USA-England refereeing (R)

[MidwestRef]

Overall, I thought the crew did only an average job. I thought the Pope foul leading to the first Richardson goal was a borderline dive and didn't deserve a free kick from 25 yards. I can't believe Alan Smith wasn't carded for persistent infringement in the first 15 minutes of the game, let alone during the entire game. I also thought that if he called the simple foul on Gibbs in the 42nd minute, there would have been no dustup between the teams. There also seemed to be several scissor tackles that were not even called fouls that went both ways.

I thought the ARs were good. They seemed to get a few close offside calls right. I also thought the referee got the US caution right in the first half and was right to caution Ashley Cole for delaying the restart. There were also a few hard-to-spot fouls that were called correctly when shown on replay.

Overall, however, if this referee was one of the best Mexico has, then the Mexican fans have no real room to blast US officiating. Hall and Stott are at least as good as this guy, and both are probably better.

[Statesman]

There were quite a few minor fouls that led to more major foul retaliations that should have been caught early on. The referee was out of his league; he was lucky the temperament of the players was for the most part a bit mild. A couple more hard tackles like the Johnson retaliation and fights would start breaking out. This match would be very easy to officiate if the referee established the tone using those first early instances to his advantage. His whistle tone was also fairly pathetic and did nothing to help his credibility.

He called the fouls that had impact on the outcome of the game, but things could have been a lot cleaner and more flowing.

[copaantl98]

The ref sucked.

[Englishref]

There were quite a few minor fouls that led to more major foul retaliations that should have been caught early on.

Totally agree. Most noticably in the build up to the Glenn Johnson and the other guy squaring up, where Andy Johnson was tackled from behind twice without a foul. It also happened three times in a row in the second half, and I was just waiting for someone to dive in, but fortunately no one did. Also agreed that Alan Smith should have been booked for PI, although I didn't really agree with some of the fouls given against him.

But what should have been an easy game to referee, especially after the dinner the two sets of players had on Thursday evening, was made to look like a real battle.

[mbar]

I was at the game and the impression in the stands was that the ref was out of his league.

Where were they from?

Also, was the foul that led to their free kick really a foul? It looked like a dive in the stands but I didn't see the replay.

Mike

[evanpemsocr]

I thought that we actually got the majority of the 50/50 calls save for the pope on johnson call.

[kevbrunton]

Personally, from the stands, I thought Pope fouled Johnson, still thought it was a foul when the replay was shown and still think it was a foul after watching the recording after I got home this evening. Pope tried to go up over Johnson to head the ball and never got close to the ball and in the process bowls him over. If he gets his head on the ball in that situation, then there's no call. But he didn't even get close to the ball. Even if you think Johnson went down easy there, the referee has got to make that call.

The one I really wanted to see on replay was Glen Johnson's chest(arm) trap in the PA in the 2nd half. He was very nearly facing me, but I was about 80 yards away. I thought it looked like arm during the game, but unfortunately, the replay was from just about the worst possible angle. There's no way the TV could show that view.

I thought that the referee let way too much go and it disrupted play because he was letting guys get whacked - a lot. Probably my biggest observation was that it seemed that with this guy, if you got ball at all, no foul - even if you clearly went through the opponent or his legs to get to the ball. Around here even if you get the ball, if you go through the legs or even go around them in a dangerous manner, you're going to get the foul called on you.

[whitehound]

Personally, from the stands, I thought Pope fouled Johnson, still thought it was a foul when the replay was shown and still think it was a foul after watching the recording after I got home this evening. Pope tried to go up over Johnson to head the ball and never got close to the ball and in the process bowls him over. If he gets his head on the ball in that situation, then there's no call. But he didn't even get close to the ball. Even if you think Johnson went down easy there, the referee has got to make that call.

The one I really wanted to see on replay was Glen Johnson's chest(arm) trap in the PA in the 2nd half. He was very nearly facing me, but I was about 80 yards away. I thought it looked like arm during the game, but unfortunately, the replay was from just about the worst possible angle. There's no way the TV could show that view.

I thought that the referee let way too much go and it disrupted play because he was letting guys get whacked - a lot. Probably my biggest observation was that it seemed that with this guy, if you got ball at all, no foul - even if you clearly went through the opponent or his legs to get to the ball. Around here even if you get the ball, if you go through the legs or even go around them in a dangerous manner, you're going to get the foul called on you.
I seem to remember reading something in the LOTG.....I dont know....maybe law 12 that describes tackles the ball making contact with the opponant before the ball as a foul.

[MidwestRef]

I seem to remember reading something in the LOTG.....I dont know....maybe law 12 that describes tackles the ball making contact with the opponant before the ball as a foul.

While Law 12 does state something to that effect, the referee still has the authority to penalize fouls even when the player does get the ball. I think that wording only deals with your regular, run-of-the-mill tackles that aren't overly careless or reckless. I had a situation like this in a game last week that led to a PK. Defensive player just lays out the offensive player, and was lucky to get the ball in the process. If the referee feels like the challenge is unfair or too careless/reckless, a foul can be called.

Actually, the senior AR called a lot of fouls for the center. Maybe that guy should have been in the middle, because he seemed to do more to keep the game under control more than it was.

[kevbrunton]

Sorry - stating it somewhat sacastically, you guys are missing my point. It is most definitely a foul if you go through legs even if you get to the ball. It can be a foul even if you get to the ball first, if you do it in a dangerous manner. Most referees around here do a very good job of call this.

The guy in the game yesterday let a LOT of these fouls go. It seemed to me, that if you got ball, not matter what else happened, he didn't see any foul.

[blech]

i agree with those (seems like virtually everyone) who thought this was not a stellar job of offiiciating. he let a lot of things go, which although smaller were fouls and which at times had players running around looking around for opportunities to retaliate. it really could have turned much worse, and i have to think that he was saved from it being a disaster only by the fact that it was a "friendly". and, even then, it still got pretty testy at spots.

as for the first goal, i thought the call on Pope was a good one. Pope was in the air and crashed into Johnson's back with his own backside, and didn't get the ball or come close. not a lot of contact, but i'm not sure why some thought that it wasn't a foul. the only real beef to be made is that calling this was inconsistent with a number of things that he let go.

[Ref Flunkie]

He did fine (like that in depth analysis?). I honestly am not smart enough I guess to see the differences between standard refereeing in international games. Now I can tell when a game is done really really well, but beyond that, the rest are the same. Oh and someone tell the US they need to actually get shots on net to score goals.

[AAGunner3]

I wanted more control in the friendly. After all, the last thing either team needed was an injury. I really felt the ref should have tightened things up and thought we were going to have a donnybrook on our hands.

[Craig P]

I can't believe Alan Smith wasn't carded for persistent infringement in the first 15 minutes of the game, let alone during the entire game.I was more surprised by the lack of anything when someone (Dempsey, I think) was scissor-tackled by Smith early on. I'm not exactly an expert here, being a lay person, but having seen your comment before watching the game, I kept an eye on Smith and didn't see anything noteworthy in terms of a string of fouls.