna’s approach was not really the most naturally suited to coming out of Carlos’s foul as the winner.
The perfect referee doesn’t exist! There are always trade-offs in style, always pros-and-contras; trying to do one thing is always at the expense of another, and so on. Igna’s not only passive approach, but passive whole MENTALITY on the pitch, was such his merit for one-hundred and fifteen minutes, as it helped orchestrate a really amazing game.
Igna knew what risks he was taking, and they had all paid off. He showed brilliant football understanding to jump in and prevent the game boiling over in the aforementioned moments, and his judgement he could rely on these players not to play too rough even in essentially not operating a disciplinary control was spot on (though he rode his luck a bit).
But then, with legs and minds wearying, Carlos gave Igna exactly the sort of incident he was pretty primed to fail on, and he did. In that sense, it was a ‘cruel’ incident for the algorithm of this game to generate for him, and even the BBC commentators had sympathy that one incident had tarnished his (strong!) whole two-hour-long body of work.
2) I want to present another angle through which to look at the consequences of the Carlos-on-Bellone (non-)decision. Had Igna punished the Brazil goalkeeper with a freekick + red card, he would have been praised as a pioneering hero, no exaggeration(!), for acting in the pre-DOGSO era against this goalkeeper who otherwise would have tainted the most beautiful and fair spirited match with his cynicalness.
Make no mistake, FIFA still appreciated this performance very much (so did I!), and the ‘weirdness’ of the incident for any WC prior to 1990 needs emphasising. But - Igna did a get a final appointment after this, despite having no serious lobby behind his origin, he was fourth official for the third place playoff (impossible if FRA had lost btw); a clear signal by the way that on whole FIFA liked his WC very much.
We can never know for sure. But, given that Igna’s performance is the kind that is LOVED by the media and FIFA politicians (very similar to Archundia in GERITA), and the red card to Carlos would have been viewed as a heroic (prototypal) decision, praised by everyone… perhaps the Romanian referee could have gotten an altogether different final appointment to finish his WC 1986.
In any case, after this very (very) good performance hitherto the infamous incident at the end of extra time, Igna has much to be proud of. His calculated risks came off, and he earned the respect of the world for his showing. However, I am quite convinced that if he had been a brave pioneer in ejecting Carlos, then Ioan Igna would also have been a World Cup final referee. How life, and refereeing, can turn on such moments!
The final words on this match will go to the linesmen, Lajos Németh and Vojtech Christov, who also contributed to this classic match with superb respective performances. Németh’s aforementioned onside at 116’, and Christov’s at 17’ and 86’ (the former for Brazil’s goal - yes the nowadays clearly NON-active player was just on, a very important judgement in 1986) being the highlights.
Christov was actually faultless the whole match through, and if Németh’s reverse crossover flag at 30’ was correct (impossible to assess), then the Hungarian was too. Though Christov ran the line on the 1982 final, this duo could have quite conceivably been appointed directly to the final eight days later; after their showings in this match, it would have been fully deserved.
Igna got 9.1/10 (I saw the mark with my own eyes), the highest mark of the WC86. He was considered for the final until Havelange requested a Brazilian referee as compensation for their elimination.
Match 46 - West Germany vs. Mexico, Jesús Díaz Full HL: https://youtu.be/dEDaZFLnIL8
Referee Jesús Díaz faced an adrenaline-filled quarterfinal which may have lacked the technical skill of the day's earlier game (or any goals), but was not lacking in excitement. The Colombian official ended up in the spotlight having sorted out eight cautions and sent two players off; to be fair, Díaz had a good game for my money.
The most controversial decision of the game was actually not the ejections of either Berthold or Aguirre, but the Colombian ref’s call to rule off a Mexico score at 70’ (21:30). Díaz adjudged that Raúl Servín pushed Andreas Brehme over, and while the decision remains controversial in Mexican culture to this day, I think that it was simply correct.
Brehme was panicking. He could see that Félix Cruz had a very good goal chance, and not seeing his own rightback playing Cruz well onside, he tries to ‘step up’ and hope for a flag. Brehme doesn’t even try to challenge Cruz for the ball, assessing that his final hope is an offside flag, which of course doesn’t come, as Cruz is clearly on.
From that perspective, what Servín did was a bit stupid. He tries to give Brehme an expedient push in order to give him no chance of stopping Cruz. Given that the defender probably couldn’t have anyway, this was a real miscalculation by Servín! Referee Jesús Díaz detected the offence, and whistled right away - he was correct to annul this goal.
In the game as a whole, I think the Colombian official performed successfully.
The opening period of the first half was the hardest of the match, with so many borderline offences in the early stages; it was de facto impossible to really ‘take charge’ of proceedings during this epoch, but Díaz did enough, and managed to secure the game after that.
While the cards given by the referee certainly didn’t inflame the game, one can wonder how much the disciplinary control actually managed to calm everyone down at the same time. Looking through a modern sense, one can wonder how these scenes would be assessed today. The full sanctions record can be found below:
20’, MEX no.20 cautioned for challenge - 09:00 26’, FRG no.19 cautioned for aggressive behaviour - 09:50 26’, MEX no.3 cautioned for aggressive behaviour - “” 56’, FRG no.4 cautioned for challenge - 17:25 65’, FRG no.14 ejected for violent conduct - 20:15 75’, MEX no.6 cautioned for challenge - 23:45 82’, MEX no.17 cautioned for aggressive behaviour - 26:05 85’, FRG no.8 cautioned for spa holding - 27:05 95’, MEX no.5 cautioned for dissent - 30:20 100’, MEX no.13 ejected for spa impeding - 31:10
I think Díaz got both red cards spot on. Thomas Berthold’s excessive force strike was quite brilliantly detected and then instantly acted on by him, one of the best decisions of the whole tournament! Despite the deep field position, you can see how promising the attack was that Aguirre stopped, probably in a reckless manner too. Neither could really complain.
Also key to Díaz preventing this game from going south was his manner. Despite his short stature, the Colombian was a natural leader on the FoP (including soft skills / manner), and the players responded well to him. His determined presence and top-drawer fitness ensured that nothing got too out of hand. Some really pleasant (smiley) interactions with the players were also visible.
An assortment of some other noteworthy scenes: 11’ advantage after crazy challenge / modern SFP (05:30); 41’ warnings to H. Sánchez and Milutinović (13:05); 48’ penalty appeal (16:45); 78’ more serious MEX penalty appeal (25:20); 88’ simply excellent mimic / facial expression (27:50); and, 115’ enthusiastic work as a team member by linesman Chris Bambridge (34:40).
I hope Díaz was a good English speaker, as all three of his teammates were from the Anglosphere! Linesmen Bambridge from Australia and Snoddy were pretty quiet in terms of offside scenes, but Bambridge made a very important mistake at 17’, denying Mexico a 1-on-1 in a crossover scene (07:40). Otherwise, besides some superficially interesting team member scenes, not much to report for them.
A dedicated report about this performance can be accessed in the link below: https://wc86refs.blogspot.com/p/in-focus-match-47-argentina-vs-england.html
Match 48 - Spain vs. Belgium, Siegfried Kirschen Full HL: https://youtu.be/GKwUIVw_Oqs
The plan was probably always for East Germany’s Siegfried Kirschen to be saved for a late-stage knockout game by FIFA, and having passed the test in what was a slightly showbiz (and not accidentally so) group stage appointment, Kirschen was placed in charge of the quarterfinal which was probably just a step below the other three in terms of prestige.
No less exciting though; the final act in of a brilliant quartet of last eight matches. After his Northern Ireland vs. Brazil game, I would say that I understood, more than shared, their enthusiasm for the East German’s way of refereeing - really very fit, and with a generally good idea of how to stay on top of everything, but not necessarily in the most elegant way regarding calls and management.
I guess you could say that both FIFA’s estimation and my feeling were proved simultaneously correct in this game, where the chips were really down and the referee faced a hard task. The deficiencies which I feared in his style did come to fruition; concurrently, from FIFA’s view, he avoided big controversy, and his thesis for match control co-existed with, and partly helped facilitate, a flowing, thrilling, cup tie.
His very rigorous line in assessing body contacts / impeding fouls was less visible here (though still was), but some clear errors in foul recognition remained. In general, his technical accuracy in assessing ‘duels’ wasn’t bad, but was a little off being at a sound level - at least on the highest level of a World Cup quarterfinal - in my opinion.
Kirschen was very fit, but a quite isolated leader on the field of play, and his general style revolved around those two premises. His disciplinary choices were technically a bit random (and perceived so by the players), but at the same time, I got what his idea was - he jumped in with cards when he needed to calm the players down.
Some of the four cautions shown could have been managed better by different tools in his arsenal (whistle tone, public/private warning), whereas more blatant offenders in other scenes got away scot-free. It was the same with his foul calls, his line felt more in tune with an eye on not losing control, than always clearly assessing foul vs. no foul in the individual incidents.
His final warning to Spain no.2 Tomás Reñones at 41’ (see all clips are below) was very good refereeing, but in some other scenes, he simply failed - he bore an extremely blatant dissent at 23’ without even a verbal warning, and worse was the caution that Michel Renquin escaped at 104’, for a crystal clear LoR handling offence, because Spain took the freekick quickly and were caught offside.
The match flowed from end-to-end after halftime, but the first period had a fair amount of aggro - Kirschen couldn’t really get the tension out of the match with his officiating, and tempers continued to rise, ending in a confrontation scene at 44’, where Ramón Calderé was booked, probably for a little kick out at an opponent. Fortunately, things didn’t blow up too much after that.
Kirschen’s general impression to the eye as a referee, enthusiastically following play with great fitness, was quite aesthetic, and there was something a bit stoic about him and his demeanour too - a slightly aloof manner, but always firm and giving a determined impression, whilst remaining understated and not being demonstrative too, allowing the players the spotlight.
I guess that is what FIFA liked about him too, his a-bit-weak match control thesis style allowed for exciting matches of the slightly unhinged variety, he kept in the background with his manner, and he was a good enough official to prevent things from really boiling over. Kirschen did have his weaknesses, but compared to say Espósito, I’d say he ultimately comes out pretty strongly.
Edgardo Codesal was quite scandalously, IMO, appointed as linesman in this match. His only(!) other designation in this WC on the field, besides this QF, was on the line in the opening game. So clearly an offering to Cañedo/FMF by FIFA. Rather irritating too - even one more appointment for him in the group rounds (eg. in Urrea Reyes’ stead for KORITA, say) would have made it much more palatable.
Especially as he made a big contribution to the match in a rather dubious way - the freekick call made by him in favour of Spain from which they scored their late equaliser was de facto non-existent. I guess the potential offside case from the actual strike though is a rare case of a situation which is active offside now, but not back then.
Interesting case study this - the attacker is running away from goal, not seeking to gain an advantage by this action whilst being offside, but he does gain an advantage, probably decisively putting the goalkeeper off, by blocking his view of the shot. No Belgium players seemed to care at the time though. If we support him in scenes at 9’ and 47’, then Codesal was okay overall.
Horst Brummeier from Austria was the other linesman, an appointment coherent with the performance principle, and he realised a very good performance, one of the best in the whole competition; (seemingly) no mistakes in eight scenes. Brummeier’s development through the tournament was pleasant to note - a hesitant team member in his first game with the flag, but very strong by the end.
Just a final word on the final team member - Jorge Leanza Sansone was the reserve linesman involved in the incident where Paraguay's coach C. Ré was ejected in the group stage, and he was not appointed for the whole R16, before getting this QF (that game was Paraguay vs. Belgium, by the way). I guess FIFA wanted to show their approval for how he handled that incident by assigning him here in the same role.
107’ - potential missed attacking IFK in the penalty area after ball-obstructing offence https://youtu.be/GKwUIVw_Oqs?t=2026
111’ - potential yellow card to Belgium (tackle/SPA) https://youtu.be/GKwUIVw_Oqs?t=2026
113’ - harsh yellow card to Belgium no.13 (challenge) https://youtu.be/GKwUIVw_Oqs?t=2133
Finally, a word on the penalty competition. Kirschen managed it quite weakly in my view, repeatedly allowing the Belgium goalkeeper’s unfair delaying tactics. In addition, should the only saved penalty (by him) have been retaken for goalkeeper off the line? https://youtu.be/GKwUIVw_Oqs?t=2344
Match 49 - France vs. West Germany, Luigi Agnolin Full HL: https://youtu.be/c46lkLsVxQk
I do wonder what FIFA's plans for Agnolin were after his all-time miraculous performance in Argentina vs. Uruguay - maybe a) they wanted to give him the final but couldn't after his controversial foot-up call disallowed a goal for Argentina, and this SF was the highest assignment they could physically give him, or, b) the all-Euro heavyweight match was the reward for that performance and he never really entered serious consideration for the grand finale.
Personally, I think the latter is more likely, and FIFA saw him as a firefighter whom they could give the most technically challenging matches (Hungary vs. Soviet Union too) whilst leaving the most sonorous clashes for others (especially Arppi Filho / Keizer). In any case, receiving three appointments as referee in the 1986 system (in very similar 82 - nobody did) was a feat akin to handling five - maybe even six(!) - matches in the World Cup nowadays; so quite a remarkable achievement by the Italian for sure.
The semifinal that he faced was quite a weird one to be honest - it really didn't feel like a World Cup semifinal at all. Played at midday on a Wednesday afternoon on a poor pitch (heavy rain had fallen since the classic QF), a rather unethusiastic crowd who didn't really care who won all contributed to a flat atmosphere in the stadium, but not on the pitch, as the players fought a calculated and intense match at a high intensity.
Henri Michel criticised Agnolin for being too lenient and I can understand the France coach's impression - in a game with a lot of (modern) reckless play, the Italian referee's tactic was to mostly underplay these fouls (short whistles, urging the players up etc). The two cards that were issued were for extrenous dissent incidents off-camera, with none issued for foul infractions. It is something that I'll try to explore in the review, but I think the Italian's disciplinary control was very practical and good for 1986-era.
This match could never happen nowadays; both teams simply accepted a high threshold for foul play, had the feeling that the referee was always there to keep a hand on everything (and he was), and they focused deeply on playing football. W. Germany's early goal concentrated minds, as France gradually and agonisingly watched the clock tick down with nil to their name, leading to an extremely dramatic conclusion, and only with final kick did Germany ensure their place in the final was safe.
The key incidents: - was the early freekick from which FGR scored correctly awarded? 04:25 - Lajos Németh was spot on to disallow a Platini equaliser in the 2H - 18:25 - should France have been awarded a late penalty for shirt tugging? 24:20
To continue: I must say, Agnolin's style was simply majesterial: very deeply assessing foul incidents and keeping the game flowing, simply fantastic gesture of gestures to signal and especially explain decisions, and showing remarkable game understanding by understanding his role on the pitch, especially as time was running out and France got more and more frustrated. They exploded after the clinching goal/final whistle, partly a consequence of the leniency which frustrated Michel, but Agnolin should sooner receive credit for managing to delay the fracas until after the final whistle with his deeply skilful officiating.
Finishing his World Cup by pushing players away from fighting each other (even screaming at them) was a sad end for one of the superlative WC 'runs' by a referee in all my refereeing consciousness certainly, but somehow was quite fitting. Agnolin had been excellent from the start, and in Argentina vs. Uruguay managed to do sth quite special, and in all three games had been doing FIFA's 'dirty work' for them, though that isn't meant in any kind of disparaging way to either party, rather a compliment. You can argue about the when and how but without doubt, this man deserved a WC final in his palmares.
The rules of the game had been significantly altered for 1990, and completly changed for 1994, so we can be pretty resolute in the assertion that we will never see the like of Luigi Agnolin again. If every referee had the almost supernatural ability of this man they probably needn't have - the amount of theoretically reckless and SPA incidents he passed over without cards would have mounted as he went through the tournament; refereeing like his would be impossible nowadays. Only Frisk, Rosetti and Mateu perhaps come close to how much of a natural he was... and not really that close, either. We will never see the like again; rest in peace, Mr. Agnolin.
Agnolin, Zoran Petrović and Lajos Németh had worked together numerous times in different roles through the tournament and formed something of a 'proto-trio' many years before they came into existance. Both of the linesman fared strongly in their final assignment together in Mexico - Németh faced an extremely challenging 2H and never made a clear mistake, getting the big calls visibly spot on; Petrović had a couple of doubtful calls as FGR countered at the end, but in general - good.
Match 50 - Argentina vs. Belgium, Antonio Márquez Ramírez Full HL: https://youtu.be/a7TeiGUHGKc?
The match which, more than any other, left a sour taste in the mouth with regards to the officiating at this World Cup. The entire designation left many questions (though - some can definitely be answered), the Mexican referee made a complete pig's ear of the game to be frank (8,0 level), and the performance of Portuguese linesman Carlos Silva Valente was not short of a complete scandal - with mistakes that need to be seen to be believed, even for the WC 1986 era.
Let's start at the top. The irritating facet of Antonio Márquez Ramírez's appointment to this game is that it was totally contingent on Mexico losing their QF, and if they had won, Mexico's ref would have gone completely without refereeing a KO stage game. That's unfair on two levels - firstly, he definitely deserved a knockout tie after the skills he displayed in his Denmark vs. Uruguay match (actually, I even considered him on a 'final level'), and secondly because what it says about the appointment.
It says exactly this to me: that given the choice, FMF would rather their team in the semis, but if that didn't work out, getting their ref there "will do" instead. That is not how it should work at all (of course I'm not naïve, but still). I don't discount that perhaps Márquez Ramírez was a compromise option as Argentina rejected Europeans again and there probably were no South Americans left besides Silva, but given that both reserve linesman roles in the semis were discharged by Mexican reserve squad members too, I can't help but feel it was a bit overkill after El Tri's elimination.
To be clear first, it went wrong on a game management level - during the game, most people probably thought "this ref is a bit poor", but afterwards, at least HIS decisions weren't memorable or containing big mistakes. But I should also underline how weak this performance was, even Kirschen and Espósito were quite significantly better than this (and their MtG skills are not strong). How then, did it all go so wrong for a referee who quite genuinely showed star quality in his group stage assignment?
Márquez Ramírez's general style presented a very arrogant and 'cocksure' leader on the FoP, and he won over the players by his natural authority, outer-confidence and so on. It was very clear from quite early on in match no.2 for him that this wasn't going to be possible. There are comments to make on the type of game he faced later, but somehow, I think AMR himself felt that he was a political choice and this SF was maybe too much for him - his manner, even from the first seconds, was somehow a bit off, of a man trying slightly too hard to prove himself; when that all came so naturally to him before.
The game itself was a nightmare for a referee. No Argentina vs. Uruguay-like battle, but extremely edgy yet also high paced (fitness and movement must have troubled him, especially by not backpedaling he got in the way in the 1H). Actually it is impossible to win as a referee such a match. Márquez R. could never really feel when to intervene as a referee and when to take a step back, and his loss of confidence was visible. Some of his interactions with players were even quite bizarre as he tried to impose his authority but each time only dug his own hole deeper.
Of course, while any World Cup semifinal appointment is an honour, I felt a bit sorry for Antonio Márquez Ramírez. His performance was really weak, but I think FIFA spoiled a very able referee by using him as a political pawn (and giving AMR himself that impression, too, can't have helped), and in addition to that, he faced a very demanding game, both of which combined to comprehensively un-do all of the positive elements of his group stage performance. He got through this semifinal, but really not much more than that; a shame, both for him personally, but more pertinently, the tournament itself.
We have to start this section by discussing appointed linesman no.2, Portuguese Carlos Silva Valente. By some long distance, this was the worst performance with the flag of the WHOLE tournament - in the semifinal. Let's walk you through the timestamps of the four very poor decisions he made (the first one is beyond belief). Pay attention particularly to the respective positions from which Silva Valente was making these calls.
On the HL video: 08:50 - 12:30 - 26:25 - 28:45
Belgium have every right to feel aggrieved at the shocking incompetence displayed by Silva Valente in the two first scenes, both crucial for the outcome of the tie, as both had a high probability of yielding goals for them. Ultimately they lost two-nothing. I understand that 35yrs have passed, but it does need underlining that this is a WC semifinal - and none (or at least very few) of the other linesmen were THIS bad. Also, note how he has (the nerve) to be shouting back at the complaining Belgium players...
The positions from which he makes these complete guesses are incredible. I also noticed this with Emanuel Zammit, the Maltese linesman who appeared in major competitions during the late 90s / early 2000s - he is so anxious about being caught for pace by a fast counter-attack, his instinctive reaction is to anticipate the play early, so he starts running backwards way too quickly. Of course, the natural result is that disasters like this happened, when the play is well in-front of you, and you automatically flag anytime there is any crossover scene.
