18 ECUCRC Codjia

 

Matchday Two meant reunion time for Coffi Codjia and the national team of Costa Rica: The official’s only game at World Cup 2002 had been the group stage clash between the “Ticos” and Turkey. In Hamburg, the stakes were high: Ecuador could clinch qualification for the Round of 16 with a win, a loss for Costa Rica would have meant elimination.

Despite these odds, the CONMEBOL vs. CONCACAF clash was a mostly fair match with focus on football. However, it was overshadowed by a number of incidents the casual viewer might not have noticed while watching, but from a refereeing perspective cause severe doubts about Codjia’s qualification to referee at this tournament.

Despite the rather flowing match with few tough challenges, Codjia never radiated confidence or gave me the impression that he was absolutely sure about the decisions he took. His disciplinary line and his foul selection proved to be rather unpredictable, with aerial duels whistled for the slightest of contacts. As for disciplinary and foul selection, compare the challenges committed and the advantages given in 43’ and 47’. The advantage in the latter case was simply not sensible in any way.

The man from Benin had little interactions with players and was happy to let a small altercation go when the infringed team decided to restart quickly (39’). What should be praised was his execution of FIFA’s guidelines regarding DtR offences. After a warning in the first half, Codjia booked two Ecuadorian players for time wasting early in the second half, having clearly watched Ecuador’s first match and decided not to allow such offences at all.

Based on that alone I would assess Codjia's performance as not really acceptable at World Cup level as he revealed significant and extensive areas for improvement. But besides that, there were no less than five Key Match Incidents that need further review.

Minute: 10'
Case: Potential RC for CRC #3 for SFP
Marín (CRC #3) tackles Carlos Tenorio (ECU #21) from the side. The tackle is aimed at the ball but is late and high. It catches the Ecuadorian fully with the studs on the side of the foot. Codjia whistles and after some hesitation, books the Costa Rican.
By all means this should be a RC for SFP. The fact that Marín tries to win the ball might be the only mitigating circumstance. Nevertheless, I would call a YC here a CRUCIAL MISTAKE.

Minute: 22’
Case: Potential RC for CRC #20 for SFP
While shielding a pass Delgado (ECU #11) is challenged by Sequeira (CRC #20). Under the eyes of Codjia, the Costa Rican steps on the ankle of his opponent. The contact is intense and with full force. Codjia is satisfied with only whistling a free kick and not even warning the Costa Rican player.
Simply put, the handling of this situation is not accetable. Evidence suggests Codjia saw the challenge, but either did perceive it wrongly or decided not to punish it. This is a crystal clear RC for SFP and hence another CRUCIAL MISTAKE.
 
Minute: 32’
Case: Potential RC for ECU #14 for SFP
Centeno (CRC #10) is making a tackle for the ball, while Castillo (ECU #14) is trying to reach it as well. This results in the Ecuadorian player stamping on the leg of his opponent just below the knee. Again the contact is clear and of high intensity. Codjia whistles nothing, in fact, the Ecuadorian attack is allowed to continue
While one could argue it was more accidental than intended, this is yet another SFP case completely missed by Codjia. CRUCIAL MISTAKE.

Minute: 64’
Case: Potential RC for CRC #10 for VC
Centeno (CRC #10) jumps over a tackle by Kaviedes (ECU #10). As he lands, he stamps with full force on the leg of the Ecuadorian player, hitting him just below the knee. Based on the motion and the way the Costa Rican player sees the challenge, this stamp seems intentional and not accidental. Codjia again does nothing.
One should be careful when speaking of malice and intention, but in this case, I see a strong case that the stamp was not just unlucky. For me a missed RC for Violent Conduct. CRUCIAL MISTAKE.
 
Minute: 90+4’
Case: Potential penalty for ECU and RC for CRC # for SFP/DOGSO
After a bad touch by Umaña (CRC #4), Kaviedes (ECU #10) gains posession of the ball inside the penalty area. Umaña commits a tackle from behind to correct his mistake. Kaviedes goes down, Codjia decides to play on. The foul itself would have been a strong case for DOGSO. Replays reveal that not only did Umaña jump into the back of Kaviedes, but also caught the back of his calves with his studs.
Yet another CRUCIAL MISTAKE. Penalty for Ecuador and a RC for either SFP or DOGSO should have been given.

Five crucial mistakes - even if one could argue which of them were de facto and which were more de jure - are simply far too many for a World Cup referee. If Codjia did not perceive the incidents or did asses them poorly does not really matter in the end. This was one of the poorest performances I have seen in a long time and his total lack of any attempt to seriously take charge was frustrating to watch. We do not assign a 6.6 grade lightly, but there was little saving grace to be found. What is even more shocking that the performance not only wasn't at any point discussed in the media (would it have been different if an European team had been involved?) but that FIFA saw it fit to appoint Codjia again.

While AR2 Aboudou Aderodjou had a quiet match, AR1 Célestin Ntagungira was called into action several times. After making a clearly wrong if unimportant offside decision in the first half (20’), he correctly cancelled an Ecuadorian goal for offside after the break (70’) and later kept his flag down when Kaviedes scored in added time (90+2').
Coffi Codjia - 6,6
Célestin Ntagungira - 8,3
Aboudou Aderodjou - 8,4
Mohamed Guezzaz
Brahim Djezzar


BEN, RWA, BEN - MAR, ALG
Ecuador 3-0 Costa Rica

Group Stage
Gelbe Karten
Castillo (44') - Reckless play
de la Cruz (54') - Delaying the Restart
Mora (60') - Delaying the Restart
Gelbe Karten
Marín (10') - Reckless sliding tackle
Solís (28') - SPA (Tripping)

Comments

  1. 10': Maybe not a 100% RC (I wouldn't have intervened as VAR) but more RC than YC. Management of the scene is also poor, card was too delayed

    22': ¡¿Not even a YC?!

    32': Not even a foul... mandatory RC, despite being accidental!

    64': Not only it's a RC, but indeed it's VC and not SFP, watching the whole replay I'd say it was 100% deliberate (2-0 score already)

    90+4': CRC4 commits 2 penalties in one second and a half. Crucial mistake not to award a PK, debatable colour of the card.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Fully agreed! 10' is certainly the weakest SFP case, but the management was horrible. Agreed on the rest, card colour for 90+4' would depend indeed on the contact (more replays could have helped), on what we have IMHO more SFP and/or DOGSO than not.

      Delete

Post a Comment

Popular Posts