And I'M telling you there are plenty of assessors out there who would have NO PROBLEM with a DFK to Houston going out. PLENTY. Post the video and we'll all see for ourselves. As Maniacal Clown said above, Augusto PUSHED, Hainault pulled (in that sequence).
there is a good angle at field level from behind or the side of the Houston GK that shows the Augusto push or abrupt cut right into Hainault to start the sequence.
Augusto gave him a forearm shimmy and Hainault responded by grabing a hold of Augusto and bringing him down. EVERY single angle I've seen it from shows the same thing.
Have to disagree. I DVR'd the play and the replays as shown on ESPN during the Seattle @ LA match. I've watched it several times in both regular speed and slow motion. The 1st infraction is the Houston defender throwing his arm over the shoulder of the DC attacker and using it to hold him back in the chest area. The DC player then responds by bringing his right arm up and outward in an attempt to shrug off his opponent's left arm. This is likely what you are seeing as a forearm push. At this point the Houston defender has been beaten as his body and feet are behind those of the attacker, so he locks onto his opponent's extending arm and starts to pull him to the ground. However, if that isn't enough, the Houston defender also makes sure that the DC attacker will not continue by thrusting out his legs with one in front and one behind his opponent's legs and pinching/clamping them around those of the attacking player to trip him. As Lalas said just prior to the start of the 2nd half, this was absolutely a foul and absolutely a red card. It was a blown call by the referee and complete garbage espoused by Peter Walton to say that it wasn't a DOGSO.
Btw I am of the opinion that Hurtado's foul against Donovan in the 14th minute of the Seattle @ LA match also should have been a red card for DOGSO. The other Seattle defender trailing the action in the middle of the field has no reasonable chance of stopping Donovan from being 1 v 1 with the GK. Sadly one of the two USA WC candidates failed to properly sanction this foul. The difference between Maruffo and Geiger couldn't be clearer than what Maruffo did today and Geiger did on Thursday. One has the courage to make the tough and correct call while the other doesn't.
I was fine with the shoulder to shoulder and glad that wasn't called, but would have understood if it was. I'm not sure that was seen.
Then I suggest you look at it again. Hainault didn't throw his arm OVER Augusto's SHOULDER...where in Gods name did you see that? Hainaults arm came across Augustos chest area just as Augusto gave Hainault a forearm shiver that created separation between the Houston and DC players. THAT was the contact which had a significant impact on play. As a result of, and in response to Augustos forearm shiver, Hainault trapped Augustos arm between his arm and body and brought the DC attacker down. It actually looks like the Houston defender is trapping Augustos arm so he himself doesn't lose his balance as a result of Augusto's forearm push. In fact, Augustos gives TWO pushes, the second one much more pronouced and obvious. It IS a push...now whether or not you want to whistle it as a foul is another matter altogether. I would put absolutely ZERO credence in anything Alexi Lalas says. I saw exactly what Maniacal Clown saw. FWIW, Salazar commented later that he didn't think there was a foul there.
People have no clue about 4 Ds directive. We as USSF sanctioned refs have to follow that directive. It is a lousy directive and everyone knows I hate that directive. We can't turn rogue and start letting our emotions make the call. Both of those fouls above DID NOT meet the 4 Ds criteria. It met 3 of the 4: Hainault had a defender nearby to bail him out and Donovan didn't have direction. Yes, they were both reds in my opinion if this was a WC game. But this is MLS where USSF sanctions the ref training and those have to follow those guidelines set forth. Sorry, it is what it is.
I am calling the suicide hotline. I got put on an ignore list! Oh no what do I do? I can't take this anymore.
Isn't this a referee forum? Where'd all the ref's go? video of the play http://www.mlssoccer.com/matchcenter/2012-11-11-hou-v-dc/highlights/205889 Sorry, but from my admittedly biased view it was a foul...Salazar can let the play go for the upper body wrangling but once Hainault scissors Augusto's legs there has to be a call (BTW, Augusto's right arm goes out because Hainault is grabbing it). And IMHO the defenders are not close enough to become involved in the play...or not close enough to get there before Augusto had an opportunity to take a shot inside the box. No call is just wetting the bed. And as always seems to happen when refs wet the bed, it comes back to haunt them, with Hainault scoring the first goal after the break...he didn't want to adversely affect the game by making a big call and refusing to make the call affected the game.
This is exactly what I hate in REF forums.......everyone who is pining for a red here is a DC United supporter. NOT a coincidence. It really irritates me when people just plain make shit up, even with a videotape available. I mean flat out making garbage up. I have NO IDEA where anyone sees Hainault initially "holding" Augusto...their arms go out almost simultaneously, not around either ones neck or shoulders, but ACROSS their respective bodies. The difference being that Augusto quite clearly thrusts his forearm into Hainault and it creates momentary spearation between the two...and THEN Hainault traps Augustos arm and brings him down. Any "leg scissor" by Hainault is a result of both players tumbling and their legs getting tangled, not any deliberate or intentional attempt to leg scissor. In any event, the so called "leg scissor" is irrelevant as the initial contact by Augusto first and then Hainault preceded the leg entaglement and Augusto was already on his way down when the legs got tangled. In any event, that wasn't my point. The point is that Salazar could have called a foul going out OR could have called a foul and pulled a red. Not doing anything was the worst possible alternative, IMO. My personal opinion is that he got stuck behind the players, not wide enough, and didn't see the actual pushing, pulling and tugging. Hence, the no call. Nonetheless, to claim that Salazar (of all people) is afraid of making a critical and game changing call (see the 2012 Open Cup Final) is patently absurd and the proponents of such a concept should be ashamed of themselves. especially if they claim to be referees.