Why was Silva Valente appointed in the first place? I don't have (m)any sources for the goings-on of WC86 refereeing, so I can't really say for sure. There was a prominent Portuguese football politician involved in FIFA at the time, Dr. António Marques, and as we mentioned Zammit, even one man (Mifsud), was enough to ridiculously get this man to appear in top games at top tournaments. His career is rather weird - UEFA gave him nothing, but with FIFA he really reached the very top.
But his performance reviews - as linesman at least(!); he was really poor in Hungary vs. France as ref - were quite decent by you, I can hear you shout back at the computer! Yes, but he never convinced me at all. I can only mark from what I can see on the television footage - if I was assessing in the stadiums, then any potential deficiencies as a team member or detecting offsides would be much more apparent. I just don't get how FIFA saw anything in him, sorry; repeating Christov/Snoddy/Socha/Bambridge would have been much preferable for me to CSV.
FIFA would never learn - Hansal's scandalous mistake in the third place playoff (90), giving Park a QF after weak performances inc. offside from a throw-in in BRAUSA (94), and Dramane Danté's appointment with Al-Ghandour in 98 was actually NO different to Ragoonath''s four years later - if anything, the Trinidadian was marginally more competent in the tournament's previous matches. Finally, the eras caught up with their ways in the Far East, but it was terrible that they played with the competition like that for so long.
Finally, to end on a positive note - Rómulo Méndez made one of the best linesmen's decisions of the whole tournament when he instantly ruled out Argentina's early score for a handling offence (03:25), and he worked very steadily both as a team member and computer of offsides in this match. A (very) good performance, well done. Fitting to end speaking about Méndez - he passed away only yesterday evening, aged eighty-three. A real trailblazer for Guatemala's referees attending two WCs, I warmed to his natural style very much. Rest in peace, sir.
Match 51 - France vs. Belgium, George Courtney Full HL: https://youtu.be/ZS1xEIq60lU
George Courtney was very unlucky indeed not to be appointed to referee a (proper) knockout stage match, and he ended up with the third place playoff as compensation (also for the FA, after the HoG). Having come out alive from a tumultuous Mexico vs. Paraguay - with great credit too by the way - and watching the efforts of some others in their knockout ties, the Englishman can quite justifiably feel he was hard done by in how FIFA treated him at this World Cup.
As for the match itself: to be fair, France and Belgium put on a good show in the ceremonial game; Courtney reffed it okay. The skills he brought to the table, especially in interacting and connecting with players, were very visible. He let a little bit too much go in the second half, but managed to keep everything under control. The big controversy was a penalty he surely missed for Belgium at the start of the extra time period; later he correctly gave France a spot kick. His foul recognition (much different from his line in MEXPAR :D) was strong, especially recognising impeding offences.
The game that really exists in modern football only so FIFA can make politically valuable referee appointments didn't disappoint in that regard either - Hernán Silva was ignored for all KO stage roles, so the Chilean got his stand here, and Jamal Al-Sharif was invariably appointed, despite his (at best) ambivalent impressions running the line in the group stage, and very poor performance in England vs. Paraguay. Both were rather challenged, Silva was good, and Al-Sharif a bit better than one might have expected, but the Syrian remained amongst the poorer linesmen in WC 1986.
(walking through the clips: 12’ was a correctly ruled out goal; 32’ well-solved disciplinary incident; 63’ was surely deliberate and ideally I’d like to have seen Pfaff sent off; 67’ should have been a YC; penalty appeals at 75’, 76’, 83’; losing control of players actions visible at quite brutal fouls 84’ and 87’; 93’ IMO a clear missed penalty to Belgium misperceived by the ref; and finally, 108’ a clear pk to France correctly given; lots of tricky crossover scenes for Silva and (especially) Al-Sharif visible in the HL)
Match 1 - Bulgaria vs. Italy, Erik Fredriksson
ReplyDeleteGood performance by the Swede in the opening game. His manner aroused respect from the players whom were simply focused on playing football, I liked his diligent and focused impression (mostly very good foul recognition) and his use of sanctions was good. Some small problems at the end, biggest area for improvement was wall management (49').
Fredriksson was ready for a second assignment in the KO stage. Both linesman, Roth and Codesal, were also good. There were no 'KMIs' in this game, so no "Big Decisions" montage! I did however write a longer report about this game, which can be accessed in the link below.
(reserve linesman: Marco Dorantes García (MEX))
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1021Nx8I7vHTxxvWi3poNVO156EMGHqk1/edit?usp=sharing&ouid=104795963901978948038&rtpof=true&sd=true
Match 2 - Spain vs. Brazil, Christopher Bambridge
ReplyDeleteBig Decisions: https://streamable.com/71dheg
Poor Chris Bambridge - the Australian having shown that he was very capable of handling such a top clash was unfortunate to face an impossible incident in the fifty-third minute, the ball crashed down off the crossbar and over the line, but linesman David Socha was correctly with the second last defender, and couldn't see it!
The match, and Bambridge's performance, turned on that moment. The referee bore a couple of crazy mobbing incidents poorly (inc. regarding this missed goal), and his technical accuracy fell thereafter. Ultimately, this performance was too controversial, and Bambridge was not appointed for a further match as referee.
I think we can compare the Aussie's style to Ali Bujsaim in WCs 98/02: a quite shining X-Factor and being visibly 'at home' in top clashes, excessive - but successful - gestures and mimics, ability to connect with players despite cultural difference, a foul recognition more orientated on game flow than pure accuracy but still good, and coming from a politically valuable nation. A real shame for this missed goal, to be honest.
The other linesman, big-name Dutchman Jan Keizer, faced controversy too - while it seems that the games' only goal, for Brazil, was offside, I am not quite sure the angles give a fair representation of what happened, and I would back well-positioned Keizer in this instance. Otherwise, both he and Socha showed to be very competent with the flag over the piece.
(reserve linesman: Enrique Mendoza Guillén (MEX))
A longer report about this performance can be accessed here:
Deletehttps://docs.google.com/document/d/1ZCbhcxP3Dp-TKJxr2iIPqQsQNfv5LWmb/edit?usp=sharing&ouid=104795963901978948038&rtpof=true&sd=true
Wasn't the interpretation back then--as the announcers referenced--that "level" was offside? I think that's the point about the Brazilian goal. I think it was invalid then--quite clearly, in fact.
DeleteSocha's inability to call this goal (which, as you note, is understandable) ended his career. I don't know the story well, but suffice it to say that USSF and CONCACAF didn't give him any support. So he became a recluse to the referee world. I'd be interested to learn if you can find any more information about exactly when he stood down but he essentially disappeared. A man who officiated at two World Cups and an Olympics, who was by far the most decorated US referee ever, simply left the game. He never served as an administrator, assessor or instructor. His experiences never helped future generations, so whatever happened in the aftermath of this game left him incredibly bitter.
This still, as a replay was 'loading' (you'll see what I mean), convinced me that the angle used by the BBC to indicate the goal as clearly offside was at least enough of an optical illusion to back Keizer: https://imgur.com/a/UwcsYyx
DeleteSocha: that's sad to hear :/ and surprising - he wrote a piece in a series of essays which FIFA used internally to review the officiating at WC 1990, so I had assumed he stayed involved at least on an instructor level. Maybe some others who were around at the time (Ed Bellion? He ran some sort of blog IIRC) might know sth.
Interesting on the BBC angle. I wonder which one was the optiacl illusion! If only there were VAR...
DeleteI'll message you on BS about Socha. If you have access to the 1990 statement, I'd love to read it.
I was in touch with Socha. He actually wanted to be involved in assessing and instructing, but USSF blocked him.
DeleteIf Socha was blocked by USSF, then that was an equally baffling and shameful decision. He deserved much better!
DeleteMatch 3 - Canada vs. France, Hernán Silva
ReplyDeleteBig Decisions: https://streamable.com/4lddao
Canada were pretty unlucky to be beaten on their WC debut; the Chilean referee faced a relatively easy game which he officiated well.
++ referee Silva was always looking for a chance to play advantage, by being close to potential foul incidents where the afflicted team were in possession, allowed him to minimise freekick decisions which impeded the flow of the game; my favourite element of this performance
+ disciplinary control was good (19', 28', 34', 49', 57', 80', 83'), the warning at 49' probably should have been a caution, but the Chilean clearly acted against the heavy tackle, good; no warning at 28' was his biggest mistake
* foul recognition was decent, but in the choppier moment (match's beginning), I felt his technical accuracy was a little weak
* Silva's manner reminded me of his compatriot from WC 1998, Mario Sánchez Yantén; very serious, determined, and respected by the players; Chile's 1986 representative kept talks with the players to a real minimum, but could communicate effectively enough with them (49', 57') when needed
* fitness was no issue at all, but the Chilean referee preferred to stay in the centre of the pitch in running the game
All in all, a second appointment ought to have been open for Silva, but I can agree with FIFA in deciding that in more troubled waters, this referee might have lacked the skills to succeed. Of his Central American linesman, Guatemalan Méndez was the weakest so far (when he wasn't getting dead cockerels off the FoP!), and Costa Rica's Berny Ulloa Morera was totally quiet.
(reserve linesman: Arturo Brizio Carter (MEX))
Match 4 - Argentina vs. Korea Republic, Victoriano Sánchez Arminio
ReplyDeleteWhile the result was never in question, Sánchez Arminio faced a very challenging assignment in this rough game - and unfortunately the Spaniard was well off the mark with his performance.
From the first minutes, that was clear - having already born a deliberate tackle foul on Maradona (2'), a blatant holding by Argentina no.14 which according to the tournament guidelines should have been a caution (3'), South Korea no.12 went in for a violent kick on Maradona at 5'. A yellow card was in order, but SA only gave him a pro forma 'that's one, no more' warning to calm down the furious Argentina players.
When he fouled again, Maradona from behind at 13', and a blatant holding on the star player at 18' - the Spanish referee gave a freekick only. Both no.12 and the other persistent offender, KOR no.10, always got away scot-free. Disciplinary control didn't really exist in this performance, there were two random cautions at the end of the first half and the start of the second, but besides that, nothing was off limits to the players.
Sánchez Arminio was a very distant leadership figure, and because he couldn't really access the players, he just let everything go. To put it bluntly, the ref just let them kick the sh*t out of (not only, but mostly) Maradona. Very poor performance. The positives: jumping in well at 64' with a warning, and three pedantic freekicks given to help match control (54', 65', 86').
While Jesús Díaz had a very doubtful flag at 70', and Gabriel González a tight, wrong, but important, flag at 83', in general these were positive linesman performance by these CONMEBOL officials - Díaz worked very well as a team member and González played a good onside at 85', amidst widely convincing respective displays.
(reserve linesman: Edgardo Codesal (MEX))
Match 5 - Soviet Union vs. Hungary, Luigi Agnolin
ReplyDeleteBig Decisions: https://streamable.com/51i42d
Contemporaries expecting a tight game were shocked to see the Soviet team trounce their opponents by six goals to nothing in the extreme afternoon heat. No decisions taken by the officials were ever going to change the destination of the winning points, but not the easiest afternoon for referee Luigi Agnolin nonetheless.
This was a typical Eastern clash - no player-player conflicts, but a lot of heavy tackles and challenges. The key to success in this one was staying alert, and ensuring the players (of Hungary) didn't try to hurt their opponents. Two correct penalty calls, well-timed warnings, appropriate whistle tones, a strong presence and excellent fitness were the tools which got Agnolin out of a slightly tricky situation unscathed. Mistakes in foul recognition were rare.
The top Italian was safely through for a second match. As for his linesmen - George Courtney worked well as a team member, played two very good onsides (29', 31') and one probably poor offside (20'). Overall, the Englishman was probably the best so far in this role. Horst Brummeier was (defensibly) waived down by Agnolin when he flagged a freekick at 15'! In the second half, the one when the Austrian was challenged, he seemed to compute offsides okay, though his sideways movement wasn't great.
(reserve linesman: Jorge Leanza Sansone (MEX))
Match 6 - Morocco vs. Poland, José Luis Martínez
ReplyDeleteKey Incidents: https://streamable.com/qewffk
Lowest key match of the tournament so far for the Uruguayan referee, whose style I really warmed to - simply taking as many correct decisions as possible, and defending them with natural authority. Despite not being the best athlete at the tournament, he worked *very* hard with his running, and moved really well. His manner was serious, but never too distant.
The key moments of the match from the montage above:
(58', 60', 70, 78' - penalty appeals)
11' - correct no YC in 1986
15' - while the warning was blatantly pro forma, I really appreciated, a) his correct initial reaction to this foul, and, b) he connected during this verbal admonishment
16' - it seems everyone, referee included, misjudged this scene; replays would probably have shown a(n modern) SFP by the Poland player
33' - Martínez's lack of prevention can be explained by his haste to be in a position to judge offside, as linesman were instructed to patrol the goal line from freekicks to be shot at goal (as it happened, Idrissa Traoré forgot anyway :D); correct YC from the guidelines/LotG
69' - the one scene where the ref was slightly overcome, VC-ish incident and the referee wasn't really on top of it, looking isolated
72' - getting the game back on is the best solution after uncarded LoR/SPA-ish incidents; well done
Martínez found himself in the same position as Neji Jouini in 1994 - a very good referee, whom FIFA feared would probably arouse too much attention in a KO stage game, despite having the class to handle it. I would have loved to see this referee in a game like Mexico vs. West Germany; he was pretty unlucky, to be honest.
As for his Francophone linesman - Joël Quiniou, besides an ostensibly wrong flag at 30', performed quite competantly, but I was less convinced by aforementioned Traoré. Malian official appeared incorrect to flag at 22' and 50', besides playing an important onside from a simply terrible position at 79' (-> guessed). Still, no important mistakes from either, in a quartet that seemed from their interactions, to be very genuinely harmonious and congenial.
(reserve linesman: Joaquín Urrea Reyes (MEX))
Match 7 - Belgium vs. Mexico, Carlos Espósito
ReplyDeleteBig Decisions: https://streamable.com/1h1599
A question of survival for the Argentine referee - more than once, this very tense and edgy game threatened to spiral out of his control, but by his fingernails, Carlos Espósito managed to cling on and just about get through. It really wasn't pretty though, and it should have been his only match of the tournament.
This was such a classic weak performance in so many ways:
- a way too high number of missed incidents, especially off-the-ball fouls (some of them VC-ish) on players who had just released the ball, which the ref should really have caught with his trailing eye
- many smaller and even some larger player-player conflicts not dealt with properly, Espósito preferring to let play continue or not issuing any warnings before the game restarted again
- any warnings given were simply reactive, no identification of problem players
- total carte blanche regarding dissent, besides one arbitrary warning and then a random caution at the end
- not existent management of DtR; Espósito even pointed to his watch on one occasion ("you'll get the time back"), actual additional time... less than thirty seconds [FIFA ordered refs to keep it to a minimum as a guideline, but even so]
- simple lack of courage in some scenes, he saw a deliberate/reckless late charge at 53' and explained away that it was just a 'coming across incident', and ignored a blatant Belgium freekick on the edge of the box (84') because it would have caused too much of a stir
-> Carlos Espósito was saved by his presence in this game - a couple of (random) warnings in the 1H, and reactively shouting at some moments in the 2H (such as in a penalty appeal in the above montage) - otherwise he would have certainly failed. All three goals were at least somewhat controversial (really handball?; clear offside before corner?; repeated throw-in?), too.
On the one hand, we can say that Argentina's referee faced a very challenging game and, arguably, didn't fail the test, therefore recommending himself for higher tasks. On the other, there were elements of this performance which were even excruciatingly weak, and the overall picture just wasn't convincing in my view.
I guess we have a similar case to Felix Brych in BELPOR at the last EURO (a '6 vs. 4' argument). Given the pull of AFA, I guess it would be naïve to expect anything other than a second game for Espósito after this performance without clear / visibly decisive mistakes.
As for his linesman - Carlos Silva Valente was quite good, whereas Rómulo Méndez struggled a bit. Both were relatively busy, as team members and computing offsides too, when they controlled the halves that Mexico respectively attacked into.
(reserve linesman: Ioan Igna (ROU))
The announcer was quite insufferable at 46'+ and 55'!
Delete55' especially :D - to be fair to Gerry Harrison, he commentated the game really well overall (and was very fair / reasonable when discussing the officials).
DeleteA small sidenote, the BBC commentator who I clipped into the ESPBRA HL, Gerald Sinstadt, died today aged 91 :( - a true legend of broadcasting here, RIP.
[there were too many incidents to make a proper MtG separate video for this game, so I uploaded the full HL video to YouTube. If you have a spare half-an-hour, I'd argue it is well-worth the watch! Link below:
https://youtu.be/nyR1MBpM_V0]
Wow, he barely reacts as the players wreak mayhem all around him! Almost nonexistent presence. If this guy was Argentina’s no. 1 in the 80s, what changed for them to produce so many good refs in the last 25 years?
DeleteMatch 8 - Algeria vs. Northern Ireland, Valerij Butenko
ReplyDeleteRelevant incidents: https://streamable.com/bm07v9
Counting in the Soviet referee's favour was his excellent fitness, especially sprinting (think del Cerro) and 'Arnie'-like presence, hence, nobody really messed with him - but this was a disappointing performance. Decisions were too unpredictable, isolated as a leadership figure, unable to calm everybody down; the result was lots of confrontations and VC-ish incidents as you can see in the montage. The two freekicks leading to the goals appeared correct/supportable respectively.
A second match would have been inappropriate after this performance. André Daina looked good as linesman on the near side, whereas Zoran Petrović had a couple of doubtful flags on the afternoon.
(reserve linesman: Marco Dorantes García (MEX))
Match 9 - Portugal vs. England, Volker Roth
ReplyDeleteRelevant incidents: https://streamable.com/fntesi
Top class performance from the (West) German referee! An excellent use of sanctions (I'd only rather YC at 88' for the tackle), taking action against rough fouls as FIFA demanded, in a widely enjoyable game. His manner was top drawer and reminded me of Viktor Kassai - his gestures and presence pointed to a man who was ultra-sure in his decisions, but his top down authority never went over the edge to arrogance. A real pleasure to watch.
Unfortunately however, Roth made the first clear referee mistake of the tournament - Portugal were denied a clear penalty at 85'. Fortunately for the FGR ref, the Iberians were already winning, and did hold out to win. Sh*t happens though, and to be fair, I was also fooled initially from the live sequence. I don't think this should count against Roth too much in the bigger picture.
Two officials who were to both achieve World Cup infamy in the future stood as linesman here - Bogdan Dočev generally convinced with his ability to determine offside, whereas Jamal Al-Sharif was a bit more doubtful. Both functioned as a good team members though, in what appeared a pleasant refereeing team to be a part of.
(reserve linesman: Enrique Mendoza Guillén (MEX))
(FYI: I am not going to create anymore game-specific streamable clips; all of my previous ones (inc. EURO 2020, WC98 et al.) have all been removed; full game HL will be on YouTube instead)
ReplyDeleteMatch 10 - Paraguay vs. Iraq, Edwin Picon-Ackong
ReplyDeleteFull HL: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o4-a8FZvoJ4
Wow, what an excellent referee this man from Mauritius was - his feeling for when and how re. warnings was exceptional, his manner and presence top drawer (can you guess which other WC referee he reminds me of? ), foul recogntion just very good; we reached genuine masterclass level in this performance.
But Picon-Ackong is remembered for ‘disallowing’ an Iraq goal before halftime. Actually, he was EXTREMELY unlucky and didn’t really make a mistake - you can view the sequence in the HL, but EPA blew his whistle some seconds BEFORE the corner was taken - but nobody really heard it with the crowd cheering, and hence this ‘disaster’ occurred.
Iraq were really furious and Picon-Ackong’s race was run. His 2H performance was a bit worse than the first, but still on a high level. What a great shame that this completely top-class referee was written off as a hopeless CAF token - we reach ‘Moreno level’ tragedy with this episode.
His linesmen were from CONCACAF - David Socha responded well after hitting the headlines in his last match, (seemingly) being correct in disallowing two Paraguay goals in the 2H, and working well as a team member.
The same cannot be said of Berny Ulloa Morera - he did well to protect his team leader at halftime, but he was clearly wrong to disallow a PAR strike in the 1H. Other officials showed that they COULD compute crossovers competently, and the best linesmen in 1986, I believe, would have gotten this call right.
Ulloa Morera’s later progress makes Picon-Ackong’s removal all the more disappointing. :/
(reserve linesman: Arturo Brizio Carter (MEX))
That disallowed Paraguay goal was onside by at least 3 meters!!!
DeleteIn Ulloa Morera's defense - he probably had no idea, at least in so much as words, what the flash-lag effect or a 'crossover' was. But even so...
