Statesman
25 Apr 2004, 06:18 PM
I like to compare the performance of a referee to one of a goalkeeper. Even though a goalkeeper's team might win the game, what he really seeks is a clean sheet. So too the referee desires the "clean sheet": the game where every call is made, none are missed, and the management is excellent.
Althougt Stott might win the game, so to speak, I have yet to see him come away with a clean sheet. Today was no exception.
There was a very clear handling in the penalty area by a Revs defender that was missed. Later, Gavin was making a run down the wing and slide tackled down to the ground by a defender with no touch of the ball by either, only to have the defender get back up and retrieve the ball to send it downfield. Gavin in the meantime was left to slide off the field over the goalline. No call was made, and the foul was perhaps worthy of a caution. This was probably more the fault of the assistant referee than Stott as he was right there. Maybe he saw a beautiful woman in the audience and could not keep his eyes off her chest -- but he certainly wasn't watching what happened.
In the second half, Heaps had the ball passed to him just outside the attacking 18. He inexplicable jumped over the top of the ball and fell to the ground. Guevara was the only Metrostar nearby and made no motion whatsoever. He just stood there. It was very clear that Heaps anticipated a challenge by Guevara and committed himself to diving. What he didn't anticipate was Guevara not even trying to tackle for the ball. So instead what we saw was him jumping and falling over all by himself. And yet Stott still awarded the free kick. It is painfully clear Stott did not actually see what happened, but blew his whistle on speculation -- a cardinal sin for referees.
I am all for talking to the players and using your personality instead of simply reverting to cautions when you can. However, there is a time and a place where a player needs to be cautioned, plain and simple. This happened three times in the game, and yet Stott chose to talk instead. He is becoming notorious for not using the cards. He is good at talking to the player -- perhaps the best at doing so in the MLS -- but he needs to use better judgment on when to pull out the card. It is not consistent with how the same offenses are dealt with in other games, and in a league where cautions accumulate this can be important for disciplinary action.
Eric Wynalda actually made an insightful comment during Terry Vaughn's masterful performance. He likened the showing of a yellow card to the breaking of a seal -- you try to keep the seal on as long as you can, and yet there comes a time where it needs to be broken and the card shown. Talk to the players, warn them of the consequences, and then when the time comes to finally show the card it really means a lot. The proper use of a caution is a beautiful thing when done correctly. It can be a very awesome tool for game management. Personally I feel that Stott talks and talks, and misses the perfect opportunity to create that aura of awesomeness -- the one moment where the referee stands tall over the player and raises that card over his head. The reaction is one of "yeah ok, whatever" instead of "man, you just got BUSTED."
So, while Stott did "win" today's game, and there was nothing too controversial, I still find myself a little unsatisfied by his mistakes. Particulary the handling incident, and the dive with no contact. For a referee who has achieved his 100th game in the league, he needs to work on polishing his game to achieve that clean sheet and not just be satisfied with the win.
Althougt Stott might win the game, so to speak, I have yet to see him come away with a clean sheet. Today was no exception.
There was a very clear handling in the penalty area by a Revs defender that was missed. Later, Gavin was making a run down the wing and slide tackled down to the ground by a defender with no touch of the ball by either, only to have the defender get back up and retrieve the ball to send it downfield. Gavin in the meantime was left to slide off the field over the goalline. No call was made, and the foul was perhaps worthy of a caution. This was probably more the fault of the assistant referee than Stott as he was right there. Maybe he saw a beautiful woman in the audience and could not keep his eyes off her chest -- but he certainly wasn't watching what happened.
In the second half, Heaps had the ball passed to him just outside the attacking 18. He inexplicable jumped over the top of the ball and fell to the ground. Guevara was the only Metrostar nearby and made no motion whatsoever. He just stood there. It was very clear that Heaps anticipated a challenge by Guevara and committed himself to diving. What he didn't anticipate was Guevara not even trying to tackle for the ball. So instead what we saw was him jumping and falling over all by himself. And yet Stott still awarded the free kick. It is painfully clear Stott did not actually see what happened, but blew his whistle on speculation -- a cardinal sin for referees.
I am all for talking to the players and using your personality instead of simply reverting to cautions when you can. However, there is a time and a place where a player needs to be cautioned, plain and simple. This happened three times in the game, and yet Stott chose to talk instead. He is becoming notorious for not using the cards. He is good at talking to the player -- perhaps the best at doing so in the MLS -- but he needs to use better judgment on when to pull out the card. It is not consistent with how the same offenses are dealt with in other games, and in a league where cautions accumulate this can be important for disciplinary action.
Eric Wynalda actually made an insightful comment during Terry Vaughn's masterful performance. He likened the showing of a yellow card to the breaking of a seal -- you try to keep the seal on as long as you can, and yet there comes a time where it needs to be broken and the card shown. Talk to the players, warn them of the consequences, and then when the time comes to finally show the card it really means a lot. The proper use of a caution is a beautiful thing when done correctly. It can be a very awesome tool for game management. Personally I feel that Stott talks and talks, and misses the perfect opportunity to create that aura of awesomeness -- the one moment where the referee stands tall over the player and raises that card over his head. The reaction is one of "yeah ok, whatever" instead of "man, you just got BUSTED."
So, while Stott did "win" today's game, and there was nothing too controversial, I still find myself a little unsatisfied by his mistakes. Particulary the handling incident, and the dive with no contact. For a referee who has achieved his 100th game in the league, he needs to work on polishing his game to achieve that clean sheet and not just be satisfied with the win.