Manchester United 1-2 Tottenham Hotspur
Referee: Howard Webb
Assistant 1: Michael Mullarkey
Assistant 2: Darren Cann
4th Official: Neil Swarbrick
TRR Assessor: Hubert (Leszno, Poland)
Date: 01/01/2014
Venue: Old Trafford, Manchester
Kick Off: 17:30
Competition: Premier League
Match Difficulty: Challenging
THE REFEREE
Foul Detection
GOOD
Comment...
The referee's foul detection was generally good. Howard Webb had to cope with many unclear situations inside the boxes and he dealt with it in a very consistent manner. Firstly, he rightly rejected a penalty appeal when it seemed that #12 MU played the ball with his hand, but replays showed how tough and brilliant call was to wave it off (45'). Secondly, Mr. Webb was right not whistling a penalty kick for the home team. #6 TOT carelessly carted his leg, but was smart enough to undo this move and therefore an exaggerated fall of #19 MU after a small contact that he provoke by changing a line of running couldn't have been a reason to award a pen (59'). Finally, the biggest controversy happened in the 86th minute of the game. #25 TOT (GK) bravely left a goal and tried to block a potential shot/centre by making a high-boot slide-tackle. As #18 MU was smart and played the ball deep into the box, he didn't clear the ball and a small contact between both players had to happen. Same manner of this tackle could be described as reckless, but one can also take into account that the MU player wanted to be touched, played the ball to nobody and exaggeratedly fell down after a small touch on a foot. I am with the referee here, it was not enough to whistle it, great feeling for the game.
Apart from those three big incidents, Howard Webb made fantastic decision detecting a dive of #44 MU and booking him for that after playing an advantage (87'). Referees missed two very obvious handballs - first of #3 TOT (16', blocking a centre) and second of #9 TOT (24'), but in those cases lack of assistance from 4th official and assistant 2 must be mentioned.
Positioning
GOOD
Comment...
The referee's positioning was of a good standard. Howard Webb is known for putting himself in excellent position throughout the game, resulting in him having an excellent view of play. So it was this time with two exceptions when he blocked a MU player (49') and was hit by the ball (80').
Man Management
GOOD
Comment...
The referee's man-management was generally good. He was seen to be talking to players regularly during the course of the match. If appropriate, the referee tried to calm irate players down by speaking to them as it was with #10 MU after waving the penalty appeal off (86'). This behaviour of MU player seemed very harsh, but if there were no insults toward the ref, Webb was right to only have a talk with frustrated player.
Card Issuing
EXCELLENT
Comment...
The referee was right to book #10 MU for excessive pulling an opponent for a hand (41'), #19 TOT for breaking a promising attack (80') and #44 MU for above-mentioned brilliantly detected dive (87').
Fitness
EXCELLENT
Comment...
The referee's fitness was of excellent standard. Webb was always able to adjudge his position to the play in an intense game what demanded a very high level of fitness and running preparation.
THE ASSISTANT REFEREES
Assistant 1 - GOOD [8.4]
Assistant 2 - GOOD [8.4]
Comment...
Both Assistants had very good games. Michael Mullarkey was correct in judging a punch of the ball by TOT GK to be on the line of the box (01') as well as in evaluation of (non-)offside situations. Darren Cann was also accurate in his offside calls and assisted the referee with a couple of foul awards.
OVERALL
VERY GOOD
SCORE
8.5/10
I'm sorry, but how on earth was Januzaj even booked for simulation, he was clearly impeded. It was a certain foul, to produce a caution is somewhat bewildering.
ReplyDeleteI must also disagree on your view on the Young/Lloris incident, I think it was a blatant penalty. The 'keeper made no contact with the ball, however there was contact with Young. It just seems to me Webb, at times is afraid to make the big decisions. He would rather give a yellow insted of a red, or abstain from whistling for a penalty in fear of getting it wrong.
Anyway, 8.5 is too high, 7.8/7.9 would be more adequate.
As for Mullarkey, well, how he didn't notice that Adebayor had taken the throw-in I'll never know. To allow Spurs to retake it was really poor officiating from an vastly experienced linesman.
You should understand that referee observer must be a referee's friend. That's why I must defend everything what is defendable in my report even if I can think otherwise. In my opinion, the lack of penalty for Lloris tackle is a defendable decision cause there was not typical studs-up challenge, but only contact due to a colliding run path... One can describe this tackle as careless or even reckless, but one can also have an empathy for the game and say it's not enough. That's why I think it can't be interpreted as clear and crucial mistake.
DeleteThere was a contact in Januzaj situation, no doubt. But look at the reaction of Januzaj, it's exaggerated fall, it's a dive. And it was a clear body challenge, no foul at all. He cheated and Webb excellently detected that.
I can't also agree with you about the throw-in. It was handled when the ball was in play, but Adebayor takes this throw-in from different place to where the ball crossed the line, so allowing a retake from correct position was absolutely understandable.
Still think (as observer) that 8.5 is adequate mark for this performance.
We'll agree to disagree, then. ;)
Delete