DeleteAnd, *spoiler alert*, it wasn't the last time that the Costa Rican would make such a glaring mistake at this tournament.
Answer to my question btw: Bujsaim; staying on top of the incidents in a hectic way, whilst being able to combine a friendly manner with a supercilious leadership style (especially mimics / gestures). And, IMO, we are talking about a complete carbon copy between the two in this regard :D.
I’m actually kind of puzzled why the “disallowed goal” was such a controversy. I’m pretty sure I could hear the whistle just before the corner is taken on the highlights. It also looked like it was mainly the Iraqi bench (who were presumably less able to hear the whistle due to distance) who were up in arms about the decision, more so than the players on the field.
DeleteAlso, after seeing some of the terrible offside decisions in this series, I’ve been paying more attention to ARs in present-day games and so many of them are amazingly good.
Match 11 - Uruguay vs. West Germany, Vojtech Christov
ReplyDeleteFull HL: https://youtu.be/L4IIufAQT0o
Czechoslovakian Christov, the referee sporting the most decorated palmares amongst FIFA's squad in Mexico, handled this (very enjoyable!) game really well - he was completely prepared for the kind of match he would face, and delivered a strong performance.
Uruguay set their stall out early, and so did our match official - clear warnings at 1' and 3', before then South American champions scored. Christov was brilliantly preventative in the 1H, always running in to prevent conflicts, act against DtR, etc. The players knew they were dealing with a serious referee. The 2H was easier as the game stretched and players tired.
I really liked this performance! Many a lesser referee would have had huge trouble in this game, but Vojtech Christov made it look rather easy in fact. Given his experience (chosen to open WC 1982 as referee and close it as linesman; EURO 1984 final too), and evident class, it is hard to reason why Christov wasn't taken forward for a ko stage game. Some hypothesises:
- FIFA assessed Diogo's tackle as a clear RC (29') and non-negotiably so (timestamp: https://youtu.be/L4IIufAQT0o?t=608)
- his leadership style was generally considered too abrasive (I think we can compare him to Puhl in this respect?)
- the assessor in the stands found fault with this performance on an MtG level; if so, quite unfairly, points for improvement being: rare tactical mistakes in 1H, arguably too 'ballsy' management of injuries, ignored clear encroachment at 85'
- he irked FIFA internally for some reason, or he made some heinous error at Díaz's or Daina's side (but why give him BRA vs. FRA QF as linesman then?)
- Christov was planned for the Azteca semifinal, but when Belgium reached it and created a repeat of the 82 opener which he handled, FIFA opted to compensate controversially-eliminated Mexico instead
-> my explanation actually would be thus - FIFA's idea of what a good referee(ing) is changes from WC-to-WC, and I hope my previous blogs managed to explain accessibly. My guess is that FIFA saw Christov as a 'firefighter', but not their go-to man for sonorous clashes. There were certainly more 'invisible' referees in 1986, if one wanted to go down that route (and, judging by the appointments, FIFA did).
So, unfortunately, this high class referee was frozen out for whatever reason. Christov, at least, reached the highest echelons in other tournaments. As for the confederationally balanced namesaked linesman - Chilean Silva Arce looked good, whereas Portuguese Silva Valente less so. CSV flagged a non-active player at 58', waived down by his ref, and some of his offside calls appeared a bit dubious generally. In any case, both were far from disastrous.
(reserve linesman: Ali Bennaceur (TUN))
Match 13 - Italy vs. Argentina, Jan Keizer
ReplyDeleteFull HL: https://youtu.be/rh4yved8NcA
Wow, what a high difficulty of game which Keizer had to face in this tie! Quite genuinely up there as one of the hardest games amongst all the WCs I've covered - a real war between the players, presumably there were scores to settle from Spain 82 too, which combined with a fast-paced game, a very high number of foul duels to assess, and a high number of problem players to manage and monitor. No small task then!
And Jan Keizer awarded a penalty in the first few minutes (link: https://youtu.be/rh4yved8NcA?t=108). The Dutchman was quite correct in my view - the defender actually controlled the ball with his hand, and was correctly penalised. Linesman Alan Snoddy actually had the situation clearly in his vicinity, but he left it to further away-Keizer to make the call; the Northern Irishman only after seeing that his team leader was going to blow, then put his arm across his chest.
On the whole, I thought Keizer reffed it really (really) well indeed. His leadership style was one of the best and most natural I've ever seen (maybe THE most natural) - such calm, elegant, undemonstrative assurance was beyond a pleasure to watch. Tactical approach was spot on too:
1) he acted against 'crafty' actions with whistle tone, warnings, facial expressions/tone; 2) he held his nerve in the tense minutes after Argentina equalised
3) PERFECT use of sanctions of the 2H
The only mistake he made was missing a very late foul by Vialli (modern SFP probably) who was later chopped down for the third booking, and he could have better recognised striking fouls to make the game a bit calmer.
In general, I was simply stunned by the quality which Jan Keizer brought to the table in this match. In every aspect of refereeing (base decisions, tactical approach, personality / manner), we simply watched a masterclass-level performance in this game. Without any doubt, Jan Keizer is one of the best referees in football history!
Chapeau.
Two interesting selections as linesmen, both sporting perhaps amongst the highest political value amongst the 36 refs there. Antonio Márquez Ramírez performed strongly both in computing offsides and as a team member. Aforementioned Alan Snoddy much less so - he flagged a phantom offside at 73', and wasn't that convincing working as a team member. No reasonable person would bring the early penalty into that discussion, though.
(reserve linesman: Joaquín Urrea Reyes (MEX))
I actually didn’t like this performance as much, mainly because of the missing striking offenses (there were a lot of them). Impressive management of the players, though I didn’t like some of the exaggerated gestures.
DeleteMatch 14 - France vs. Soviet Union, Romualdo Arppi Filho
ReplyDeleteFull HL: https://youtu.be/vBNRTl9VjYM
If the simultaneous game to this one was characterised by a notably high number of foul infringements, this encounter was remarkable for exactly the opposite - both France and the USSR just wanted to 'get on with it', and the result was an aesthetic, pretty modern piece of football, but that didn't necessarily mean an easy ride for the Brazilian referee on another searingly hot Mexican afternoon.
Arppi Filho was a very good ref and he handled this game assuredly. His disciplinary control was the best so far - a true law-enforcer(!) - and his foul recognition strong too, though he could have used 'delayed whistle' a few times to his advantage. His elegant running/fitness was top drawer, and his manner aroused the players respect. In terms of KMIs, he faced a couple of penalty appeals (7'/02:15 -- 18'/04:00) and a potential RC/'SYC' (72' -- 13:30).
This referee certainly had the 'X-Factor' necessary to go very far in this WC. Neither of the two linesmen did anything to impede their progress in that role either - Victoriano Sánchez Arminio and debuting-Shizuo Takada were very quiet due to the game's nature, but worked well as team members in the smaller scenes in which they are required. It would have been great to see this crack trio work a KO stage together!
(reserve linesman: Marco Dorantes García (MEX))
Wow! This game didn’t seem to be that difficult, but I really liked this performance. Arppi Filho is probably the first ref from this series that I’d describe as ‘cool’ or ‘stylish’. Love the relaxed and understated gestures he uses.
DeleteMatch 15 - Korea Republic vs. Bulgaria, Fallaj Al-Shanar
ReplyDeleteThis game should be one of the cult FIFA World Cup finals matches.
Reasons:
a) the incessant rain under which it was played and in the 2H, the condition of the pitch was farcical
b) it comprised two of the most unfacied/unfashionable teams of the tournament
c) the game was actually decisive for who would progress to play hosts Mexico in the R16
d) the underdogs nearly won!
e) to say that the level of football was agricultural would be a polite formulation
but, most pertinent to us,
f) the game was officiated by a completely incompetent referee, Fallaj Al-Shanar from Saudi Arabia, whose eccentricities were all part of the fun on a surreal afternoon in Mexico City
If I were assessing Al-Shanar's performance on 'my' scale, I would assign a mark of "2" for this showing. Some of my favourite moments from this football spectacle:
https://youtu.be/nkf8oIoN-Y4?list=PLJNDTL9UhkPtE-OJNe7HTQvWo-AlPPDRE&t=41
https://youtu.be/nkf8oIoN-Y4?list=PLJNDTL9UhkPtE-OJNe7HTQvWo-AlPPDRE&t=79
https://youtu.be/nkf8oIoN-Y4?list=PLJNDTL9UhkPtE-OJNe7HTQvWo-AlPPDRE&t=308
https://youtu.be/nkf8oIoN-Y4?list=PLJNDTL9UhkPtE-OJNe7HTQvWo-AlPPDRE&t=461
https://youtu.be/nkf8oIoN-Y4?list=PLJNDTL9UhkPtE-OJNe7HTQvWo-AlPPDRE&t=703
If far-sided linesman Valerij Butenko was trying to out-do his team leader's incompetence, then he did a pretty good job, showing a total inability to compute crossovers which included two really poor offside calls. Ioan Igna, holding the yellow flag, to some extent had the game exclusively in his hands in the final stages, determining a number of extremely promising Korea attacks offside. The majority of these decisions appeared correct / supportable, but some were rather controversial from my position.
(reserve linesman: Jorge Leanza Sansone (MEX))
Any time you hear someone argue that the politics of FIFA or the overall standard of officiating has gotten worse over time, or that referees were more likely to punish "X" correctly back in the day, show them this. Hell, show them snippets of any of these matches or highilght packages of many of them. But this game? Just wow. The 5th highlight you flag is particularly egregious (he misses an SFP tackle and decides to have bodily convlusions to coerce the Bulgarians to just play on) but the whole thing was atrocious. This was a nightmare. It is a stark reminder that there clearly are "modern" and non-modern eras of refereeing. And 1986 is firmly in the non-modern era. There are at least some plausible arguments that 1990 and 1994 straddle the two.
DeleteIndeed, I think decades from now we'll simply just look back on the 1990s as the big transition period. I would posit that so much attention was paid to the poor quality of 2002 precisely because things had improved so much during the 1990s and expectations were higher (and more cameras and better production meant mistakes were much clearer). You could have put almost any WC2002 match back into WC1986 and no one would have said a word. Yet right now, for many who aren't at least 50 years old, it's probably seen as the nadir for international refereeing.
Full agreement from me regarding the first paragraph. To add: If you saw Al-Shanar's mistakes in SCO vs. DEN and then note he was at Al-Sharif's side for England vs. Paraguay in the R16... scandalous. The teams and the watching world deserve(d) better.
DeleteWow! I actually think the best current referee from my home state (New Hampshire), who’s done college and possibly USL2 (4th-tier) games is definitely better than this Al-Shanar fellow. I’m not even convinced he’s better than an average high school official from here nowadays (some of whom are quite bad).
DeleteHard to imagine what the other Saudi refs from this time must have been like …
Match 16 - Hungary vs. Canada, Jamal Al-Sharif
ReplyDeleteFull HL: https://youtu.be/4WJBngGbckw
A 'must-win' game for both Hungary and Canada, whose result ultimately rendered both nations eliminated. This was an easy-going fixture to referee for the more-favoured of Farouk Bouzo's two Arab referees.
With his excellent fitness, Jamal Al-Sharif did enough in Irapuato. The only minutes which really needed careful attention were those after Hungary's second goal, where it could have gotten nasty. That Al-Sharif had no real disciplinary plan besides cautioning what would nowadays be red cards actually didn't matter for this encounter.
This game is most notable from our officiating standpoint for producing the first red card of the tournament (86' -- 12:15). No SYCs back then, but having already been cautioned, Mike Sweeney was dismissed via this route after a blatant holding offence. Al-Sharif followed the guidelines to the letter - though he ostensibly had forgotten that he'd booked Sweeney early in the 2H - and the Canada player walked.
Scandal-aside, the Syrian was probably always going to get a KO stage appointment (as argued for his powerful compatriot Bouzo) but this 'strict' following of the instructions, at a tournament where the refs seemed a bit too adept at ignoring them, was the icing on the cake. No matter that it actually had no sporting relevance at all (in a game nobody cared about with the result already decided).
So Al-Sharif made the grade for the next phase. So did his two linesmen as it happened - Zoran Petrović had the near-side, and made a clear mistake to deny Canada a very promising attack at 67'; besides that he was okay. Aussie Chris Bambridge looked the most complete of the whole officials squad in the role so far, a very good team member (eye contact and so on) and faultless according to my record in determining offsides.
(reserve linesman: Enrique Mendoza Guillén (MEX))
Match 17 - Brazil vs. Algeria, Rómulo Méndez
ReplyDeleteFull HL: https://youtu.be/pIDTgrwu0os
What a thrilling match! Played in the right spirit, full of attacking football, a potential upset and the result undecided until the end - this was the World Cup at it's brilliant best (I couldn't disagree more with the RTÉ summariser at the end!). Guatemala's Méndez was the referee, one of five who returned from Spain 1982.
Relevant match incidents:
03:25 - potential YC for LoR holding (19')
04:10 - potential YC for LoR handling (25')
04:50 - goal to Brazil disallowed for foul challenge (32')
06:25 - potential YC for LoR handling (38')
06:55 - potential YC for reckless tackle (39')
09:00 - potential YC for SPA holding (52')
11:30 - warning to Algeria no.11 after foul (71')
12:05 - potential penalty to Brazil for blocking (74')
12:20 - potential penalty to Brazil for blocking (75')
12:40 - potential penalty to Brazil for foul tackle (81')
I really liked this performance by Rómulo Méndez! He reminded us that yellow cards are just bits of paper, and he managed to (genuinely) stay on top of the incidents simply by his conviction and personality. The players 'bought into' his relaxed approach and the result was a fantastic spectacle. A brilliant natural the like of whom - for better and for worse - would be very out of place in modern refereeing.
Appointing him for a KO stage match would have come with some measure of risk, but it was a chance that the Guatemalan referee definitely earned with this performance. The fear that in a harder match it would blow in his face, the ignoring of the guidelines, his abdication of common-sense in getting H. Sánchez booked at Espósito's side and the lack of lobby for him probably all played a part in that not turning into reality.
The nature of the game meant it was a pretty quiet one for both linesmen - especially Martínez (URU) who besides one smaller 'team member scene', had not much to do. Quiniou (FRA) was busier, and he would have realised a full expected level performance were it not for two poor flags at the end of the match (82', 85'). This was the Frenchmen's last participation at Mexico 86' with the flag.
(reserve linesman: Arturo Brizio Carter (MEX))
I’d agree with the belief that Mendez would have trouble in a hard game, at least if he didn’t change his disciplinary approach. He probably did enough to merit a KO appointment on this performance, but I wouldn’t go as far in my praise.
DeleteMatch 18 - England vs. Morocco, Gabriel González
ReplyDeleteFull HL: https://youtu.be/kmeaIjyeWL4
This game os most famous here for the Ray Wilkins' first half red card for throwing the ball at the referee. Clip link is below. What happened is this: Wilkins was flagged offside by the Argentine linesman Carlos Espósito, but seeing the ref with his arm up (-> IFK call), believed he had been awarded an attacking freekick for 'foot up'.
Upon realising that wasn't the case, Wilkins threw the ball at González. Credit to the man in the middle, who instantly processed what had happened - this might sound stupid, but on an expectation-recognition level, esp. as the ball actually bounced just before the ref's feet, it was relatively easy to lose the moment. González to his credit didn't, and instantly went for the red card.
https://youtu.be/kmeaIjyeWL4?list=PLJNDTL9UhkPtE-OJNe7HTQvWo-AlPPDRE&t=459
Analysing the performance as a whole, I would say that Gabriel González did relatively well. This was a very challenging game to referee for much of its' playing - (lots of foul duels, lots of 'borderline' disciplinary incidents, players getting frustrated / fractious) - with a lot to technically analyse. We can summarise it like this:
DeleteNeg: >100°F conditions forced this non-athlete type ref to cut corners, most problematic was management of the game leading up to the weak first caution; we can also mention positioning, some missed incidents (fouls), doing 'bare minimum' managing problem player Wilkins resulting in this RC, also in separate encroachment, then sarcastic applause scenes in 2H
Pos: not surprising to note his regular appearances late in the Libertadores, González was clearly an accomplished ref; generally good use of sanctions, clear focus on LoR holdings (probably emphasised internally mid-way thru GS); impressively staying on top of incidents, respected by players; and the courage /decisiveness to eject Wilkins
-> Overall, I'd say that we reach an 8,3 / 7 level performance where the starting mark would be 8,8-ish, if everything was perfectly handled; IMO a bit short of a KO stage appearance, but absolutely no shame at all in this performance by Gabriel González, a pretty decent job indeed, given the context especially.
Linesman: there were no scenes where it was actually possible to assess Espósito's / Kirschen's offside calls(!); the East German was busier, both worked quite fine as team members.
(reserve linesman: Edgardo Codesal (MEX))
Match 19 - Mexico vs. Paraguay, George Courtney
ReplyDeleteFull HL: https://youtu.be/Qe4KbyuUpOc
One of the most fascinating pieces of refereeing I've ever seen. George Courtney's prevention was as extreme as it was skilful - seventy-eight (yes, 78!!) fouls whistled in a still-standing WC record - as he mostly prevented this Latin duel from turning into the complete fight which it threatened to degenerate into throughout.
Going deep in foul detection (understandably this wavered a bit for the last half-an-hour), brilliantly judged tones in player interactions, a disciplinary control which optimally synthesised warnings vs. cards, and remarkable concentration / fitness skills - Courtney was simply superb.
Most crucially however, the English referee had to decide upon two very tricky Hugo Sánchez penalty appeals - clips are below. Courtney played on in the first half scene, but he pointed to the spot in the second, giving Sánchez the kick to win the game, only for Mexico’s star striker to miss. Would be very interested in other’s views!
39’ - https://youtu.be/Qe4KbyuUpOc?list=PLJNDTL9UhkPtE-OJNe7HTQvWo-AlPPDRE&t=575
88’ - https://youtu.be/Qe4KbyuUpOc?list=PLJNDTL9UhkPtE-OJNe7HTQvWo-AlPPDRE&t=1335
Both scenes were ambiguous enough in any case to give Courtney the benefit of the ‘clear match error doubt’, and quite rightly FIFA kept him in the running for a knockout stage appointment (which was actually mandatory after this showing). I would strongly recommend watching the full match if anyone gets the chance!
England’s representative was assisted by two top European officials - Fredriksson and Igna - neither of whom had a too sizeable body of work. They worked well as team members, but did make evident mistakes; the Swede in a tough crossover scene, Igna however missed a clear elbow in his vicinity. The strike was worthy of ejection in my opinion.
(reserve linesman: Rómulo Méndez (GUA))
I recently watched the first 30 minutes or so of this game and was hugely impressed. I especially liked the way he cautioned for failure to respect the distance:
DeleteR: ‘back up’
Player: ‘what was that?’
R: ‘you know what I meant! Here’s a yellow!’
He was calling even the smallest tugs and any challenges looking remotely dangerous, but also allowing advantage at every opportunity. It seemed like almost every few seconds there was a duel or challenge requiring a decision.
I’ll have a look at the penalty calls.
My first impressions are that 39’ should’ve been a PK and that 88’ looked like a fair shoulder charge, and yet he gave the opposite decision in each case!
DeleteIt looks like Courtney got only 2 European cup centers, mostly being used in the Cup-Winners Cup or UEFA Cup while Hackett was usually favored for the premier competition. Courtney was also overlooked for Euro 88 in favor of Hackett. Seems like UEFA preferred Hackett and FIFA preferred Courtney, maybe?
I think you are right - though it is worth noting that UEFA did take Courtney to EURO 1984, where he directly handled the Denmark vs. Spain semifinal.
DeleteI meant to add this in addition to what I wrote above about Espósito vs. who followed - the whole idea of 'number ones' from certain countries as we know them today wasn't really the case 'way back when'.
However, to really 'grasp' this idea properly, I think you have to understand that probably the idea of even having a 'number one', as we understand it today, at least in the modern sense, is not just "wrong", but is actually "not even wrong" / a "category mistake".
UEFA, I am quite sure, relied very much on national association recommendations more than their own assessments. Look at the refs selected for eg. EURO 84/88 - simply just one referee from all the big associations, plus one 'wildcard' who starred at the previous WC.
The concept of a number one referee from each nation implies that a) there is enough data (performance analysis) to make that judgement and b) that UEFA really wanted to do it. I really don't think they did, preferring to rely on association's judgement and subscribing to general idea of 'turn-taking' (such as Hackett to EURO 1988 over Courtney as you say).