Look I can be biased and still be right. And I felt like I specifically acknowledged the possibility that your analysis was correct. I wrote that once Hainault took out Augusto's legs a call had to be made...I didn't say which one had to be made...I later said in my opinion that it should be a foul against Hainault, and I still think so because, unlike you, I am of the opinion that the legs tangling was not just the natural fall of a player but of a decision that "I'm falling and outside the box and no way this player is getting through" (a red card and foul OUTSIDE the box to prevent a 2-0 deficit, certainly a reasonable alternative to a professional at that point). [as an aside, there if the whole line of argument that a foul does not have to be intentional to be a foul. Intent is only part of the formulation of one offense and in that only part of the equation...the offense is 'tripping' not 'tripping and really meaning to do it,' but I digress] And so I'm in agreement with you that the worst thing Salazar could have done was nothing...and that is why I say he wet the bed. Because like it or not, at this level judgements of performance leave out what a ref or player meant to do and focus only on one thing, the result.
You know, we're all biased, the problem is when we don't recognize it. I've been reading you on this board for years, and don't know if I've ever seen any doubt expressed in you're posts. While we may benefit from your many years of experience in the game but it amazes me that little of what you say recognizes the one absolute truth I have learned in 40 years in this game... ...that almost every situation is complex and can be interpreted in different ways and that even the smallest difference in angle of view or perceived intent of the players involved can totally shade the way an incident is seen. But I'm sure you're absolute certainty has served you well.
PRO GM Walton, gives his take: http://www.mlssoccer.com/news/artic...lton-explains-contentious-play-hou-dc-1st-leg I would expect foul and send-off, but Walton wants yellow.
I call garbage on Salazar. The replay even shows his position should have made the scissor action more than readily apparent while the arm pull would have been screened. That's just a terrible non-call. There's also no way the defender at the bottom of the screen getting there in time to prevent a 1v1. That's a CYA post.
You and NC Soccer United seem to be on a bit of a crusade of late about how biased fans are in here and how much you hate it. If you hate it so much, you are welcome to stop visiting the forum--there are several other places online that are referee-online. If that's what you seek, then that's where you should post. This forum has always been part of the larger BigSoccer site and part of its intention is to educated non-referee fans--that fact has never been disguised. You two posting about how much their participation annoys you is not welcoming and it narrows the purpose of this board. Will their be some biased fans in here? Sure. And we've driven them out in the past pretty easily. But just because someone isn't a ref and has a different viewpoint as you doesn't mean you have to attack. Plus, to this incident, you are exaggerating. Everyone "pining for a red here" is not a DC United supporter. I don't think MrRC is. I know ChelseaSounder and tog aren't. I know AndyMoss isn't (though, admittedly, he gives both options, which is red or nothing--he disagrees with you, however, about the notion of a foul coming out). Also, I'm not. I think it's a red. I suspect a lot of other referees think it's a red but feel no strong need to criticize Salazar on a judgment call (that was my position until this post, which was basically arguing that only DCU fans think it's a red). Do I see what you're talking about, that there was a coming together that might have been initiated by a DCU player? Yes. Do I think that, given the subsequent totality of events, a foul coming out could be justified or sold? No way. If Salazar felt that the coming together produced a collision where the Houston player went down and then legs got tangled, resulting in no call... well, that's his prerogative and that's what he called (it's the "nothing," referred to in Andy's two options). Personally, I think the Houston player brings him down with his legs. And if that's a foul, then it's a red. I'm not sure what Walton said on television, but he has remarks quoted on the MLS site. They are here: http://www.mlssoccer.com/news/artic...lton-explains-contentious-play-hou-dc-1st-leg Notice the words he uses to avoid giving a concrete answer. "I would've expected..." And "Looking in real time (said this twice)..." "Could have influenced the outcome of that particular play..." He goes to great lengths to say that it could have been a yellow if called and bases his opinion, explicitly, upon what he personally saw in real time. Watch that replay and pause it when the incident occurred. At best--at absolutely best--the nearest Houston defender is 8 yards away and the DC attacker has a straighter path toward goal. The notion that said Houston defender would count as "covering" is a joke when you look at it on replay. That's a red card in the World Cup (if it's a foul) and that's a red card under the dreaded 4 Ds (if it's a foul). There's no distinction here. I see no legitimate argument for a yellow card. And I'm no DC United fan.
I had similar thoughts here. But I don't think I've ever seen a red given that wide on the field for DOGSO. I also think there's a chance--maybe not a reasonable one, but a chance--that the other Seattle defender could have covered if he went straight toward Donovan, or if Donovan slowed up his dribble to measure a shot from angle, which he might have, as he advanced toward goal. I'm torn on this one. I think a case could be made for DOGSO. But, 14 minutes into a match where no one really expected red? I think it's a bit much to criticize Marrufo here for that. I also think it's a stretch to say Geiger would have given it.
I don't think anyone is making stuff up. There was a foul, and it was not called by Salazar, maybe because he didn't see it, or maybe because he thought it was trifling. The foul could be called on the arm "work", or it could be called on the scissors trip by Hainault. The arm movements can be considered a foul or not, and they were shielded from Salazar's view. The scissors trip are a foul at any level. As he is falling, Hainault has his right leg in front of Augusto's and his left leg behind. Hainault closes his legs, trapping Augusto's right leg. There is no way that is not a foul. Salazar might have thought that both players were already falling and neither one could get to the ball and deemed the foul trifling. Or he just didn't see it.
What a rebuke! Whatever, MassRef. All I was providing was a context of why Salazar and Marrufo didn't issue reds by using 4D's directive and it is quite obviously flawed if you haven't followed me enough. Get of your high horse.
I honestly think he didn't see it. I just can't understand why he wouldn't, unless he glanced over at the AR for some reason right as contact was initiated.