2014 MLS Referee Assignments and Discussion [Rs]

Referees do NOT levy a triple punisment. Referees aware a PK if a foul occurs. And if that foul denies an obvious goal or GSO, dismiss the player. Referees should NOT be pondering what sanctions the league might further levy in terms of a suspension in making their decisions.

 

Looking at the foul, I think it's a borderline yellow to begin with. I don't mind seeing this not given so early. If Ricardo gives a card for that foul, I think he ties his hands for the rest of the game with a relatively low misconduct threshold. Yeah, the fact that he pulls out the card and then puts it back in doesn't look great (especially with the camera right on him the whole time) but if it weren't for that, I don't think the Red Bulls necessarily expected a card there. They took the decision change relatively well. McCarty wasn't happy, but his behavior didn't devolve into one of his signature tantrums. Olave seemed to understand after a quick word. I think the way Salazar managed the situation after changing his decision is a good example of why he's among the league's best referees.

 

Yeah, I think there is a case that it was not deliberate. Certainly if deliberate then it is red. When a player lunges for a ball like that, their arms tend to move above their head for balancing purposes. I wish I could find a video, but I know I do it. On one hand, I think the arms could be in "natural position", but on the other hand the player is "making himself bigger". Very tough play.

I found it interesting that after the PK is awarded, the Union players kinda just stop appealing. They don't rush over to beg for a red. Neither do the Red Bulls players rush over to protest what they know might be red. I don't know if this is simply because everyone knows this is a clear red or because no one was expecting red, just a PK.

Referees levy a double punishment based on the LOTG, the triple comes later with a suspension. And don't try that "referees don't give out cards, fouls, PK's; players earn them" business. It's nice rhetoric, but the decision still falls on the officiating crew. Anyway, when I said it seemed like a tough play to levy the triple punishment, I was speaking in general, not specifically about the referee.

 

It looked, on the Philly broadcast, that the conclusion was no card because Gaddis was pushed into the RB player. I'm not sure I saw that this should make a difference, but that's one conclusion. Weird mechanic regardless.

 

Your post can end here. If it is not deliberate, then it is not a foul and there's no penalty to begin with. If it is deliberate, it is a foul, and the player has denied a goal by deliberately handling the ball, which is misconduct punishable by a send-off. End of story.

 

I can end my post wherever I want thank you. What you quoted above is what the Laws say about handling -- the rest of my post outlined why I think it could not be handling. Which is the importance of discussion, understanding the why not just the what. No one is disagreeing about the enforcement of deliberate versus non-deliberate handling.

 

For those who didn't see the incident: http://gfycat.com/CalmSomberAbyssiniancat

 

Can you get the foul? It seemed like everyone accepted what happened and the 4th was in the best position.

 

Your friend isn't watching the same basketball games I do.

And he should watch the third period of an NHL game - especially in the playoffs.

 

Or the overtimes that happened last night...

 

Year after year you hear the mantra that a penalty in October should be a penalty in March - but as someone who has shot 30 NHL games/season for the last decade, that has never been the case.

 

Do you have an online portfolio or photo stream?

Edit: Just spotted your signature. D'oh!

 

It may have been the right call, but Gonzalez over stepped his authority telling Salazar to rescind that card.

It's not like a yellow would have been blatantly wrong. I didn't think that looked good at all and it drew way too much attention on Gonzalez.

 

Nonsense. Gonzalez provided what he saw, which is exactly what his job is. The decision on whether to caution or not based on what he saw and what input he received from his team was Salazar's.

So the standard is don't help the referee get the call right unless it is blatantly wrong becuase it might not look good? I don't agree. ARs/4O should give the information they have so that the R is in the position to make his decision. Nothing prevented Salazar, if he thuoght it was the right decision, from issueing the yellow even if one of his teammates disagreed. The reall issues here, I think, are more about timing and communication.

 

@RedStar91 makes an interesting point though: obviously on something soft, like a throw-in or whatever, the 4th may know the ref is wrong and not do anything, bc that will just cause more trouble than its worth. But does a yellow card reach that level? In my mind, getting the card/no card right at the 5th minute is more important than it would have been, say, in the 70th. Both Salazar and Gonzalez are known by the players, and I think demonstrating team-work in a way that they all accept that early in the game is worth waaay more than giving the message that the R is going to stick to his guns no matter what. I could see how later in the game though it might hurt the refs credibility to roll over like that though.
So the question for me: did they get it right? Seriously, I didn't see the play. Was it good he put the card back?

 

What? It's not like he commanded Salazar to put it back away.

 

In my mind the players on both sides, more or less, respected the decision made by the ref(s). That early in the game, if he was indecisive, all hell would have/could have broken loose if one or both teams still wanted to test the ref.
After the immediate protest following (to be expected to a degree), the match settled back into a decent rhythm.

Based on that it would seem to be the correct call.

 

It would have looked better if Salazar had not taken the card out, but I honestly view that as an example of very good teamwork and trust between professionals. These guys depend on each other for support. It doesn't serve either referee to with hold information or trust and it certainly doesn't serve the game.

 

Honestly, I wish there was more of this. There are four sets of eyes on the game for a reason, and while the CR makes the ultimate decision, the whole team should be working together on these things.

Nobody thinks less of Salazar because he pulled out a card and put it away. More people have issues with officials sticking to a bad call out of ego or stubbornness. Showing a willingness to get the call right looks good, not bad.

 

Look, every sport officiating crew does it. It doesn't look great when a referee throws a flag and its subsequently picked or a catch is good/or not up because another referee saw something else. One umpire signals fair, the other foul. They work as a team. As long as the call is correct, despite the moment of uncomfortable uncertainty, it is for the best.

 

Who says MLS refs are afraid to send players off for 2 cautions? So far one in each game today!

 

I think Villareal forgot Sarkodie was on a yellow. I don't think he would have booked him if he remembered. This opinion is based on his mechanics. He starts to head away and players told him that is his second.

 

Alston for sent off for a "handball" on the line in stoppage time at Chicago. Looked like it hit him in the back, but I'll reserve judgement until I can see a screencap.