Analysing who got more European Cup vs. CW/UEFA Cups is also a bit of a faux analysis IMO (not trying to take anything away from what you said, to be clear!(!!) - it implies that there would be more attention on European Cup game x, than UEFA Cup game y.
I don't think anybody looked deeply into performances enough to really even, in their minds, want to or even think it possible to have real 'country no.1s', the notion of keeping associations happy and turn-taking was much more important.
Perhaps FIFA were a bit different. I think they paid more attention to sending observers to obscure games, focusing closely on performances in their youth WCs, and simply wanted to take the best to their WCs, while also satisfying political considerations of course.
I guess FIFA's vision came closer to what we consider today as 'country no.1s' than UEFA, but I still think it is quite distinct. Let's say in the 1980s/90s, FIFA might choose Letexier over Turpin for the next WC, if they were really convinced by the former.
I hope that I explained that okay! For similar reasons, I think analysing the performances from past WCs, especially so far back as 1986, is a kind of 'category error' - these referees had only to satisfy FIFA assessors (and, I guess chiefly, politicians like Blatter) in the stands.
Analysing their performances by video, when they themselves weren't trained by video, is kind of unfair and a 'category error', if you know what I mean. Even the top referees tended to have one rather blatant 'moment of madness' in all the games I saw so far.
Satisfying an assessor in the stands era of refereeing is very different to 'surviving video analysis' refereeing. This is very painful when seeing linesmen who have no concept of the 'flash lag effect', and make sooo obvious mistakes because of it. It is only because of video and so on, that we ourselves can pick that out.
I think this concept is most fascinating in the English commentated games, when blatantly incorrect offside calls are determined correct by them. Nowadays, showing EXACTLY the same replays (no lines, slow-mo etc.), the commentators would call them incorrect.
I hope that I didn't just waffle on in this comment and managed to make some coherent enough points; as perhaps comes across, I find these 'philosophical' elements rather fascinating indeed! :D
This is very interesting and explains a lot, such as why so many different English officials got only a few UEFA club competition matches each in the 1970s. Clearly UEFA must have been relying on the National FAs considerably.
DeleteWhen re-watching (college) games I attended in person, and I’ve found on many occasions that the referee comes out looking worse on video than in my immediate post-game impressions, so it definitely makes sense that refereeing was much more of an art than a science back then.
Full HL:
Deletehttps://youtu.be/-2BZfuufaMQ?list=PLJNDTL9UhkPtE-OJNe7HTQvWo-AlPPDRE
Match 20 - Northern Ireland vs. Spain, Horst Brummeier
ReplyDeleteFull HL: https://youtu.be/dN1YeU8qfsw
Spain avenged their famous defeat to Northern Ireland by beating them 1-2 in the decisive game of Group D. While short of a 'showstopper', Austrian ref Horst Brummeier got a good assignment here - great atmosphere in the small stadium and a game of moderate difficulty. Brummeier responded well, with a strong performance.
++: very receptive to threats to match control by taking quick action (whistle tone and warnings), able to interact with players by issuing clear warnings, preventative against DtR (one of the best so far in this regard), perfect use of sanctions
--: somewhat limited athletic profile, a bit charisma-less and hence a quite distant / slightly 'aloof' impression, not able to access sophisticated gestures
Every referee has his limits though, and the Austrian was a bit unlucky not to get a KO stage assignment for my money. A wholly strong performance from the whole refs team including both linesman Agnolin from Italy and Németh of Hungary (some (very) good onsides for 1986 played by both), and a proactive Mexican 'fourth official' too. A completely satisfying impression from this match's officiating!
(reserve linesman: Joaquín Urrea Reyes (MEX))
Match 21 - Poland vs. Portugal, Ali Bennaceur
ReplyDeleteFull HL: https://youtu.be/ruQSyMz6NRY
In refereeing retrospect, this game takes on a 'United States vs. Portugal 2002'-kind of significance. Ali Bennaceur had to face a pretty weird match to be honest - the loudest fans were English (they had little interest in the action, preferring to shout, amongst others, "let's all do the conga"), and as in all of Monterrey's fixtures, the climate often brought proceedings down to walking pace.
The Tunisian referee came out of this encounter rather well in my view, though it wasn't too challenging with relatively few foul duels to assess and nought inter-player conflict. Bennaceur was impressive and de facto faultless for the first hour, setting very clear boundaries for both teams. The game stretched after that, and the ref's technical accuracy decreased a bit, but nothing too criminal by any means.
A 'exotic' trio of officials for this all-Euro clash raised some eyebrows, but mistake hunters were to be disappointed. Ali Bennaceur delivered an assured performance, with very little to criticise. Obviously the Tunisian's origin played in his favour, but Bennaceur was without doubt a quite capable (World Cup-level) ref in his own right.
The linesmen Shizuo Takada (Japan) and Edwin Picon-Ackong (Mauritius) both performed well too - with Takada playing probably the onside of the tournament so far at 2', though neither were challenged too much. Both looked (at least) in the upper midfield of a hypothetical 'linesman ranking' amongst the FIFA squad in Mexico.
(reserve linesman: Marco Dorantes García (MEX))
Match 22 - Iraq vs. Belgium, Jesús Díaz
ReplyDeleteFull HL: https://youtu.be/HjJ-Uhy0AJ4
Tough gig for the Colombian referee in a very chaotic match. In general, Jesús Díaz was up to the task - despite a small handful of bizarre decisions at the end, he applied the laws strictly and confidently to keep control of a volatile encounter. Despite his short stature, he was able to arouse the protagonists’ respect.
Below are timestamps for the game’s two key decisions - to award Belgium a penalty (19’), and to eject Basil Gorgis moments after cautioning him (52’).
19’: https://youtu.be/HjJ-Uhy0AJ4?t=399
52’: https://youtu.be/HjJ-Uhy0AJ4?t=1021
It was a highly challenging game for both linesmen too.
- Christov, V. (TCH) played a really good onside at 89’, but he was definitely mistaken at 45’ in a very important scene, but the Czechoslovak’s most important call was at 35’ where he denied Belgium a game-changing third goal. The decision seemed incorrect, but we can’t be sure, as he might have flagged for the off-camera attacker, who could (theoretically) have been offside.
- Sánchez Arminio, V. (ESP) faced even more situations than his teammate, and in general had higher accuracy too; a number of notable calls were taken correctly (12’, 34’, 46’, 50’, 90’). His only mistake was a wrong flag at 73’. In his two group stage games on the line, the Spaniard managed to convince quite decisively.
[there are some errors online about the cards given so here is the correct sequence: 20’ for IRQ no.1 (DtR/UB); 30’ for IRQ no.4 (foul chal.); 43’ for IRQ no.7 (striking); 49’ for IRQ no.5 (foul chal.); 52’ for IRQ no.14 (*potential MI); SEND OFF 52’ for IRQ no.14 (dissent // ‘OffInAbus’); 67’ for IRQ no.15 (agg. behvr.); 78’ for BEL no.14 (foul chal.)
-> in general, Díaz used his sanctions very well to act against Iraq’s rough play; 78’ was a de facto incorrect balancing call]
(reserve linesman: Enrique Mendoza Guillén (MEX))
I would argue 52' is a case of mistaken identity. #14 commits a rather rudimentary foul. #22 then appears to stomp directly on the leg of the prone opponent. It would appear that Diaz looks away while this is happening and then reacts simply based on feel, and possibly chooses to send off the player he just cautioned.
DeleteAlso, the manhandling of the official by the Iraqi players seems excessive, even by the standards of those bygone days.
Agreed. Díaz was one of the best IMO at this tournament and FIFA made a good choice to appoint him again, but I think this was the last WC where you could 'get away' with such a mistake and still progress.
DeleteFrom 1990 onwards, I'm pretty sure this incident would have resulted in the Colombian being rejected, as it would have generated too much controversy. The lesser focus on each individual game from before then (+ even more political) saved Díaz's WC.
NOTE: Iraq no.7 Haris Mohammed spat at Jesús Díaz after Gorgis was ejected, undetected by the Colombian, but not by video evidence after the match. FIFA suspended Mohammed indefinitely.
DeleteMatch 23 - West Germany vs. Scotland, Ioan Igna
ReplyDeleteFull HL: https://youtu.be/nPQbiuBTs2w
Good performance by the phlegmatic Romanian referee, in what was a football-focused game. Igna solved both the choppier start of the 2H and end-to-end remainder of the second period with no issues. Disciplinary was solid/good, but the procedure for both 1H cautions were a bit questionable (04:40, 07:10).
A former top player himself, Igna read the game excellently, especially in terms of positioning and movement. Able to stay in the background, understanding what the game required from him, it is No surprise that FIFA really warmed to this ‘X-Factor’ referee, who was heading for higher tasks in Mexico.
Interesting games for both linesmen - Alan Snoddy was visibly a bit nervous at Jan Keizer’s side on his tournament bow, but performed very well here - determining a number of key and sometimes tricky scenes correctly. His only blot was failing as a team member at 31’ (04:40^).
On the other hand, Bogdan Dočev however had a complete nightmare, with a number of poor mistakes (13’, 37’, 42’, 83’, 84’). The Bulgarian was an experienced referee who did fine in his other group round inset as linesman, but this performance was actually weak enough to have ought to end his Mexico 86’ with the flag.
(reserve linesman: Jorge Leanza Sansone (MEX))
I really liked Igna’s game here. Seemed pretty modern, procedural quirks notwithstanding.
DeleteMatch 24 - Denmark vs. Uruguay, Antonio Márquez Ramírez
ReplyDeleteFull HL: https://youtu.be/tGqVbUJNDZo
Careful consideration for which match the host nation’s referee would take at Mexico 1986 resulted in it being this very one - and Márquez Ramírez faced a frenetic game full of goals, six of which were scored by the famously-clad Denmark side (to a resposte of only one). The fixture turned on Miguel Bossio’s twentieth minute ejection.
Here are timestamps for all the bigger incidents to assess the Mexican ref’s performance:
07’ - https://youtu.be/tGqVbUJNDZo?t=141
12’ - https://youtu.be/tGqVbUJNDZo?t=292
14’ - https://youtu.be/tGqVbUJNDZo?t=324
18’ - https://youtu.be/tGqVbUJNDZo?t=391
20’ - https://youtu.be/tGqVbUJNDZo?t=435
36’ - https://youtu.be/tGqVbUJNDZo?t=650
45’ - https://youtu.be/tGqVbUJNDZo?t=825
51’ - https://youtu.be/tGqVbUJNDZo?t=1082
55’ - https://youtu.be/tGqVbUJNDZo?t=1218
Márquez Ramírez showed he was a very good referee in my eyes - a distant authority but still able to communicate with players, closely following play and following incidents, and very good approach to sanctions. Mexico’s representative was one of those in FIFA squad who possessed an ‘X-Factor’, and he deserved a knockout stage appearance at this WC.
Highly challenging game for both linesmen. A bit less so for Jan Keizer, who got his key call right - to disallow a Denmark score at 26’. He did make some mistakes though. Romualdo Arppi Filho faced a high number of calls which most of his WC 1986 compatriots would also have gotten wrong (25’, 44’, 75’), but the Brazilian didn’t leave the most satisfying impression either all the while.
(reserve linesman: Hernán Silva (CHI))
Match 25 - Hungary vs. France, Carlos Silva Valente
ReplyDeleteFull HL: https://youtu.be/C9UZqyasXmE
After their Soviet tonking, Hungary needed a point to squeeze through to the knockout rounds due to their inferior goal difference - despite showing comfortably their best performance of the competition, they lost 0-3 to a simply more able France team, and were hence eliminated.
Basically untried Carlos Silva Valente was the referee (I am 95% sure was the replacement for Brian McGinlay in the final list of referees for Mexico), with his linesman being former and future European Cup final refs respectively. How the system in the old days worked! The officials faced two crucial calls on this afternoon:
> Was Swiss linesman André Daina correct not to award Hungary a goal here? (47')
https://youtu.be/C9UZqyasXmE?list=PLJNDTL9UhkPtE-OJNe7HTQvWo-AlPPDRE&t=635
> Did Silva Valente (Daina's vicinity too, maybe) miss a clear penalty to Hungary? (58')
https://youtu.be/C9UZqyasXmE?list=PLJNDTL9UhkPtE-OJNe7HTQvWo-AlPPDRE&t=735
On the whole, the Portuguese official got a bit lucky with this assignment - he got a very dynamic game which played okay with his style. Ultra-distant presence, some bizarre calls, zero prevention; anyone playing ‘neck lanyard; whistle-in-mouth-style; Mottram/Lennie 1.0’ bingo would not have been disappointed. 58’ aside, Silva Valente evaded serious trouble though.
Very challenging game for Alexis Ponnet, especially as the second half grew older. He did play a very good onside at 67’, but besides that, he assessed even simple crossovers incorrectly; slightly poor, even by 1986’s standards. Daina was quieter, but also more convincing.
(reserve linesman: Arturo Brizio Carter (MEX))
Match 26 - Soviet Union vs. Canada, Idrissa Traoré
ReplyDeleteFull HL: https://youtu.be/sWrhdgPILjM
With a win against a second-string Soviet side, Canada would probably have sneaked through the backdoor into the knockout rounds, but as it happened, they ultimately finished the whole competition with not a point nor a goal to their name having been beaten two-nothing. Three creditable performances actually merited for Canada, who haven't qualified since; the USSR finished atop the group.
A gargantuan ice-hockey clash between these nations on the football pitch this was not; comfortably the easiest game of the tournament for referee Idrissa Traoré, and fortunately so as well - I think the Malian was the weakest official amongst the whole FIFA squad.
A few factors contributed to this poor impression of the referee from Mali:
- a complete lack of game-feeling; verrrry pedantic over throw-in locations with the game ultra-calm
- some totally phantom free kicks, especially early on
- a real lack of body tension in gestures gave an amateurish impression
- slightly ‘crazy’ approach to positioning; running around ‘like a headless chicken’
We can also observe three penalty appeals of note from the game:
> 34’ - https://youtu.be/sWrhdgPILjM?list=PLJNDTL9UhkPtE-OJNe7HTQvWo-AlPPDRE&t=337
> 78’ - https://youtu.be/sWrhdgPILjM?list=PLJNDTL9UhkPtE-OJNe7HTQvWo-AlPPDRE&t=641
> 87’ - https://youtu.be/sWrhdgPILjM?list=PLJNDTL9UhkPtE-OJNe7HTQvWo-AlPPDRE&t=672
I wonder how Traoré would have gotten on in a game even of reasonable challenge; I fear, worse than Al-Shanar. It does need underlining how pedestrian this game was - and how limited the Malian ref presented himself too. As for his linesman, one of whom as it happened was said Fallaj Al-Shanar (the other, González) had even less to do than their team leader, and hence performed on an expected level.
Finally, two interesting notes about Traoré. 1) he was banned for life after a hilarious-sounding (though not to him) bribery episode at AFCON 1990 where the Malian apparently didn't report it because he genuinely didn't realise that it looked like someone was trying to manipulate him; and, 2) his son-in-law is three times WC assistant referee, Dramane Danté, also from Mali.
(reserve linesman: Erik Fredriksson (SWE))
Indeed, all three penalty appeals were correctly refused IMO, but some of those calls were bizarre, and the scene where he runs too close to the play, ducks and weaves when he belatedly realizes it, then gets domed by the ball is pretty comical.
DeleteI agree regarding 78' (defender wins the position by good movement and then plays the ball fairly) and 87' (impossible to assess), but I think 34' is more of a penalty than not. The ball has gone so the question is does the goalkeeper crash into his opponent with careless (play on) or reckless force (penalty).
DeletePersonally, I'd err more towards giving it than play on, but both calls are acceptable IMO.
Well, after watching it again, you’re right about 34’. I just wasn’t surprised that he refused it, given how the tournament had been officiated to that point. Clearly a penalty nowadays.
DeleteMatch 27 - Korea Republic vs. Italy, David Socha
ReplyDeleteAn explosive game for the American referee - the hardest of the tournament so far.
Group B was on a knife-edge (3-2-2-1 pts) heading into the final round of matches, with this tie ultimately being the blockbuster one. Korea sensed their chance - their physical gameplan employed vs. Argentina returned, and in the end they came pretty close to a seismic achievement; as Bulgaria lost by two in the other game, a point would have taken the plucky underdogs through to face hosts Mexico.
After (a bit unfairly, or at least unluckily) arousing attention as linesman in Spain vs. Brazil, Italian media had put huge pressure on referee David Socha even before a whistle blown. The American official faced an extremely challenging match, intense from the first whistle. I liked his approach! He worked hard to ensure that things didn’t get out of control in very trying circumstances, and mostly succeeded.
Here are the relevant incidents to assess Socha’s performance:
07’ - https://youtu.be/J572JbjjpyA?t=138
09’ - https://youtu.be/J572JbjjpyA?t=232
10’ - https://youtu.be/J572JbjjpyA?t=251
18’ - https://youtu.be/J572JbjjpyA?t=290
(0-1)
19’ - https://youtu.be/J572JbjjpyA?t=349
32’ - https://youtu.be/J572JbjjpyA?t=542
36’ - https://youtu.be/J572JbjjpyA?t=654
HT
54’ - https://youtu.be/J572JbjjpyA?t=1060
56’ - https://youtu.be/J572JbjjpyA?t=1099
60’ - https://youtu.be/J572JbjjpyA?t=1225
(1-1)
71’ - https://youtu.be/J572JbjjpyA?t=1379
73’ - https://youtu.be/J572JbjjpyA?t=1420
(1-2), (1-3), (2-3)
FT
Linesman no.1, Jamal Al-Sharif from Syria, performed well. He was an active and enthusiastic team member, reporting offences in his vicinity, though on a couple of occasions the accuracy of these calls was a bit doubtful. Linesman no.2 was Joaquín Urrea Reyes, one of the Mexican reserve squad.
Nothing against him personally, but I found this random appointment a bit irritating; at least the two games which Edgardo Codesal stood in with the flag made it obvious that these were 100% political choices. Urrea’s hardest minutes were at the game’s end as Italy pushed for more goals. A couple of important offside calls were doubtful, but the television footage does not give enough data to decide conclusively.
(reserve linesman: Marco Dorantes García (MEX))
7' and 32' both seem like VC red cards, no?
DeleteThe penchant of referees in that age to immediately move to the "get up, you're not hurt" is jarring to look back upon. Mannerisms that would like you get stricken from any elite list with ONE use were employed 10+ times a game. How things change.
Agreed. It's a shame - if Socha displayed the courage (7', 18', 32') to take "brave and unpopular (correct) decisions", then this would have 100% been the best performance so far.
DeleteMatch 28 - Argentina vs. Bulgaria, Berny Ulloa Morera
ReplyDeleteFull HL: https://youtu.be/I-HW0ZWV5CI
A narrow Argentina win suited both teams down to the ground, so referee Berny Ulloa Morera (pronounced: eww-zhow-uh Morera ;)) faced a pretty sleepy game. To be fair, I warmed to the Costa Rican's style quite a lot - elegant gestures, closely following play, relatively distant impression + ability to connect with the players on their level reminded me of Michael Oliver. This young referee would have been a nice choice to ref the third place playoff.
Some challenging scenes for both linesman Romualdo Arppi Filho and José Luis Martínez. Besides a blatant wrong flag at 35' (crossover), the Brazilian did fine, correctly assessing active vs. passive offside positions (it would be v. different nowadays!). Martínez was actually wrong to disallow an Argentina goal at 72', but nobody at the time realised, simply determining this call as correct. Uruguay's official did basically well besides.
(reserve linesman: Antonio Márquez Ramírez (MEX))
Match 29 - Paraguay vs. Belgium, Bogdan Dočev
ReplyDeleteFull HL: https://youtu.be/blDGWK4ylI4
What a chaotic game for the Bulgarian referee! Paraguay and Belgium scrambled to a two-each draw, the fact that both were already de facto through was outmatched by: 1) a frenetic crowd in a tight stadium; 2) relatively speaking, a very small pitch allowing a lot of end-to-end play, and; 3) a ref who couldn't really calm the players down.
I liked Dočev's aesthetic impression (very elegant gestures, muscular/fit physically), but he struggled on an MtG level - he couldn't really connect with players as a distant leadership figure, and most crucially, he didn't slow the game down at its delicate moments(!!), leading to inevitable tension. Scenes like 19' were a de facto disaster (missed violent stamp on star player Nunes before 'horrific' dropped ball m'ment), but on the whole the Bulgarian did okay(-ish).
