You do fail to understand. I believe the MLS has taken this Committee refereeing by Vote after the fact further than any other league. This will hurt the league as a whole and for me at least drive away people who love the game for what it is. If I want to watch the NFL with it's reviews I will certainly do that, but leave soccer alone.
But how is the Cardenas decision relevant. There have been more than a dozen fines/suspensions by the DC, then one call goes the other way and you're complaining about refereeing by vote?At this rate, there will be 3 successful appeals of suspensions throughout the season. That's on par with the rates around the rest of the world. The DC is completely irrelevant to this thread.
I'm pointing out there are effectively 2 committees judging referees decisions after games agreed? I'm saying that this for me is too many cooks and is going to ruin the game for me and other purests. It might also as in the NFL lead to referees being too scared to give a red card when it's deserved because a committee with instant replay gets to decide he was wrong and consequently effect his future reffing in that league. This is also troubling because the Commissioner has volunteered the MLS to be a test subject for Instant Replay in soccer. I can't see that doing anything but wholly ruining the game for me.
Don't ref's want to get things correct? If a ref makes a mistake that can effect games beyond the one they are reffing what is wrong with there being a mechanism for teams to get their player back? I don't get your argument. Makes no sense to me. And refs will get criticized regardless. Suspending players, or overturning red cards doesn't change that one bit. They would still get blasted by fans and the media without these mechanisms in place. And they have their internal review process as well. That won't change regardless. So this shouldn't effect Refs one bit. I would think Refs would actually appreciate the fact there is now a way for a bad call of theirs to be overturned. Or for a player to get suspended for a tackle that was worse than it initially looked or that the ref crew just plain missed. Just comes across as selfish if a Ref is going to be upset over a red card they issued being overturned. They are not worried enough about the integrity of the game if all they care about is how they look rather than getting things right. Getting things right is GOOD. Don't know how people can complain about that.
1. No. Not agreed. There is 1 committee reviewing games (the DC). There is one committee reviewing appeals. One committee has the power to hand out discipline, the other committee has the power to rescind discipline. One committee has watched/reviewed every minute of every game this season. The other has reviewed no more than 30 seconds of one game. They're completely different committees that don't serve the same purpose, nor do they overlap in their duties. 2. Are you a referee? Do you constantly doubt every decision you make because of past mistakes? If so, you might want to consider another hobby. A good referee learns from his/her mistakes, but doesn't allow those mistakes to seed doubt. I would hope all MLS referees are capable of using mistakes to their advantage.
So I suppose I'm the only one that doesn't like the direction we're going (I'm not). Maybe you'll dislike it when the referee has to check a replay for 2 mins on a TV at the side of the field.
except that isn't what is happening right now. I am perfectly fine with what they are doing right now.
There are Two committees judging referees decisions after games. Yes I am a referee, a very experienced referee don't make assumptions about my ability or that it's a "hobby" to me.
Fine, I am not and I'm not the only one. Also this is a slippery slope. Soon there will be 8 referees and challenge flags, and I don't like that.
I think you are over reacting. That will not happen. Besides, how much of a purist are you? How far back do you go with regards to the rules of the game?
And right now, nothing is being ruined. Again, the game has changed throughout history. Changes that have effected the speed and continuity of the game. So how much of a "Purist" are you? How far back do you go before you start agreeing with the changes made to the game?
The only changes I can recall throughout the Laws is making it faster. Limits on keeper time, punishing time wasting. Video Replay which the Head of the MLS says he wants will make the game slower. And your opinion is that nothing is being ruined. My opinion is that having committees judge after games with replays and still images what action should've been taken is wrong and it ruins the game.
Changes? http://www.fifa.com/classicfootball/history/index.html http://www.fifa.com/classicfootball/history/law/summary.html Refs used to not even be allowed on the field. I am sorry. Looking at the history of the game, I find your argument laughable. Especially considering all these "changes" do is allow for us to get things right AFTER the fact. Not actually interrupt the game or change how it is played. And the idea behind Goal Line technology is to have a sensor so they know the ball crossed the line. Not so they can stop play to go and look at a video in order to see if it did.
I'm not talking about Goal Line technology...I'm talking about instant video replay which the head of the MLS has said he wants in the league and has told FIFA that they'd like to trial it first. That will most certainly add time to the game so we're simply talking about two different things. You are choosing to ignore my points, fine. Any of those changes make the game slower? I don't see many or any that do. The game has progressively gotten faster as athletes have gotten faster. The game is faster all the time...I want it to continue that trend and I want people to accept rulings on the field. The referee is a part of the game.
Your initial complaints in this thread were about the committees and "lawyerball" Who is ignoring who? You said you were a "purist" Clearly you are in favor of the game as it is played now over the way it was played 60 years ago. And you would be in favor of changes to the game that get the game going even faster... You don't sound like much of a purist to me. So just to clarify. What was your point again regarding the DisCo and the red card appeals process? Also, the game can be played without a referee. It can't be played without players. Look at the reasoning why the "referee" was first allowed onto the field. It was to take the decisions out of the teams captains hands in order to speed things up. The referee is there to help facilitate the game and to apply the laws of the game. The referee is a tool to help the game. Just as instant replay could potentially be if done right. Same with goal line technology. Same with these committees.
I think we're talking apples and oranges here. You're unhappy with instant video replay, but that hasn't happened and is unlikely to happen anytime soon, so it really doesn't have anything to do with the issue at hand.
I want to make a point about the level of game here. In a rec league, I could see this being a red card, whether he pulled out of the challenge or not. A rec league player could not be expected to control himself to that high a degree. But in a professional first division, I think you have to give the degree of doubt in terms of player control in favor of the player. Likewise plays that you might consider clumsy in a rec league may be considered reckless in MLS, because you expect the players to exercise a greater degree of control.
This is an interesting argument, but I would say that the rules have to be consistently applied from the World Cup to a rec league.
No, Ives (and others) did this process a disservice with their earlier reporting of what's at risk. I've now seen the comments about risk in multiple forums and the actual rules aren't what's being discussed: http://pressbox.mlssoccer.com/content/appeal-review-red-card-decision For a normal questionable red card the appeal is either successful and the card is overturned or the appeal is denied and the card is upheld. Teams get two denied appeals a season, once that hit their second denied appeal they can't appeal any more red cards that season. If the Committee determines that the appeal was frivolous then and only then is their grater risk. At that point the bond is forfeited, the team loses the ability for any appeals for the remainder of the current season and the next season, and the player's suspension is raised from 1 game to 2 games for the card being appealed. I assume something like Mullan's red card for tackling Zakuani would fall into the frivolous category if it were to be appealed. On this one I think its pretty clear the only thing the Revs risked was burning one of their two denied appeals for the season. I doubt anyone would have thought it was frivolous and apparently the Committee agreed. On another note, having just read the thread from start to finish, I think NC Soccer United might owe an apology to some people in this forum, given that the Committee pretty much proved that those people questioning the decision and wondering if it would be overturned weren't wearing "homer glasses".
Big difference between someone who has been on bigsoccer for 12 years and one has has been here for 12 months. Thanks for the details on the appeal process.
So the committee unanimously decided that not only was the red card not worthy, but the foul itself was the incorrect call. Interesting.
Not necessarily. They could have decided for #1 that it was a foul but did not involve excessive force, and therefore #2 the disciplinary sanction was not appropriate.