Three scenes stand out as very interesting indeed:
(54') - Huge and crazy confrontation
https://youtu.be/blDGWK4ylI4?list=PLJNDTL9UhkPtE-OJNe7HTQvWo-AlPPDRE&t=775
(73') - Indirect fk shot straight into the goal
https://youtu.be/blDGWK4ylI4?list=PLJNDTL9UhkPtE-OJNe7HTQvWo-AlPPDRE&t=1019
(82') - Paraguay coach ejected (*I believe, this a WC first(?))
https://youtu.be/blDGWK4ylI4?list=PLJNDTL9UhkPtE-OJNe7HTQvWo-AlPPDRE&t=1302
The Bulgarian ref could be glad that two strong linesman were at his side for a match which turned out to be highly challenging. Ali Bennaceur, working with Dočev for the first of three consecutive matches, played a great onside at 25', and but for a slightly angry reaction at 88' slightly spoiling it, left a very good impression. Hernán Silva seemed to take good offside decisions, and keenly reported fouls in his vicinity too.
(reserve linesman: Jorge Leanza Sansone (MEX))
Did they give the wrong restart at 73’? It looks like a FK was given near the edge of the penalty area, as if offside was given (like the commentator guessed). But that would be one of the worst offside calls of the tournament if that was the case. Shouldn’t the restart have been a goal kick?
DeleteMatch 30 - Iraq vs. Mexico, Zoran Petrović
ReplyDeleteFull HL: https://youtu.be/pi950UU8igY
The least intense of the Mexico group games by some distance, but young referee Zoran Petrović still had to face a tie that was quite mentally demanding and had a little bit of niggle in it. High concentration was needed and the Yugoslav succeeded - good foul recognition and very good use of cards as a mgmt tool (besides a missed caution at 12:35/63') saw him through.
The most important call was to allow the game's only goal (which saw Mexico top the group), and Petrović was correct to do so (10:35). The ref did look as though he was about to blow up for a defensive freekick, but to do would have been a mistake - the defender actually fouled the attacker, not the other way around.
Iraq, I believe, had accepted their (not-yet-confirmed) elimination before the match and only entered the pitch not to be 'humiliated' - for rather harrowing reasons - and a one-nothing defeat wasn't too bad for them. Both linesmen rarely had to adjudicate on their attacks, and besides one clear mistake (and quite important) by the Italian, Németh and Agnolin worked well, both impressing as team members.
(reserve linesman: Jan Keizer (NED))
Match 31 - England vs. Poland, André Daina
ReplyDeleteFull HL: https://youtu.be/VNfB-YmLxl8
Gary Lineker's first half hat-trick turned England's World Cup around, and left Poland teetering on the edge of elimination. Having been perceived to underperform, both of these European 'big hitters' were under high media pressure at home, and yet they played a competitive game largely devoid of tension and aggro - so a relatively easy job for referee André Daina, besides the Monterrey heat.
Daina reffed the game well, with there being little to remark on a technical level. The Swiss referee focused more on game flow than managing the game/players, leading to a small number of slightly-chaotic feeling scenes, but nothing really major in the bigger picture. It would have been better to assess this ref in a harder game, but overall I'd say it was fair that his WC stopped here.
The most important decision taken by the linesman in this match was on the side of V. Christov, when he disallowed an England goal at 17' (05:00) - correctly so. Both Christov and H. Brummeier were relatively quiet, until a very challenging last twenty minutes of the game for the Austrian, ft. a great crossover onside (68'), a poor crossover offside (88'), but generally a solid impression wholly speaking.
(reserve linesman: Arturo Brizio Carter (MEX))
Daina, a former Switzerland international (player), has quite a sad story:
Delete- Regrettably, being in charge of the Heysel European Cup final the year previous essentially destroyed the Swiss referee's career - noted for making two very blatant mistakes in the match itself, in addition to struggling to deal with the deadly tragic events in the tribunes (friends reported he struggled to sleep and even eat in the months after), Daina's credibility and particularly motivation seeped away; he retired from the top level the season after this World Cup :/
- In an interview about his career and Heysel in 2005, he stated this to a French newspaper:
"Pour être honnête, je nourris de nombreux regrets par rapport à ma carrière. Je n'ai pas su en profiter. Je n'ai pas beaucoup aimé voyager, quitter ma terre. Je n'ai pas savoir mes petits succès, pas même le Mundial mexicain où, obnubilé par mes responsabilités, je me suis étiolé. En fait, j'ai assez mal vécu l'arbitrage. J'ai entretenu des illusions, je suis entré en conflit avec le système, je n'ai vu que mes performances, et pas le plaisir que je pouvais en tirer. Au fond, je n'ai jamais cessé d'être en souci."
Match 32 - Portugal vs. Morocco, Alan Snoddy
ReplyDeleteFull HL: https://youtu.be/SLFajFPE5tQ
Morocco sensationally finished ahead of their three European counterparts to top Group F and become the first African nation to qualify for the next round of the World Cup finals. England's win in the other game ensured that a draw in this tie would see both nations through, but a loss meant automatic elimination. Portugal were decisively defeated (1-3), and were sent packing.
Referee Alan Snoddy found him in what would later be Jan Wegereef's shoes in the Far East. The rookie Northern Irish referee was appointed to fulfil this fixture before a ball was kicked, and FIFA obviously didn't anticipate such an imperative match, with difficult teams to handle too. This appointment was quite unfair on Snoddy; his talent, but moreover inexperience, shone through in a challenging match.
While we can praise the Northern Irishman for his excellent fitness, quite strong game-reading ability (whistling more pedantically / being closer to play in hotter moments) and good DtR mgmt, this was not a good performance. Most notably in how he solved two Portugal penalty appeals at 54'/58' (10:30/12:05), but also there were huge deficiencies in managing the game and the players, very visible in the HL^.
This would be the last linesman assignment for both Valerij Butenko and Volter Roth at this tournament. The Soviet official wasn't terribly challenged, but Roth faced four very big calls, in each he denied Morocco a very promising attack with his flag; in all four scenes he was incorrect, as attackers had timed runs perfectly, only to be denied by the German ref's offside decisions.
(reserve linesman: Marco Dorantes García (MEX))
Hold on... Wegereef was appointed to Uruguay-Senegal before the tournament started?! Is that what you are saying?
DeleteI mean, I think I called ahead of time that that match would be one of the most difficult in the tournament at the time. It seems shocking to me that FIFA didn't see that. If they made the assignment before understanding the consequences of the match, that's even worse.
Yeah, he was.
DeleteThe first 36 appointments of the tournament (to give each ref his first game) were made and released before the start of the competition. It's a terrible system IMO used by FIFA in all WCs pre-2006 besides... Italia 1990, bizarrely, where they sensibly released the appointments in 6 match packages each time, before defaulting to type for USA 94'.
On Wegereef specifically - he, together with three others from Europe, were treated as a 'collecting experience' group whom were only getting one game regardless, and they all basically got the same fixture in their eyes, between 'less sonorous' exotic teams:
Michel' - Paraguay vs. South Africa
Vassáras - China vs. Costa Rica
Hauge - Cameroon vs. Saudi Arabia
Wegereef - Senegal vs. Uruguay
This is what happens when you a) prioritise politics over practice, b) appoint all the referees in a zoomed out way to games without giving it much thought and c) appoint for MD3 before MD1 has happened!
It gets more absurd when you think about it more - Melo Pereira / López Nieto / N'Doye / Wegereef were appointed for the MD3 clashes that they were *just because they were the ones that happened to be happening first*, not for any other reason!! For instance, the next day's SWEARG eg. was a 'fresh' appointment.
FIFA had such an excellent group of referees in 2002 (NOT assistants), probably the strongest ever IMO, and still managed to stuff the whole thing up... :/.
Match 33 - Northern Ireland vs. Brazil, Siegfried Kirschen
ReplyDeleteFull HL: https://youtu.be/cZI-NVi-Wv4
A point would have taken NIR through, but despite playing pretty well they lost 0-3 to Brazil, in a feel-good bowing out of the World Cup; they haven't returned since. Brazil finished with a 100% record having won all three games, and finished atop Group D.
A nice tie to referee for East Germany's Siegfried Kirschen, who was in charge. The match was never challenging in terms of player management, and only challenging on a foul recognition level for the first 15-20mins, and Kirschen did fine. The E. German ref stood out chiefly for his very strict match practice; his line against impeding fouls, upper body contacts and sliding tackles was a bit too much for my taste.
His thesis for match control was similar to André Daina's, prioritising game flow over taking the initiative. While that doesn't sit as my favourite vision of refereeing, I would agree with FIFA that Kirschen did have an 'X-Factor' which, say, Daina, lacked, and can understand why the governing body thought highly of this East German official.
Reminiscent of matches 13 and 14, an interesting and seemingly 'hand-picked' trio was conceived. Kirschen was joined by Idrissa Traoré from Mali, who showed a rather poor performance both as a team member and in computing offside (his last field appearance at WC 1986), and George Courtney from England, an odd choice for NIR, who performed well, besides a de facto irrelevant crossover mistake, flagged at 18'.
(reserve linesman: Enrique Mendoza Guillén (MEX))
Match 34 - Algeria vs. Spain, Shizuo Takada
ReplyDeleteFull HL: https://youtu.be/1wlS1hQe8s0
Algeria were quite a bit closer than the 0-3 final reverse suggests than getting the point they needed to squeeze themselves into the knockout stage fold, but despite the importance of the game for the North Africans, it never really felt like blowing over on the pitch in Monterrey.
That is at least partly thanks to a convincing performance by Japanese referee Shizuo Takada, who became the first referee from his country to handle a WC finals tie in the process (Yoshiyuki Maruyama ran the line on a couple of games at the last Mexican WC sixteen years previous).
Here are the relevant incidents to assess Takada’s performance:
11' - https://youtu.be/1wlS1hQe8s0?t=179
12' - https://youtu.be/1wlS1hQe8s0?t=240
27’ - https://youtu.be/1wlS1hQe8s0?t=414
31' - https://youtu.be/1wlS1hQe8s0?t=508
34' - https://youtu.be/1wlS1hQe8s0?t=565
35' - https://youtu.be/1wlS1hQe8s0?t=643
49' - https://youtu.be/1wlS1hQe8s0?t=998
67' - https://youtu.be/1wlS1hQe8s0?t=1386
70' - https://youtu.be/1wlS1hQe8s0?t=1461
77' - https://youtu.be/1wlS1hQe8s0?t=1579
81' - https://youtu.be/1wlS1hQe8s0?t=1674
82' - https://youtu.be/1wlS1hQe8s0?t=1732
84' - https://youtu.be/1wlS1hQe8s0?t=1760
88’ - https://youtu.be/1wlS1hQe8s0?t=1828
Takada was unlucky - he was a good referee (the best of AFC I’d say), but with no lobby behind him, this was his last assignment in any role at WC 1986. The same was true for his first linesman, Edwin Picon-Ackong from Mauritius; despite some mistakes (32’, 45’) generally he performed quite well with the flag.
The performance of the other linesman, Argentina’s Carlos Espósito, is quite remarkable. In the first half, Espósito had to take a few quite important decisions, where the evidence pointed towards being mistakes, without being clear. At the start of the second half, this poor impression intensified as he made a number of basic crossover mistakes (48’, 56’, 58’).
And then. I can only presume someone gave him as crack course on the flash-leg effect somehow during the 2H, because after sixty minutes, Espósito was quite excellent! He had a very high volume of calls (63’, 64’, 68’, 70’, 71’, 82’, 83’, 84’) and played inspired Spain’s second and third goals; he totally turned it around! His only error, at 83’, was understandable for 1986.
On the form of the last thirty minutes, Carlos Espósito was the best linesman of the whole refs squad by a long, long way! The Argentine was the only member of this trio to receive another appointment, though he was to never run the line in a World Cup finals match again. Contrary to the first hour of the match, he went out at the top! :)
(reserve linesman: Joaquín Urrea Reyes (MEX))
Match 35 - Denmark vs. West Germany, Alexis Ponnet
ReplyDeleteFull HL: https://youtu.be/xZLhf5vjqjc
Uruguay's wretched goal difference ensured this heavy-weight clash would only determine positions one and two, and given the apparently easier route of the runners up, contemporaries wondered if the game would be 'Gijón-esque'. Nothing of the sort - Denmark won a quite brilliant match by two goals to nothing, joining Brazil as the most impressive teams of the whole group stage.
Referee Alexis Ponnet had a superb game - despite not sporting the most aesthetic running gait, nor sophisticated gestures, the Belgian ref's excellent style was something to behold. The players ALWAYS followed his leadership style, perpetually looking for advantage / chance to let the game flow, setting clear boundaries in disciplinary measures.
A real pleasure, Mr Ponnet, this brilliant game wasn't possible with you - chapeau!
Four KM incidents for him:
08:15 - potential penalty to Denmark (tackle); YC (simulation) to Denmark no.15 [36']
09:45 - penalty given to Denmark (tripping) [43']
19:00 - potential penalty to Denmark (tripping) [67']
23:40 - red card given to Denmark no.15 (violent conduct - stamp) [89']
Chris Bambridge gave a second generally strong impression acting as linesman, playing good crossover onsides, but the blots in his copybook read: poor offside call at 76', doubtful boundary call at 83'. The Aussie overall enhanced the impression he is one of the best with the flag in Mexico.
Erik Fredriksson had the most important linesman call of the day - his decision to disallow a Denmark goal (17') was probably wrong, but tight. Ponnet actually missed one of his (correct) flags at 87', with Fredriksson correctly spotting an active play (in 1986) if the resulting corner had gone in - play had therefore restarted - the Belgian ref was in trouble. Fredriksson looked sound overall.
(reserve linesman: Edgardo Codesal (MEX))
Thoughts on 36'? That's an, um, interesting simulation decision.
DeleteI also love how the commentators say Matthaus made "more of it than necessary" when he got kicked in the groin. I mean, maybe. But how about not kicking guys in the groin?
To be clear, I thought Ponnet was superb at least congruent with, or perhaps even in spite of, his penalty area decisions. I'd underline the RC as excellent still, especially in 1986 and the very subpar dealing with VC incidents across many games.
Delete36' - it is definitely not a dive! In some kind of way, I guess Ponnet didn't see it wrongly, there was no contact. But that is only because the attacker hurdles the tackle and has no where else to go(!); the caution is completely wrong, crystal clear foul. The impeding bit of the tackle seems outside to me(?), though disappointing that there wasn't even one replay at all.
Match 36 - Scotland vs. Uruguay, Joël Quiniou
ReplyDeleteA full report about this performance can be accessed in the link below:
https://wc86refs.blogspot.com/p/in-focus-match-36-scotland-vs-uruguay.html
It’s not quite analogous, but Ponnet did two very difficult and rough UEfA club matches that I’ve watched in the past (on YouTube): 1986/87 Gladbach vs Rangers in the UEFA Cup, and 1982/83 Aston Villa v Barcelona in the Super Cup. I’ve only seen extended highlights of the former, which don’t show all the cautions given. Apparently Ponnet told the press afterward that he should’ve, with hindsight, sent off a Rangers player in the first half for VC (which would’ve been completely correct). He only gave a caution because he thought the game would calm down. In the latter he sent off 3 and cautioned 10 or thereabouts, and probably could’ve sent off 2 more. That game was a very impressive performance by him IMO.
DeleteThanks! A very interesting insight :)
DeleteMatch 37 - Mexico vs. Bulgaria, Romualdo Arppi Filho
ReplyDeleteFull HL: https://youtu.be/kZaK23i3V2A
High pressure for the officials kicking off the elimination phase at the Estadio Azteca - near 115 000 people in the stands generated an electric atmosphere cheering on the hosts in the famous cathedral of football in Mexico City. What a pleasure such an occasion must have been to have been a part of.
Not that the pressure weighed in any visible way on Brazilian referee Romualdo Arppi Filho in charge. Bulgaria were subdued and never really looked like winning but take nothing away from the very convincing performance of Arppi Filho, who won the players' respect and trust with his officiating (see great scene at 49' / 15:30 eg.).
Arppi Filho's technical accuracy was really strong, with mistakes being rare indeed. While it appeared the Brazilian ref lacked 'interpersonal charisma' (eg. 30' / 06:35), actually that didn't matter - elegantly gliding around the FoP, perfect use of card(s) and sporting a highly sovereign manner, his style as a whole was one of charisma.
The biggest issue with this performance is that I think Mexico's second goal probably should have disallowed for a clear impeding offence on the goalkeeper (19:30). Perhaps you could argue that the keeper was going the wrong way anyway and got distracted by an irrelevant 'fight', and then was fairly beaten? No scandal IMO in any case.
BBC's Barry Davies perhaps summed up this performance best, Arppi Filho didn't face a terribly difficult game, but at least some of that fact should be praise towards him; the Brazilian ref had the courage to "be his own man" in a quite incredible context. A great performance, well done Mr. Arppi Filho!
The carefully balanced linesmen, Méndez from Latin America and Igna from Eastern Europe, were pretty quiet on the day. I don't think the Guatemalan even indicated one onside, and he was right to do so at 82', a very good onside. He worked well as a team member. Igna wrongly flagged a couple of times (21', 86'), but no matter in the end.
(reserve linesman: Christopher Bambridge (AUS))
Match 38 - Soviet Union vs. Belgium, Erik Fredriksson
ReplyDeleteFull HL: https://youtu.be/Fz2I-fZe8gg
An all-time World Cup classic with good reason (an in-full must-watch for all football historians!), with Sweden's Erik Fredriksson in charge of this seven-goal extra time thriller. The end-to-end play amidst rising tension meant a challenging task for all three officials.
There was a lot going on here, so I will break the analysis into three separate parts for each member of the on-field trio, starting with linesman Victoriano Sánchez Arminio.
(reserve linesman: Arturo Brizio Carter (MEX))
Sánchez Arminio
DeleteThe game is most controversial though not for decisions taken by Fredriksson himself, but for the Spanish linesman’s two onside calls which resulted in equalising goals for Belgium in the 2H. Actually, he likely got both right, but managed to put himself in the line of fire for what he did in the second situation:
#1 (15:45) - simply a correct call, defender no.5 plays the attacker onside, very good decision for 1986 when many would have panicked and flagged!
#2 (25:00) - VSA stops his gait and raises his flag 80%-ish before relenting and allowing the goal, a media disaster...
Some points to make re. number two:
- knowing what we do now about crossovers, I'm almost certain that on an objective level, VSA ultimately made the right decision to validate the goal
- even despite this, why he changes his mind is quite terrible; he obviously wasn't sure either way, and with nobody having noticed his flag, he considered the probabilities (his perception vs. others, nobody looked out to him) and decided to reverse
- do you think Fredriksson a) noticed the flag?, and, b) should he have gone out to speak to SA to decide on a final decision together?
- this is a bad one, but this sort of thing does happen even to the best, such as Brych's long time AR Stefan Lupp in 2015 (clip: https://youtu.be/C8htvXO2z3Y?t=431)
Sánchez messing up the second equaliser actually distinctly reminded me of Martin Hansson’s WC playoff. Forgotten to time, but the implicated assistant ref faced a really manic few minutes before the ‘Hand of Frog’ incident occurred, in a specific set of circumstances which are comparable to our WC 1986 match here.
DeleteThe Swedish team in Paris were put under extreme pressure in an incident where Anelka dived in the penalty area in a 1-on-1 incident, right in Nilsson’s vicinity - it was obvious that Hansson/Nilsson weren’t really sure, but went with goalkick after some moments of deliberation.
Using a pyschological term, the feedback that the officials got (crowd, players) would have put significant doubt their minds (for our purpose, Nilsson’s). We can add that Nilsson had to face a pretty tricky offside call, solved correctly, literally one minute before the famous incident, too.
Of course, it is partly absurd to compare the work of a late 2000s specialist AR with a 1980s-era ref running the line, but here it works I think. In the minute before the 2nd BEL equaliser, VSA was caught slightly behind play, and simply guessed an offside call - he was surely blatantly wrong, and the feedback (players / crowd / subs behind him) said so too.
In Sánchez’s / Nilsson’s minds, they probably doubted that they got the extreme pressure right moment right (allowing Belgium’s 1-1*; not granting Anelka a pk), and were not totally fresh from a call just taken (offside mistake in León; tricky offside call denying a goal); hence these big mistakes which followed.
The ability to ‘park’ previous decisions, in two different ways, is so important succeed in refereeing(!):
- long-term, letting a big decision that you think you’ve gotten wrong earlier in the game make you doubt your perception, feel more negative for the rest of the match
- short-term, moving on from the decision you’ve just taken asap, when the ball starts rolling again, being focused not on the previous decision, but the next one
These kinds of pyschological competancies is not only what differenciates officials between categories in refereeing, but are visible in determining successful wider life settings too!
Back to Sánchez Arminio specifcally: besides the infamous hesitation actually performed quite well(!), with the only mistake I noted by him being the aforementioned scene a minute before (76'). He even worked quite well as a team member (53’), and to underline the onside for the first equaliser was simply very good for 1986.
Two blackout minutes cost him dearly; as one of the best group stage performers with a quite strong association behind him, SF / final on the line was maybe in reach, but having aroused attention by raising his flag and then putting it down on a goal put paid to his whole tournament.
Some interesting in-box decisions which Fredriksson had to face through the game:
Delete03:10 - missed freekick to URS, not penalty, at 4’ for an outside-the-box tripping offence
04:35 - just an accidental elbow, right?
19:10 - probably a missed penalty to URS for handling (62’), perhaps more EF’s vicinity than linesman Socha’s given which (ostensibly outstreched; no replay) arm it seems to hit
36:00 - penalty given to URS; essentially a carbon copy of Badilla’s call against Bolivia, maybe a brilliant call as the defender didn’t get away with a crafty push, maybe a terrible one as it was a nothing coming-together between two jumping players; even with replays, we have no idea really(!), so ref should be supported
40:20 - I am pretty sure that Fredriksson just missed a 119’ corner to the Soviet Union and not a penalty, but not convincing handling of the whole scene (-> he wasn’t mentally, even physically, fresh to assess and then solve this incident)
Finally, I know that referees got guidelines from FIFA to this effect, but Fredriksson’s compensation of lost time in this game was atrocious:
1H - he blows for HT exactly at 45:00 as Belgium are on a (very) promising attack
2H - he would blow also exactly at 90:00 but for allowing a freekick taken while he checks his watch; then gives an attacking freekick (supportable / correct) which when is behind for a corner ≈10secs later, blows up
1ET - after an attacking freekick is blocked out for a throw-in just past 105:00 blows, and then is a bit pedantic in ordering an immediate change over, fair enough I guess, but common-sense says it was a reasonable request to rest for a minute or so and take on some water during this particular game…
2ET - the worst; after a goal, a penalty argued about and then scored, blatant time-wasting by Belgium and twice visibly showing to the audience that he was stopping his watch, blows the final whistle at… +120:45 when the Soviet Union had a corner :/
To be fair, Fredriksson was NOT the only one(!!), but it was very irksome (like with Quiniou) in this knockout tie. And the idea that FIFA wanted this game being curtailed early is absurd, as Arppi Filho actually worked out.
Presumably Fredriksson’s time-keeping approach was with a view to getting the final. Earlier in the day, Romualdo Arppi Filho was much more sensible (also in view to the guidelines and their general spirit), blowing up at approaching +93:00… and he ended up with the final! :)
This reads as a lot of criticism of Fredriksson, which is unfortunate, because all things considered, he managed to keep it together relatively well given the difficulty of what he had to face in this epic game. He didn’t ref it badly! But I’d say that on the highest level, in the running for a WC final, this performance was a little bit short.
Socha
DeleteLike Sánchez Arminio, the American (appointed to this Soviet Union’s game; a detail worth pointing out) was one of the impressive linesmen in the group stage. And he managed to confirm that impression during this encounter, especially as a team member, where Socha was actually very modern (a compliment!).
Much less-so than his Spanish teammate, but Socha unfortunately lost it a little bit in the 2H. He clearly wrongly flagged at 83’, and in denying the Soviet Union a 1-on-1 at 90’ (though saved with both players apparently unaware of a flag up), the US official probably made a very important mistake.
If we were assessing with the integer marks system, a classic 6-level showing. Still, a deserved appointment for him to the R16, and one could argue that he was unlucky not to get another KO stage inset on the line to be honest (he was de facto out from the four QFs for different reasons).
119' is fascinating. I see what you mean about corner over penalty--particularly with the standards of those days (and the face he had already given the USSR a penalty in ET). But it's a very silly/dangerous tackle. He gets the ball with his left leg, but playing through the legs of his opponent. But the right leg is the lead leg for the tackle and makes no contact with the ball. It feels like the inverse of the challenges where a player gets the ball but then gets opponent with follow through. Here, he gets the opponent and THEN the ball. The way the LOTG used to be written, I think it was 100% a foul (making contact with opponent prior to the ball). Whether it should be a penalty or not at 119' of a WC KO match is a different question, but I don't dismiss the idea too readily.
DeleteAs for Socha...
I also found it notable he got a USSR match. It seems almost impossible given the geopolitics of the day.
When you say he was de facto out of the QFs, I understand for three of the four matches. He wouldn't get Belgium again straight away. He wouldn't get Mexico. And he wouldn't get Brazil after the first round. But why not Argentina-England? Cultural attachment to US or US aid in the Falklands? That's all I can think of, but it seems a bit of a stretch. Though I guess, when looking at the composition of that crew, perhaps it isn't and FIFA went out of its way to find 3 officials whose country's had almost no involvement--even the Latin American country (CRC) doesn't even have armed forces!
BRA vs. FRA - Brazil from the group stage, also if Igna's interview is accurate, he was granted two 'Eastern' linesman at his request
DeleteMEX vs. FRG - Mexico
ARG vs. ENG - simply not a good idea in this, as you say, delicately balanced quartet, with the United States being perceived to be 'close' to England
ESP vs. BEL - Belgium again, Spain from the group stage
Though, FIFA obviously weren't verrrry fussed about the US-Mexico thing, as David Socha was appointed as 'fourth official' for the Mexico vs. West Germany QF (this role was not listed publicly until WC94, though).
Match 39 - Brazil vs. Poland, Volker Roth
ReplyDeleteFull HL: https://youtu.be/nfgL11LQvWY
For the second game running, Volker Roth showed that he was a top class referee - with his serious, top-down authority style and very good disciplinary control, he managed to keep a hand on a tough game (his manner, even in running gait, again reminds me very distinctly of Viktor Kassai).
Roth faced a weird ambience on the pitch, the paying spectators had all come to see the Brazil show, but Poland played very well indeed, and the final score belies a genuine battle which the South Americans had to come through; the game turned on the decision to award Brazil a 29th minute penalty (06:00).
To be honest, I think that the German ref made a big mistake there. Ricardo Careca's touch isn't a good one, and by good play, the defender can win the position in the duel for the ball, before a coming-together of the two. From much too far away, Roth points to the spot - Poland can count themselves very unlucky in this episode IMO.
Some other incidents: Boniek is booked for actually a clear VC on Roth after the penalty scored (07:25); mass confrontation(s) in the hot minutes after the penalty (11:00); Poland penalty appeal (17:40); penalty appeal, then onside played for correct Brazil penalty (25:40); Poland penalty appeal then potential VC incident (28:50).
After working with Jan Keizer together in the group round, Alan Snoddy and Antonio Márquez Ramírez were paired as linesmen again. The Northern Irishman was quiet but now looked settled with the WC flag, and worked well as a team member; Mexico's ref played a good onside aforementioned, but struggled a bit in reporting fouls.
(reserve linesman: Enrique Mendoza Guillén (MEX))
Agreed the penalty was wrong and a huge mistake. I think we would even call it a scandal in the 1998-2017 era (though VAR would hopefully fix it now).
DeleteCurious about the "clear VC." I see a hand on Roth's chest. While I would love to be draconian with these sort of things, I don't think that any FIFA referee at ANY WC would consider that "clear VC." In fact, in 1986 I think we're lucky a referee even gives yellow. But perhaps I am missing something?
I could actually easily believe that the penalty call wouldn't be overturned in PL or (more worryingly) at the EURO, to be honest; the contact is clear and a judgement call from the referee, and having reported his perception, I suspect it wouldn't reach c/o.
DeleteHere is another angle which the BBC showed of the situation:
https://youtu.be/M-2bir1KCRA?t=348
About Boniek-on-Roth, the emphasis was on "actually", in how I tried to phrase it. I see it the same as you. Boniek aggressively walks towards the ref, gesturing in his face, and then pushes his arm out on his chest; though, still short of eg. the one on Kuipers at the last EURO.
Match 40 - Argentina vs. Uruguay, Luigi Agnolin
ReplyDeleteFull HL: https://youtu.be/sr0F1wDGd64
FIFA were scared sh*tless of what might happen in the River Plate derby, so in an attempt to prevent (or at least, alleviate) the inevitable carnage, pulled out all the stops - Uruguay were punished for their behaviour vs. Scotland, and threatened with ejection from the whole World Cup by the governing body if there was a repeat.
The man entrusted with ensuring FIFA didn't have to act on their surely hollow words was Luigi Agnolin from Italy; besides maybe Brazil vs. Chile in 2014, I cannot think of a taller order for a referee in World Cup finals history (1950 final match? Battle of Santiago? Argentina games in 78?) than what this tie promised Agnolin here.
I wonder whether in my whole life I'll ever see a better refereeing performance than this one. Reports declared that Uruguay were "subdued", but I don't really see it like that - they had exactly the same rationale as against Scotland, but simply had to be much more crafty in execution trying to beat Argentina.
The match was crazy: an extortionate amount of fouls duels to compute with the game ready to explode after each one; a minefield of disciplinary incidents where he always used his munition (presence, warnings, cards) optimally, having to very closely patrol every single incident in an end-to-end game and scores of scenes where his personality was deeply challenged - Luigi Agnolin came through it all.
There is only one scene which makes a full ten in my mark scale potentially tricky, Argentina's disallowed goal in the 2H (31:20). It would be derided as ludicrously soft today, but the call elicits a fair reaction from the BBC commentators in 1986; "fair enough", even an expected decision.
Foot-up (IFK) was punished much more stringently back then than it is nowadays, and Maradona does move into the ball with loaded studs against the defender. Sure, Uruguay's man back does seem to get into a right old muddle, and perhaps it would be better to allow it, but for me the ruled-off goal is supportable at least (in 86).
Nowadays it would be impossible to not caution as many especially SPA/LoR, but also reckless, incidents and still survive (Agnolin was on top of them all, btw), and probably impossible to interact with the players in some scenes as he did (just watch eg. 36:50); matches, nor referees, anything remotely like this simply don’t exist anymore at the elite.
There is no doubt that Agnolin saved FIFA's skin, but by the same token, it was an inspired appointment too. The Italian received universal (besides disallowed goal) praise from contemporaries in the media, but they still didn't appreciate quite how good Agnolin was on a continuum, actually I don't think they were close, even in eulogy.
A perfect 10 (TEN) from me; thank you Mr. Agnolin [RIP :(], it was more than a pleasure to review your performance thirty-five years later.
The linesmen had a lot to live up to! Both appointments were slightly hard to fathom, George Courtney was obviously given the gig because he was highly rated, but did FIFA pay no attention to his origin (on two levels)? Carlos Silva Valente's merits were a bit exaggerated from my view, at least for this warzone match, too.
In any case, both didn't do too badly. Courtney fared well besides an incorrect (tight) flag at 50', at least if you believe the replayed angle over the live sequence at 56' when he denied Maradona a 1-on-1 (27:20). His good onside at 60' was in no doubt though. CSV was fine, besides an actually poor flag - even for 1986 - at 76' (33:15).
(reserve linesman: Joaquín Urrea Reyes (MEX))
Super Agnolin - one of the big names of Italian refereeing ever!
DeleteMatch 41 - Italy vs. France, Carlos Espósito
ReplyDeleteFull HL: https://youtu.be/eYpDCD43LtU
Back down to Earth :D; Carlos Espósito was not only quite fortunate that his group stage performance (Belgium vs. Mexico) wasn't rejected by FIFA, but furthermore that they decided to appoint him to referee the most sonorous football match of all the R16 ties, World champions Italy vs. European champions France.
Besides the obvious reason (AFA / Argentina), I can understand why FIFA didn't dislike his GS performance enough to put them off Espósito. His problem wasn't so much that he was a bad referee, but without doubt the Argentine was too weak a referee to really merit his two appointments (esp. this one) at WC 1986.
It was visible to me that his football understanding was actually pretty deep, as unpretty as BELMEX was at times, he always did enough to keep control, but somehow he doubted his perception / soft skills etc. too much, and his mission in all of his games was simple - survival. Technical accuracy didn't matter too much.
The weakness aforementioned came through very clearly in two KMI scenes in this match I think - at 77', no.10 Bagni escaped even a foul call with his clear (VC) stamp on no.8 Tusseau, and the ref turned a blind eye to what was surely a clear penalty for France at 48'. You can find the clips at 22:10 and 18:20 respectively on the HL.
While the second scene was essentially an extraneous incident with the battle lost-and-won (right in front of linesman JL Martínez too), early in the second half, it was quite probable that Italy could have turned the game around and won 2-1 after this missed penalty call. Espósito was lucky in that regard.
His disciplinary control, as in his first game, was excruciatingly reactive, to be frank. To his credit, the Argentine's clear warning, being quite justified in denying France an advantage, at 2', was very good [01:50]. But the rest not so much, with it feeling like cautions being given exclusively for tactical (temporal) value.
A scandalous tackle from behind (could have been exhibit A in a FIFA training vid for the WC98 refs) at 13' went without caution [04:50], as did an extremely flagrant and at least a bit brutal tactical foul at 28' [10:00]. It was obvious to me that the players worked out what sort of ref they had gotten; there were other 'moments' too [04:10].
But, to be fair to the Argentine referee, for all the limitations detailed, with his languid presence, and passive (but never too much so!) style, he managed to do enough to steer the game to a sound conclusion. The handshakes at fulltime shared between him and these top players were warm and genuine, which definitely says sth for him.
While without doubt Carlos Espósito was fortunate both times that he rolled the dice in reffing games at this WC, it is also to his merit that he could always do just enough to avoid failure as well. All things considered, I don't think you could reasonably say his officiating of this real top clash was any worse than decent.
Linesmen: an all-UEFA trio for the big South American clasico in the R16 meant a South American triad here, aforementioned Martínez and Díaz from Colombia on the line. Both were quite quiet, and in their four on-off scenes (1/3 resp.) which I noted, all were solved correctly. Any doubts about functioning as team members were minimal.
(reserve linesman: Edgardo Codesal (MEX))
Match 42 - Morocco vs. West Germany, Zoran Petrović
ReplyDeleteFull HL: https://youtu.be/H6DlTo_qjrE
A very different game to the other R16 ties - the stadium was less than half full and generated a flat atmosphere, those who were there started booing because they were bored, and Morocco chanced their arm that they could outlast their hitherto faltering venerable opponents with negative tactics in the Monterrey heat.
Zoran Petrović was the referee, the Yugoslav a young up-and-comer whom FIFA used this match to give a chance in the KO stage. While the commentators bemoaned how "boring" this match was, it was certainly not like the group matches in Monterrey - the game had much more intensity, and was not a walk in the park to ref.
Petrović did a good job. With his elegant, serious/unobstrusive style, he always managed to ellict the appropriate response to disciplinary incidents (in 1986), in terms of warnings and sanctions, but also whistle tones, gestures and so on. I felt rather robbed of extra time by the eighty-eighth minute winner, to be honest.
Some interesting incidents from the game:
28' - very good caution for PI to MAR no.3, the game needed calming down and Petrović correctly recognised that it was his third offence in less than 10mins [08:15]
34' - a good final warning to MAR no.3 after his latest foul [09:50]
36' - what seems to be a missed caution to FRG no.8 for simulation [10:30]
51' - play on; missed penalty to MAR vs. impeding gk by the attacker [13:35]
58' - scandalous tackle from behind, another WC98 refs vid, no card given [15:40]
65' - MAR no.2 is cautioned for a very blatant holding (LoR over SPA in 86) [18:05]
76' - interesting scene; a clear SYC nowadays, but given they didn't exist then, I agree with ZP, not enough for the 'SYC' RC back then, so a final warning for MAR no.2 [20:15]
87' - and finally, was the freekick that Matthäus scored justly awarded? [22:15]
Linesmen: the Moroccan association were politically weak, so they couldn't force more 'exotic' appointments vs. European teams, as say Mexico could in this WC, so not only did they get a less experienced UEFA ref, Petrović, he was joined by a(n Austro-Hungarian) Euro duo, Németh and Brummeier, satisfying DFB.
Nobody could really complain though as both were amongst the stronger performers as linesmen, and FIFA retained them late as SF / QFs respectively. That being said - I can't see how Németh's 20' flag was anything other than wrong [05:50]; Morocco had the ball in the net too. Besides that, good, though HB was a slightly passive team member.
(reserve linesman: Gabriel González (PAR))
Match 43 - England vs. Paraguay, Jamal Al-Sharif
ReplyDeleteFull HL: https://youtu.be/z-VQ3JzY_eo
The difference in surroundings between the group stage game which confirmed Syrian referee Jamal Al-Sharif's place amongst the latter stage referees, and the knockout tie which he was placed in charge of, was rather vast indeed; even to such extent that taking place in the same competition being all that connected them.
A remarkably easy-going Hungary vs. Canada in the small stadium in Irapuato actually bore only strenuous relation at all to what Al-Sharif faced here - a tense duel between a big nation and a South American challenger (who kicked up quite a fuss in their last two GS fixtures too) in front of near 100.000 people at the Estadio Azteca.
Looking deeper, anyone with even decent understanding of refereeing, having gotten past being impressed at the Syrian official's quite remarkable level of fitness, could have seen problems on the horizon for this man if he found himself in the middle of a challenging game, upon analysing his performance in Hungary vs. Canada too.
But no matter - an excellent refereeing politician, AFC refereeing leader since 1983 and WC78 ref himself, Farouk Bouzo, had put his compatriot Al-Sharif in his corner, and FIFA chose what they saw as the easiest R16 game possible for him (Morocco were Arab), and then could only hope for the best.
And any prayers that this game would go okay from any FIFA people wise enough to realise that they ought to have been praying seemed to have been answered in the first half. The game was very quiet, the only goal (England's) came with no outer controversy, and Al-Sharif had even given a very well-timed warning for a borderline tackle at 24'.
So far, so good then. But warning signs were there (even from 1’…) - it happened off-camera, but it appeared that England's Martin was given a caution rather weakly for DtR (37'). Paraguay themselves had transgressed in this regard (4', 26'), and the 1H ended a bit on edge, though with a decently-solved mobbing incident (39') in there too.
The second half started much fruiter than the first, but Al-Sharif could have acted against that in what was a key MtG scene in my opinion - a blatant deliberate charging incident at 47' would have been perfect to set a stall out (and balance the cards), however only a freekick was given by the Syrian referee.
DeleteAl-Sharif had to physically pull Paraguay players away from the confrontation this triggered, not even clearly warning one of them. Further incidents, deliberate foul from behind (52') and an off-the-ball striking (54') went unpunished, leading the (Paraguay) players further to the conclusion that they were facing a carte blanche.
England went two-nil up shortly after, and as Paraguay now attacked to get back into the game, Al-Sharif faced the 'moment of truth' in this match. He denied the South Americans a penalty (58'), and then faced an absolutely crazy mobbing that brought both the near-side linesman and 'fourth official' onto the FoP to protect their team leader.
At least a caution was sorted out to one of the Paraguay pack who harassed the ref, but in no way was Al-Sharif any kind of 'winner' from the scene, and he lost it after that (61', 67, 69', 71', 72’, 80'). After the third goal it’d calmed down, but this had now become one of the weakest performances in the whole competition.
Both England players and the referee were fortunate the crazy attempt at physical retribution (-> very clear RC to be given) such as at 90', which fortunately didn't make contact, was an isolated one. The clear score had saved Al-Sharif at the end, though even so, only three other referees had struggled on the level that he did here.
Looking back, General Bouzo's pushing of Al-Sharif is infuriating. He failed at all three of his WCs, showing little improvement (contrary to the later énfant cheri, Bujsaim) yr-to-yr. It is rather irritating that the Syrian ref was allowed to destroy (three) more WC finals games; he tried his best though, it is FIFA, not him, whom we should blame.
It is no accident that Al-Sharif got both two experienced UEFA officials (Ponnet as 1st linesman, Christov as r/l) and an Arab compatriot (Al-Shanar) in his team. The Belgian was a steady hand, the Saudi a much more hesitant team member - but both were sound overall in their computing of offsides, Al-Shanar surprising me with a very good onside even at 54’.
While Al-Sharif would go on to two more World Cups, this was the end of the line for Ponnet and Al-Shanar, with Christov going out of the WC stage on his next match, as linesman for the classic Brazil vs. France QF. Indeed - I can’t find any other match in any record at all for Fallaj Al-Shanar after this; he was quite young (39), but it seems he retired c. Mexico.
(reserve linesman: Vojtech Christov (TCH))
Timestamps of all the mentioned incidents concerning Al-Sharif’s performance:
Delete1’ - https://youtu.be/z-VQ3JzY_eo?t=87
4’ - https://youtu.be/z-VQ3JzY_eo?t=130
24’ - https://youtu.be/z-VQ3JzY_eo?t=223
26’ - https://youtu.be/z-VQ3JzY_eo?t=281
37’ - https://youtu.be/z-VQ3JzY_eo?t=373
39’ - https://youtu.be/z-VQ3JzY_eo?t=456
47’ - https://youtu.be/z-VQ3JzY_eo?t=645
52’ - https://youtu.be/z-VQ3JzY_eo?t=739
54’ - https://youtu.be/z-VQ3JzY_eo?t=786
58’ - https://youtu.be/z-VQ3JzY_eo?t=978
61’ - https://youtu.be/z-VQ3JzY_eo?t=1081
67’ - https://youtu.be/z-VQ3JzY_eo?t=1166
69’ - https://youtu.be/z-VQ3JzY_eo?t=1210
71’ - https://youtu.be/z-VQ3JzY_eo?t=1258
72’ - https://youtu.be/z-VQ3JzY_eo?t=1279
80’ - https://youtu.be/z-VQ3JzY_eo?t=1450
90’ - https://youtu.be/z-VQ3JzY_eo?t=1574
Match 45 - Brazil vs. France, Ioan Igna
ReplyDeleteFull HL: https://vk.com/video/playlist/400374426_10
Say what you like about the effect of FIFA’s non-refereeing politicians on refereeing, but you can’t fault their intrinsic understanding. In appointing (or rather, anointing) the officials for the Brazil vs. France quarterfinal at WC 1986, they quite well grasped what kind of football occasion it would be.
They chose their perfect referee for it - Igna. Not a particularly big name before Mexico 86, the Romanian’s very relaxed and elegant style would perfectly compliment this match, if the teams wanted to play. And they did - contesting a two hour epic, a World Cup classic to this day.
Igna faced what was actually a very modern game, in that he had much, much fewer foul duels to assess than in (almost?) all the other games at the whole tournament. Both teams were just focused on playing, and it was possible as referee to simply foster a brilliant football match.
He had a game plan and deliberately changed the thesis of his approach from his West Germany vs. Scotland tie in the group round. Igna chose to be much more passive here, generally taking a real backseat and conserving his energy in the midday heat of this ultra-end-to-end encounter where possible (in eg. body tension for gestures).
Disciplinary control, as in cards / real warnings / tactical signals, was de facto totally absent from this performance (34', 46', 49', 50', 52', 55', 59', 87', 107', 111'), and by this tolerance, there was more rough play than which was actually necessary in this very fair-spirited match. Igna had no interest in taking control of / moulding the players' actions at all.
While I would stand by the view that he was a bit fortunate it didn't blow back in his face, there is no doubt that it paid off for Igna - the Romanian quite understood why he got this game and his brief in the appointment it from FIFA, and he helped create a wonderful football match.
Despite his extreme passivity, he ALWAYS noticed the moments where he had to step in and do just enough to prevent any flair-ups (a small one at 34' aside), and keep the players focused on playing football (eg. tense gestures at 61' + 69', quick whistle at 63' after agricultural tackle, a bit harsh but calming fk call at 79', running in at 87').
In that regard solely, this performance was a pure masterclass. Coming to a balance about it (on an MtG level), perhaps I can't share the complete enthusiasm of some (a question of taste!), but without any doubt I appreciated what was a very (very) good level of refereeing by Ioan Igna, who helped make a WC classic.
Although France won the penalty competition, perhaps Bruno Bellone might have something to say about that evaluation. An analysis of the key match incidents follows.
DeleteClips:
35’ - https://vk.com/video400374426_456239269?t=10m25s
74’ - https://vk.com/video400374426_456239269?t=19m42s
85’ - https://vk.com/video400374426_456239269?t=19m42s
104’ - https://vk.com/video400374426_456239269?t=27m55s
116’ - https://vk.com/video400374426_456239269?t=30m58s
Pen Comp - https://vk.com/video400374426_456239269?t=38m59s
We can start firstly with in-box incidents in the match, starting with the three extraneous penalty appeals:
35’ - clear impeding foul, so missed attacking IFK (no dfk/pk offence as the laws were pre-1997)
85’ - borderline but the attacker does stop waiting to be crashed into, so very good play on call
104’ - impossible to assess this completely off-the-ball incident; referee fully backed here
74’: The first of the three big decisions. Igna was definitely right to award Brazil what could have been a decisive penalty at 74’. The goalkeeper simply wipes out the attacker in a clear foul. The ref was right on the spot to award this stonewall penalty. Of course, no sanction was in keeping with how it was back then, with no SPA, DOGSO etc to consider.
PKs: If the famous foul by Brazil goalkeeper Carlos on Bruno Bellone four minutes from time (which we’ll of course come to, see the next comment) caused some trouble for Igna on an LotG level, then that some player’s penalty which hit the post and was going away from the goal before hitting diving Carlos and going in, gave the ref an even greater one; there was absolutely no provision to either grant the penalty goal or rule it out in this situation!
So whatever Igna did, he was setting the trend for the future. Specific to this game, he made the sensible choice - calling this penalty saved from Bellone, who had so unfairly been charged out of a goal exactly by Carlos in extra time, would surely have de facto ended Igna’s international career if France went on to lose in the penalty competition.
In this regard Igna was fortunate that France did win. But his handling of the scene wasn’t convincing; this moment needed the ref to take the initiative, and make his decision very clear with obvious gestures. That was more-or-less the complete opposite of what Igna did do, he was extremely passive and like 116’, seemed to let the thing ‘get away’ from him, even if the final decision was basically the right one.
The infamous incident from this game is Brazil goalkeeper Carlos’s ultra-cynical foul on Bruno Bellone as the France substitute broke free four minutes from the end of extra time. Making the advantage signal with both arms (as Igna had many times previously in the match), Carlos got away with his unfair action without even a foul being called against him.
DeleteRegrettably, Igna messed up here. My detailed thoughts:
> With one player from each team down in the Brazil box, the corner from which France countered to get in 1-on-1 would have actually been better off not taken; of course(!), we know FIFA’s guidelines in this regard (and the defending FRA player got up too, attacking BRA’s not), but it did feel like Igna just let the game go on unhinged. He should have blown up and checked they were both okay before allowing the corner taken.
> Igna was kind of unlucky in a way; if he had a worse linesmen than Lajos Németh (who, like Vojtech Christov, was excellent(!) in this match), then Bellone might have been flagged offside and everything forgotten about this scene; but, Németh quite correctly played the France sub on (a top drawer call for 86), so the scene did come into ‘live’ existence.
> The referee visibly tired greatly in extra time, sticking very rigidly away from the channels of the FoP on all four sides, but he failed here not because he was physically tired (he actually got relatively close given the speed of the counter), but too mentally exhausted to properly assess it on a deep level.
It was a complex scene for 1986 (see below), and Igna didn’t really have the mental strength remaining to process what happened, and the decide “what the game expects”; he simply panics, lets the whole thing ‘get away’ from him, and is the loser (Carlos the winner), of the whole incident.
He signals an advantage, and there was no sanction when the ball went out of play (and Socrates nearly won it for Brazil too in the next attack!). One can wonder how much the concept of sanction-after-advantage existed in 1986, only one referee had done so in this whole WC… Igna. :)
Advantage at all was a complete mistake. What Igna should have used a delayed whistle, and come back to the original offence. He would have been quite correct to do so, Bellone tried to go on but simply couldn’t, and the defender could sweep up because he was tripped.
Bellone staying on his feet is what probably killed Igna. It forced him to do sth quickly once the defender came in, and he sh*t the bed and went with a totally wrong “advantage”. Courage was required to trust yourself to come back, even though, in theory at least, Bellone had a chance at goal after the foul.
Moreover, the whole handling of the scene lacks a big picture view. A clearly thinking top referee (and Igna was exactly that), would process that it was highly sour to allow the goalkeeper to stop a de facto certain goal by a completely deliberate foul, especially at the end of such a fair game.
One of my favourite phrases that I try to keep at the centre of view during my matches is “don’t be the idiot (ie. the fall guy)”. By allowing Carlos to get away completely with such an obvious offence, whatever the extenuating circumstances for Igna, the world viewed the ref as the ‘idiot’ from this key moment.
> As Jimmy Hill correctly identifies, this situation did present a big problem for the 1986 referee; what and why, according to the laws, should he sanction Carlos for this egregious action having awarded the freekick?
DeleteBy the next WC, referees were ordered to eject perpetrators of professional fouls (see Fredriksson’s and Quiniou’s classic now-DOGSO reds), but because this was a charging, not tackling, action, in 86 Igna was indeed a bit stuck; if Carlos had kicked Bellone (ie. an SFP), it would have been different, but because the foul was actually careless, I guess Igna didn’t really know what to do.
And in this sense, Igna was just the unlucky one. This sort of thing could have happened to any referee, and this exact scene must have been a big reason why FIFA introduced the concept of “professional foul” WCs at Italia 1990. It takes a straw etc. However, given that he doesn’t even give the freekick at all, I would stand firmly by my view that the Romanian referee did fail in this scene.
> A small sidetone; with this decision also having increased the tension on the FoP (Németh had to sort sth out at 118’), Igna blew up for fulltime a full twenty-five seconds early (I checked too, no television clock errors), with Brazil on a very promising attack, indeed their players noticed the stadium clock and mobbed him a bit after this premature whistle (he played zero additional time in 1H, 2H, 1ET btw)
Just a conspiracy theory of mine, but I really wonder whether the Romanian (who I would detect as a referee in his career with a deep grasp of slightly ‘darker’ self-preservation in refereeing) knew exactly what he was doing and blew up to save Brazil scoring, and his own skin… but I could never say for sure!
And, in a roundabout kind of way, I'd like to make two more extended observations to balance the performance holistically.
Delete1)
There were many things excellent about Igna on this afternoon, with his very deliberate and successful tactical approach operated by the referee which fostered what is considered by some still to be the greatest World Cup finals match ever (Romania vs. Argentina in 94 for me ;)).
But, the drawback of this showing on the whole was how passive Igna was. Of course, a) it is understandable to take a clear backseat in such a game; b) it is understandable to try and conserve energy in such extreme heat of an amazing end-to-end encounter, and; c) nobody got hurt and nobody cared, or probably even noticed, about this in the disciplinary regard.
I’d argue that proper warnings etc didn’t have to be incongruent with Igna’s overall approach and so on (at least in theory - the heat + extreme pace for 86 might have rendered it de facto impossible). But until 116’, that was rather immaterial; being really passive was only really a point for consideration in terms of MtG amidst a very (very) good performance.
However, the passivity DID matter in the two big scenes at the game’s conclusion. It really hurt him at both 116’ and the Bellone penalty shot, one of which he failed in and in the other he got a bit lucky. And here is the wider point - with Igna’s approach was not really the most naturally suited to coming out of Carlos’s foul as the winner.
The perfect referee doesn’t exist! There are always trade-offs in style, always pros-and-contras; trying to do one thing is always at the expense of another, and so on. Igna’s not only passive approach, but passive whole MENTALITY on the pitch, was such his merit for one-hundred and fifteen minutes, as it helped orchestrate a really amazing game.
Igna knew what risks he was taking, and they had all paid off. He showed brilliant football understanding to jump in and prevent the game boiling over in the aforementioned moments, and his judgement he could rely on these players not to play too rough even in essentially not operating a disciplinary control was spot on (though he rode his luck a bit).
But then, with legs and minds wearying, Carlos gave Igna exactly the sort of incident he was pretty primed to fail on, and he did. In that sense, it was a ‘cruel’ incident for the algorithm of this game to generate for him, and even the BBC commentators had sympathy that one incident had tarnished his (strong!) whole two-hour-long body of work.
2)
DeleteI want to present another angle through which to look at the consequences of the Carlos-on-Bellone (non-)decision. Had Igna punished the Brazil goalkeeper with a freekick + red card, he would have been praised as a pioneering hero, no exaggeration(!), for acting in the pre-DOGSO era against this goalkeeper who otherwise would have tainted the most beautiful and fair spirited match with his cynicalness.
Make no mistake, FIFA still appreciated this performance very much (so did I!), and the ‘weirdness’ of the incident for any WC prior to 1990 needs emphasising. But - Igna did a get a final appointment after this, despite having no serious lobby behind his origin, he was fourth official for the third place playoff (impossible if FRA had lost btw); a clear signal by the way that on whole FIFA liked his WC very much.
We can never know for sure. But, given that Igna’s performance is the kind that is LOVED by the media and FIFA politicians (very similar to Archundia in GERITA), and the red card to Carlos would have been viewed as a heroic (prototypal) decision, praised by everyone… perhaps the Romanian referee could have gotten an altogether different final appointment to finish his WC 1986.
In any case, after this very (very) good performance hitherto the infamous incident at the end of extra time, Igna has much to be proud of. His calculated risks came off, and he earned the respect of the world for his showing. However, I am quite convinced that if he had been a brave pioneer in ejecting Carlos, then Ioan Igna would also have been a World Cup final referee. How life, and refereeing, can turn on such moments!
The final words on this match will go to the linesmen, Lajos Németh and Vojtech Christov, who also contributed to this classic match with superb respective performances. Németh’s aforementioned onside at 116’, and Christov’s at 17’ and 86’ (the former for Brazil’s goal - yes the nowadays clearly NON-active player was just on, a very important judgement in 1986) being the highlights.
Christov was actually faultless the whole match through, and if Németh’s reverse crossover flag at 30’ was correct (impossible to assess), then the Hungarian was too. Though Christov ran the line on the 1982 final, this duo could have quite conceivably been appointed directly to the final eight days later; after their showings in this match, it would have been fully deserved.
(reserve linesman: Marco Dorantes García (MEX))
Igna got 9.1/10 (I saw the mark with my own eyes), the highest mark of the WC86. He was considered for the final until Havelange requested a Brazilian referee as compensation for their elimination.
DeleteMatch 46 - West Germany vs. Mexico, Jesús Díaz
ReplyDeleteFull HL: https://youtu.be/dEDaZFLnIL8
Referee Jesús Díaz faced an adrenaline-filled quarterfinal which may have lacked the technical skill of the day's earlier game (or any goals), but was not lacking in excitement. The Colombian official ended up in the spotlight having sorted out eight cautions and sent two players off; to be fair, Díaz had a good game for my money.
The most controversial decision of the game was actually not the ejections of either Berthold or Aguirre, but the Colombian ref’s call to rule off a Mexico score at 70’ (21:30). Díaz adjudged that Raúl Servín pushed Andreas Brehme over, and while the decision remains controversial in Mexican culture to this day, I think that it was simply correct.
Brehme was panicking. He could see that Félix Cruz had a very good goal chance, and not seeing his own rightback playing Cruz well onside, he tries to ‘step up’ and hope for a flag. Brehme doesn’t even try to challenge Cruz for the ball, assessing that his final hope is an offside flag, which of course doesn’t come, as Cruz is clearly on.
From that perspective, what Servín did was a bit stupid. He tries to give Brehme an expedient push in order to give him no chance of stopping Cruz. Given that the defender probably couldn’t have anyway, this was a real miscalculation by Servín! Referee Jesús Díaz detected the offence, and whistled right away - he was correct to annul this goal.
In the game as a whole, I think the Colombian official performed successfully.
DeleteThe opening period of the first half was the hardest of the match, with so many borderline offences in the early stages; it was de facto impossible to really ‘take charge’ of proceedings during this epoch, but Díaz did enough, and managed to secure the game after that.
While the cards given by the referee certainly didn’t inflame the game, one can wonder how much the disciplinary control actually managed to calm everyone down at the same time. Looking through a modern sense, one can wonder how these scenes would be assessed today. The full sanctions record can be found below:
20’, MEX no.20 cautioned for challenge - 09:00
26’, FRG no.19 cautioned for aggressive behaviour - 09:50
26’, MEX no.3 cautioned for aggressive behaviour - “”
56’, FRG no.4 cautioned for challenge - 17:25
65’, FRG no.14 ejected for violent conduct - 20:15
75’, MEX no.6 cautioned for challenge - 23:45
82’, MEX no.17 cautioned for aggressive behaviour - 26:05
85’, FRG no.8 cautioned for spa holding - 27:05
95’, MEX no.5 cautioned for dissent - 30:20
100’, MEX no.13 ejected for spa impeding - 31:10
I think Díaz got both red cards spot on. Thomas Berthold’s excessive force strike was quite brilliantly detected and then instantly acted on by him, one of the best decisions of the whole tournament! Despite the deep field position, you can see how promising the attack was that Aguirre stopped, probably in a reckless manner too. Neither could really complain.
Also key to Díaz preventing this game from going south was his manner. Despite his short stature, the Colombian was a natural leader on the FoP (including soft skills / manner), and the players responded well to him. His determined presence and top-drawer fitness ensured that nothing got too out of hand. Some really pleasant (smiley) interactions with the players were also visible.
An assortment of some other noteworthy scenes: 11’ advantage after crazy challenge / modern SFP (05:30); 41’ warnings to H. Sánchez and Milutinović (13:05); 48’ penalty appeal (16:45); 78’ more serious MEX penalty appeal (25:20); 88’ simply excellent mimic / facial expression (27:50); and, 115’ enthusiastic work as a team member by linesman Chris Bambridge (34:40).
I hope Díaz was a good English speaker, as all three of his teammates were from the Anglosphere! Linesmen Bambridge from Australia and Snoddy were pretty quiet in terms of offside scenes, but Bambridge made a very important mistake at 17’, denying Mexico a 1-on-1 in a crossover scene (07:40). Otherwise, besides some superficially interesting team member scenes, not much to report for them.
(reserve linesman: David Socha (USA))
Match 47 - Argentina vs. England, Ali Bennaceur
ReplyDeleteA dedicated report about this performance can be accessed in the link below:
https://wc86refs.blogspot.com/p/in-focus-match-47-argentina-vs-england.html
Match 48 - Spain vs. Belgium, Siegfried Kirschen
ReplyDeleteFull HL: https://youtu.be/GKwUIVw_Oqs
The plan was probably always for East Germany’s Siegfried Kirschen to be saved for a late-stage knockout game by FIFA, and having passed the test in what was a slightly showbiz (and not accidentally so) group stage appointment, Kirschen was placed in charge of the quarterfinal which was probably just a step below the other three in terms of prestige.
No less exciting though; the final act in of a brilliant quartet of last eight matches. After his Northern Ireland vs. Brazil game, I would say that I understood, more than shared, their enthusiasm for the East German’s way of refereeing - really very fit, and with a generally good idea of how to stay on top of everything, but not necessarily in the most elegant way regarding calls and management.
I guess you could say that both FIFA’s estimation and my feeling were proved simultaneously correct in this game, where the chips were really down and the referee faced a hard task. The deficiencies which I feared in his style did come to fruition; concurrently, from FIFA’s view, he avoided big controversy, and his thesis for match control co-existed with, and partly helped facilitate, a flowing, thrilling, cup tie.
His very rigorous line in assessing body contacts / impeding fouls was less visible here (though still was), but some clear errors in foul recognition remained. In general, his technical accuracy in assessing ‘duels’ wasn’t bad, but was a little off being at a sound level - at least on the highest level of a World Cup quarterfinal - in my opinion.
Kirschen was very fit, but a quite isolated leader on the field of play, and his general style revolved around those two premises. His disciplinary choices were technically a bit random (and perceived so by the players), but at the same time, I got what his idea was - he jumped in with cards when he needed to calm the players down.
Some of the four cautions shown could have been managed better by different tools in his arsenal (whistle tone, public/private warning), whereas more blatant offenders in other scenes got away scot-free. It was the same with his foul calls, his line felt more in tune with an eye on not losing control, than always clearly assessing foul vs. no foul in the individual incidents.
His final warning to Spain no.2 Tomás Reñones at 41’ (see all clips are below) was very good refereeing, but in some other scenes, he simply failed - he bore an extremely blatant dissent at 23’ without even a verbal warning, and worse was the caution that Michel Renquin escaped at 104’, for a crystal clear LoR handling offence, because Spain took the freekick quickly and were caught offside.
The match flowed from end-to-end after halftime, but the first period had a fair amount of aggro - Kirschen couldn’t really get the tension out of the match with his officiating, and tempers continued to rise, ending in a confrontation scene at 44’, where Ramón Calderé was booked, probably for a little kick out at an opponent. Fortunately, things didn’t blow up too much after that.
Kirschen’s general impression to the eye as a referee, enthusiastically following play with great fitness, was quite aesthetic, and there was something a bit stoic about him and his demeanour too - a slightly aloof manner, but always firm and giving a determined impression, whilst remaining understated and not being demonstrative too, allowing the players the spotlight.
I guess that is what FIFA liked about him too, his a-bit-weak match control thesis style allowed for exciting matches of the slightly unhinged variety, he kept in the background with his manner, and he was a good enough official to prevent things from really boiling over. Kirschen did have his weaknesses, but compared to say Espósito, I’d say he ultimately comes out pretty strongly.
Edgardo Codesal was quite scandalously, IMO, appointed as linesman in this match. His only(!) other designation in this WC on the field, besides this QF, was on the line in the opening game. So clearly an offering to Cañedo/FMF by FIFA. Rather irritating too - even one more appointment for him in the group rounds (eg. in Urrea Reyes’ stead for KORITA, say) would have made it much more palatable.
DeleteEspecially as he made a big contribution to the match in a rather dubious way - the freekick call made by him in favour of Spain from which they scored their late equaliser was de facto non-existent. I guess the potential offside case from the actual strike though is a rare case of a situation which is active offside now, but not back then.
Interesting case study this - the attacker is running away from goal, not seeking to gain an advantage by this action whilst being offside, but he does gain an advantage, probably decisively putting the goalkeeper off, by blocking his view of the shot. No Belgium players seemed to care at the time though. If we support him in scenes at 9’ and 47’, then Codesal was okay overall.
Horst Brummeier from Austria was the other linesman, an appointment coherent with the performance principle, and he realised a very good performance, one of the best in the whole competition; (seemingly) no mistakes in eight scenes. Brummeier’s development through the tournament was pleasant to note - a hesitant team member in his first game with the flag, but very strong by the end.
Just a final word on the final team member - Jorge Leanza Sansone was the reserve linesman involved in the incident where Paraguay's coach C. Ré was ejected in the group stage, and he was not appointed for the whole R16, before getting this QF (that game was Paraguay vs. Belgium, by the way). I guess FIFA wanted to show their approval for how he handled that incident by assigning him here in the same role.
(reserve linesman: Jorge Leanza Sansone (MEX))
Video clips:
Delete2’ - too harsh freekick call for alleged impeding offence
https://youtu.be/GKwUIVw_Oqs?t=84
9’ - potential penalty to Spain (tackle)
https://youtu.be/GKwUIVw_Oqs?t=151
9’ - offside call by Edgardo Codesal
https://youtu.be/GKwUIVw_Oqs?t=176
15’ - advantage(?); followed by wrong freekick call denying Belgium very promising attack
https://youtu.be/GKwUIVw_Oqs?t=283
22’ - potential penalty to Spain (handling)
https://youtu.be/GKwUIVw_Oqs?t=313
23’ - freekick for impeding offence, followed by clear dissenting behaviour
https://youtu.be/GKwUIVw_Oqs?t=353
24’ - yellow card to Belgium no.24 (tackle)
https://youtu.be/GKwUIVw_Oqs?t=400
40’ - yellow card to Spain no.2 (tackle)
https://youtu.be/GKwUIVw_Oqs?t=535
41’ - final warning to Spain no.2 after further foul
https://youtu.be/GKwUIVw_Oqs?t=577
44’ - yellow card to Spain no.18 (tackle vs. dissent vs. agg beh); confrontation
https://youtu.be/GKwUIVw_Oqs?t=626
47’ - offside call by Edgardo Codesal
https://youtu.be/GKwUIVw_Oqs?t=789
49’ - positioning issue
https://youtu.be/GKwUIVw_Oqs?t=816
51’ - important foul call against Belgium no.11
https://youtu.be/GKwUIVw_Oqs?t=860
53’ - potential yellow card to Spain no.3 (challenge)
https://youtu.be/GKwUIVw_Oqs?t=900
58’ - potential yellow card to Belgium no.22 (tackle)
https://youtu.be/GKwUIVw_Oqs?t=990
60’ - management of attacking quick freekick
https://youtu.be/GKwUIVw_Oqs?t=1040
70’ - potential penalty to Belgium (charging by gk)
https://youtu.be/GKwUIVw_Oqs?t=1172
73’ - freekick given by Codesal; management of dissenting behaviour
https://youtu.be/GKwUIVw_Oqs?t=1196
79’ - potential penalty to Spain (blocking); instead, IFK given to Spain (impeding)
https://youtu.be/GKwUIVw_Oqs?t=1280
85’ - freekick decision by Edgardo Codesal resulting in goal
https://youtu.be/GKwUIVw_Oqs?t=1346
86’ - active offside by Spain no.20 or no offence and therefore goal (Codesal)?
https://youtu.be/GKwUIVw_Oqs?t=1387
88’ - potential penalty to Belgium (pushing)
https://youtu.be/GKwUIVw_Oqs?t=1460
90’ - alleged striking incident by Spain no.20, if so, potential red card (violent conduct)
https://youtu.be/GKwUIVw_Oqs?t=1544
92’ - positioning issue
https://youtu.be/GKwUIVw_Oqs?t=1704
92’ - two consecutive fouls from behind (tackle) by Belgium no.19; sanction?
https://youtu.be/GKwUIVw_Oqs?t=1704
96’ - onside call by Horst Brummeier
https://youtu.be/GKwUIVw_Oqs?t=1780
101’ - good advantage or missed attacking freekick to Belgium?
https://youtu.be/GKwUIVw_Oqs?t=1870
104’ - clear missed yellow card to Belgium no.5 (SPA/LoR handling); management
https://youtu.be/GKwUIVw_Oqs?t=1929
107’ - potential missed attacking IFK in the penalty area after ball-obstructing offence
https://youtu.be/GKwUIVw_Oqs?t=2026
111’ - potential yellow card to Belgium (tackle/SPA)
https://youtu.be/GKwUIVw_Oqs?t=2026
113’ - harsh yellow card to Belgium no.13 (challenge)
https://youtu.be/GKwUIVw_Oqs?t=2133
Finally, a word on the penalty competition. Kirschen managed it quite weakly in my view, repeatedly allowing the Belgium goalkeeper’s unfair delaying tactics. In addition, should the only saved penalty (by him) have been retaken for goalkeeper off the line?
https://youtu.be/GKwUIVw_Oqs?t=2344
Match 49 - France vs. West Germany, Luigi Agnolin
ReplyDeleteFull HL: https://youtu.be/c46lkLsVxQk
I do wonder what FIFA's plans for Agnolin were after his all-time miraculous performance in Argentina vs. Uruguay - maybe a) they wanted to give him the final but couldn't after his controversial foot-up call disallowed a goal for Argentina, and this SF was the highest assignment they could physically give him, or, b) the all-Euro heavyweight match was the reward for that performance and he never really entered serious consideration for the grand finale.
Personally, I think the latter is more likely, and FIFA saw him as a firefighter whom they could give the most technically challenging matches (Hungary vs. Soviet Union too) whilst leaving the most sonorous clashes for others (especially Arppi Filho / Keizer). In any case, receiving three appointments as referee in the 1986 system (in very similar 82 - nobody did) was a feat akin to handling five - maybe even six(!) - matches in the World Cup nowadays; so quite a remarkable achievement by the Italian for sure.
The semifinal that he faced was quite a weird one to be honest - it really didn't feel like a World Cup semifinal at all. Played at midday on a Wednesday afternoon on a poor pitch (heavy rain had fallen since the classic QF), a rather unethusiastic crowd who didn't really care who won all contributed to a flat atmosphere in the stadium, but not on the pitch, as the players fought a calculated and intense match at a high intensity.
Henri Michel criticised Agnolin for being too lenient and I can understand the France coach's impression - in a game with a lot of (modern) reckless play, the Italian referee's tactic was to mostly underplay these fouls (short whistles, urging the players up etc). The two cards that were issued were for extrenous dissent incidents off-camera, with none issued for foul infractions. It is something that I'll try to explore in the review, but I think the Italian's disciplinary control was very practical and good for 1986-era.
This match could never happen nowadays; both teams simply accepted a high threshold for foul play, had the feeling that the referee was always there to keep a hand on everything (and he was), and they focused deeply on playing football. W. Germany's early goal concentrated minds, as France gradually and agonisingly watched the clock tick down with nil to their name, leading to an extremely dramatic conclusion, and only with final kick did Germany ensure their place in the final was safe.
The key incidents:
- was the early freekick from which FGR scored correctly awarded? 04:25
- Lajos Németh was spot on to disallow a Platini equaliser in the 2H - 18:25
- should France have been awarded a late penalty for shirt tugging? 24:20
To continue: I must say, Agnolin's style was simply majesterial: very deeply assessing foul incidents and keeping the game flowing, simply fantastic gesture of gestures to signal and especially explain decisions, and showing remarkable game understanding by understanding his role on the pitch, especially as time was running out and France got more and more frustrated. They exploded after the clinching goal/final whistle, partly a consequence of the leniency which frustrated Michel, but Agnolin should sooner receive credit for managing to delay the fracas until after the final whistle with his deeply skilful officiating.
DeleteFinishing his World Cup by pushing players away from fighting each other (even screaming at them) was a sad end for one of the superlative WC 'runs' by a referee in all my refereeing consciousness certainly, but somehow was quite fitting. Agnolin had been excellent from the start, and in Argentina vs. Uruguay managed to do sth quite special, and in all three games had been doing FIFA's 'dirty work' for them, though that isn't meant in any kind of disparaging way to either party, rather a compliment. You can argue about the when and how but without doubt, this man deserved a WC final in his palmares.
The rules of the game had been significantly altered for 1990, and completly changed for 1994, so we can be pretty resolute in the assertion that we will never see the like of Luigi Agnolin again. If every referee had the almost supernatural ability of this man they probably needn't have - the amount of theoretically reckless and SPA incidents he passed over without cards would have mounted as he went through the tournament; refereeing like his would be impossible nowadays. Only Frisk, Rosetti and Mateu perhaps come close to how much of a natural he was... and not really that close, either. We will never see the like again; rest in peace, Mr. Agnolin.
Agnolin, Zoran Petrović and Lajos Németh had worked together numerous times in different roles through the tournament and formed something of a 'proto-trio' many years before they came into existance. Both of the linesman fared strongly in their final assignment together in Mexico - Németh faced an extremely challenging 2H and never made a clear mistake, getting the big calls visibly spot on; Petrović had a couple of doubtful calls as FGR countered at the end, but in general - good.
(reserve linesman: Marco Dorantes García (MEX))
Match 50 - Argentina vs. Belgium, Antonio Márquez Ramírez
ReplyDeleteFull HL: https://youtu.be/a7TeiGUHGKc?
The match which, more than any other, left a sour taste in the mouth with regards to the officiating at this World Cup. The entire designation left many questions (though - some can definitely be answered), the Mexican referee made a complete pig's ear of the game to be frank (8,0 level), and the performance of Portuguese linesman Carlos Silva Valente was not short of a complete scandal - with mistakes that need to be seen to be believed, even for the WC 1986 era.
Let's start at the top. The irritating facet of Antonio Márquez Ramírez's appointment to this game is that it was totally contingent on Mexico losing their QF, and if they had won, Mexico's ref would have gone completely without refereeing a KO stage game. That's unfair on two levels - firstly, he definitely deserved a knockout tie after the skills he displayed in his Denmark vs. Uruguay match (actually, I even considered him on a 'final level'), and secondly because what it says about the appointment.
It says exactly this to me: that given the choice, FMF would rather their team in the semis, but if that didn't work out, getting their ref there "will do" instead. That is not how it should work at all (of course I'm not naïve, but still). I don't discount that perhaps Márquez Ramírez was a compromise option as Argentina rejected Europeans again and there probably were no South Americans left besides Silva, but given that both reserve linesman roles in the semis were discharged by Mexican reserve squad members too, I can't help but feel it was a bit overkill after El Tri's elimination.
To be clear first, it went wrong on a game management level - during the game, most people probably thought "this ref is a bit poor", but afterwards, at least HIS decisions weren't memorable or containing big mistakes. But I should also underline how weak this performance was, even Kirschen and Espósito were quite significantly better than this (and their MtG skills are not strong). How then, did it all go so wrong for a referee who quite genuinely showed star quality in his group stage assignment?
Márquez Ramírez's general style presented a very arrogant and 'cocksure' leader on the FoP, and he won over the players by his natural authority, outer-confidence and so on. It was very clear from quite early on in match no.2 for him that this wasn't going to be possible. There are comments to make on the type of game he faced later, but somehow, I think AMR himself felt that he was a political choice and this SF was maybe too much for him - his manner, even from the first seconds, was somehow a bit off, of a man trying slightly too hard to prove himself; when that all came so naturally to him before.
The game itself was a nightmare for a referee. No Argentina vs. Uruguay-like battle, but extremely edgy yet also high paced (fitness and movement must have troubled him, especially by not backpedaling he got in the way in the 1H). Actually it is impossible to win as a referee such a match. Márquez R. could never really feel when to intervene as a referee and when to take a step back, and his loss of confidence was visible. Some of his interactions with players were even quite bizarre as he tried to impose his authority but each time only dug his own hole deeper.
Of course, while any World Cup semifinal appointment is an honour, I felt a bit sorry for Antonio Márquez Ramírez. His performance was really weak, but I think FIFA spoiled a very able referee by using him as a political pawn (and giving AMR himself that impression, too, can't have helped), and in addition to that, he faced a very demanding game, both of which combined to comprehensively un-do all of the positive elements of his group stage performance. He got through this semifinal, but really not much more than that; a shame, both for him personally, but more pertinently, the tournament itself.
We have to start this section by discussing appointed linesman no.2, Portuguese Carlos Silva Valente. By some long distance, this was the worst performance with the flag of the WHOLE tournament - in the semifinal. Let's walk you through the timestamps of the four very poor decisions he made (the first one is beyond belief). Pay attention particularly to the respective positions from which Silva Valente was making these calls.
DeleteOn the HL video: 08:50 - 12:30 - 26:25 - 28:45
Belgium have every right to feel aggrieved at the shocking incompetence displayed by Silva Valente in the two first scenes, both crucial for the outcome of the tie, as both had a high probability of yielding goals for them. Ultimately they lost two-nothing. I understand that 35yrs have passed, but it does need underlining that this is a WC semifinal - and none (or at least very few) of the other linesmen were THIS bad. Also, note how he has (the nerve) to be shouting back at the complaining Belgium players...
The positions from which he makes these complete guesses are incredible. I also noticed this with Emanuel Zammit, the Maltese linesman who appeared in major competitions during the late 90s / early 2000s - he is so anxious about being caught for pace by a fast counter-attack, his instinctive reaction is to anticipate the play early, so he starts running backwards way too quickly. Of course, the natural result is that disasters like this happened, when the play is well in-front of you, and you automatically flag anytime there is any crossover scene.
Why was Silva Valente appointed in the first place? I don't have (m)any sources for the goings-on of WC86 refereeing, so I can't really say for sure. There was a prominent Portuguese football politician involved in FIFA at the time, Dr. António Marques, and as we mentioned Zammit, even one man (Mifsud), was enough to ridiculously get this man to appear in top games at top tournaments. His career is rather weird - UEFA gave him nothing, but with FIFA he really reached the very top.
But his performance reviews - as linesman at least(!); he was really poor in Hungary vs. France as ref - were quite decent by you, I can hear you shout back at the computer! Yes, but he never convinced me at all. I can only mark from what I can see on the television footage - if I was assessing in the stadiums, then any potential deficiencies as a team member or detecting offsides would be much more apparent. I just don't get how FIFA saw anything in him, sorry; repeating Christov/Snoddy/Socha/Bambridge would have been much preferable for me to CSV.
FIFA would never learn - Hansal's scandalous mistake in the third place playoff (90), giving Park a QF after weak performances inc. offside from a throw-in in BRAUSA (94), and Dramane Danté's appointment with Al-Ghandour in 98 was actually NO different to Ragoonath''s four years later - if anything, the Trinidadian was marginally more competent in the tournament's previous matches. Finally, the eras caught up with their ways in the Far East, but it was terrible that they played with the competition like that for so long.
Finally, to end on a positive note - Rómulo Méndez made one of the best linesmen's decisions of the whole tournament when he instantly ruled out Argentina's early score for a handling offence (03:25), and he worked very steadily both as a team member and computer of offsides in this match. A (very) good performance, well done. Fitting to end speaking about Méndez - he passed away only yesterday evening, aged eighty-three. A real trailblazer for Guatemala's referees attending two WCs, I warmed to his natural style very much. Rest in peace, sir.
(reserve linesman: Edgardo Codesal (MEX))
A full incident-by-incident analysis of the match, analysing all the situations featured in the HL by turn, can be found in the link below:
Deletehttps://docdro.id/jRdu97x
I love the color commentator insisting those first two atrocious offside decisions were correct.
DeleteMatch 51 - France vs. Belgium, George Courtney
ReplyDeleteFull HL: https://youtu.be/ZS1xEIq60lU
George Courtney was very unlucky indeed not to be appointed to referee a (proper) knockout stage match, and he ended up with the third place playoff as compensation (also for the FA, after the HoG). Having come out alive from a tumultuous Mexico vs. Paraguay - with great credit too by the way - and watching the efforts of some others in their knockout ties, the Englishman can quite justifiably feel he was hard done by in how FIFA treated him at this World Cup.
As for the match itself: to be fair, France and Belgium put on a good show in the ceremonial game; Courtney reffed it okay. The skills he brought to the table, especially in interacting and connecting with players, were very visible. He let a little bit too much go in the second half, but managed to keep everything under control. The big controversy was a penalty he surely missed for Belgium at the start of the extra time period; later he correctly gave France a spot kick. His foul recognition (much different from his line in MEXPAR :D) was strong, especially recognising impeding offences.
The game that really exists in modern football only so FIFA can make politically valuable referee appointments didn't disappoint in that regard either - Hernán Silva was ignored for all KO stage roles, so the Chilean got his stand here, and Jamal Al-Sharif was invariably appointed, despite his (at best) ambivalent impressions running the line in the group stage, and very poor performance in England vs. Paraguay. Both were rather challenged, Silva was good, and Al-Sharif a bit better than one might have expected, but the Syrian remained amongst the poorer linesmen in WC 1986.
(reserve linesman: Ioan Igna (ROU))
Some video clips of the most interesting moments:
Delete12’ - https://youtu.be/ZS1xEIq60lU?list=PLJNDTL9UhkPtE-OJNe7HTQvWo-AlPPDRE&t=172
32’ - https://youtu.be/ZS1xEIq60lU?list=PLJNDTL9UhkPtE-OJNe7HTQvWo-AlPPDRE&t=434
63’ - https://youtu.be/ZS1xEIq60lU?list=PLJNDTL9UhkPtE-OJNe7HTQvWo-AlPPDRE&t=769
67’ - https://youtu.be/ZS1xEIq60lU?list=PLJNDTL9UhkPtE-OJNe7HTQvWo-AlPPDRE&t=896
75’ - https://youtu.be/ZS1xEIq60lU?list=PLJNDTL9UhkPtE-OJNe7HTQvWo-AlPPDRE&t=1022
76’ - https://youtu.be/ZS1xEIq60lU?list=PLJNDTL9UhkPtE-OJNe7HTQvWo-AlPPDRE&t=1044
83’ - https://youtu.be/ZS1xEIq60lU?list=PLJNDTL9UhkPtE-OJNe7HTQvWo-AlPPDRE&t=1103
84’ - https://youtu.be/ZS1xEIq60lU?list=PLJNDTL9UhkPtE-OJNe7HTQvWo-AlPPDRE&t=1111
87’ - https://youtu.be/ZS1xEIq60lU?list=PLJNDTL9UhkPtE-OJNe7HTQvWo-AlPPDRE&t=1146
93’ - https://youtu.be/ZS1xEIq60lU?list=PLJNDTL9UhkPtE-OJNe7HTQvWo-AlPPDRE&t=1251
108’ - https://youtu.be/ZS1xEIq60lU?list=PLJNDTL9UhkPtE-OJNe7HTQvWo-AlPPDRE&t=1483
(walking through the clips: 12’ was a correctly ruled out goal; 32’ well-solved disciplinary incident; 63’ was surely deliberate and ideally I’d like to have seen Pfaff sent off; 67’ should have been a YC; penalty appeals at 75’, 76’, 83’; losing control of players actions visible at quite brutal fouls 84’ and 87’; 93’ IMO a clear missed penalty to Belgium misperceived by the ref; and finally, 108’ a clear pk to France correctly given; lots of tricky crossover scenes for Silva and (especially) Al-Sharif visible in the HL)
Match 52 - Argentina vs. West Germany, Romualdo Arppi Filho
ReplyDeleteA dedicated report about how the final was officiated can be accessed here:
https://wc86refs.blogspot.com/p/in-focus-final.html
Referees like jassim mandi Bahrain and Mohamed hansal Algeria deserved to referee in wc 1986 in Mexico
ReplyDelete