View Full Version : MLS deems Jaime's red-card vs Metros unjustified -&- USSF weigh in too
gocaps
22 Aug 2005, 02:41 PM
It's not an official admission of error, but it's something... (http://www.mlsnet.com/MLS/news/mls_news.jsp?ymd=20050822&content_id=40631&vkey=news_mls&fext=.jsp)especially since it comes from US Soccer's Manager of Referee Development and Education.
MassachusettsRef
22 Aug 2005, 02:50 PM
Thought you guys might be interested in this, which I haven't seen discussed yet on the board (my apologies if it has been):
http://www.mlsnet.com/MLS/news/mls_news.jsp?ymd=20050822&content_id=40631&vkey=news_mls&fext=.jsp
Here's my take on the article, which I posted on the referee board (so my apologies if it's a bit bogged down with ref-jargon):
http://www.bigsoccer.com/forum/showthread.php?t=235209
MassachusettsRef
22 Aug 2005, 02:52 PM
For your information, here's the last USSF memorandum about DOGSO in MLS:
http://www.ussoccer-data.com/docfile/ogsomemo_film.htm
MassachusettsRef
22 Aug 2005, 02:59 PM
Sorry, started another thread about this without seeing this one. Feel free to delete mine or merge them.
McOwen
22 Aug 2005, 03:01 PM
Funny, the consensus seemed to be both calls should have been REDs and that the Metros were given a break when their guy wasnt sent off for the tackle on Carroll.
Glad to see MLS can confuse the issue further and say neither should have recieved a red :D
Sundevil9
22 Aug 2005, 03:10 PM
Funny, the consensus seemed to be both calls should have been REDs and that the Metros were given a break when their guy wasnt sent off for the tackle on Carroll.
Glad to see MLS can confuse the issue further and say neither should have recieved a red :D
Well, I think those views are colored by the order that they happened. Jamie's incident was first, we saw that the ref interpreted that as a red card offense, so we reasoned that the BC incident on the other end was fairly similar and also worthy of a red.
If they had happened in the reverse order, we would have likely argued that neither were red card offenses.
gnat
22 Aug 2005, 03:14 PM
Funny, the consensus seemed to be both calls should have been REDs and that the Metros were given a break when their guy wasnt sent off for the tackle on Carroll.
Glad to see MLS can confuse the issue further and say neither should have recieved a red :D
I for one was calling for a red against the Mutts as a "if you do one, you better damn well do the other". I never thought Moreno deserved the red (yellow maybe, but not red).
Now MLS needs to step up and suspend the Ref as well as make him pay Moreno's fine back (I hear it is still quite warm in hell though) :rolleyes:
-dave
Pints
22 Aug 2005, 03:17 PM
OK, so what happens now?
Sundevil9
22 Aug 2005, 03:24 PM
OK, so what happens now?
We bitch and moan like it happend yesterday.
But other than that, nothing.
Th4119
22 Aug 2005, 03:38 PM
Can they go back and retroactively give Thornton a suspension for his mauling of Moreno?
Yeah, I'm still mad.
MassachusettsRef
22 Aug 2005, 03:50 PM
Can they go back and retroactively give Thornton a suspension for his mauling of Moreno?
Yeah, I'm still mad.Very good point, and kind of what I was getting at in my post in the referee forum.
Very quietly, USSF admitted that the Thornton incident was completely botched. That was a violent play that had serious ramifications for the match and the season. Yet no public mea culpa and no hanging the referee in question out to dry.
In this instance, USSF decides to say that a very subjective decision (which most people on Bigsoccer agreed with) was wrong. Why did USSF go out of it's way in this instance, especially after: A) it had just emphasised DOGSO as a point of concern, B) there was no real uproar over the call at the time and C) Vaughn had, for the most part, a damn good game
This just doesn't make any sense to me.
GlennAA11
22 Aug 2005, 04:37 PM
Maybe some one should ask TPTB. Believe it or not I have actually sent email to the MLS referee honchos in the past and they have answered. Not sure if they still do that or if they even have an email link on the website anymore, but MassRef raises some excellent questions that are crying out to be answered.
Pints
22 Aug 2005, 04:40 PM
Could it have anything to do with Guevara and Ruiz discussing the poor reffing so publicly and Guevara threatening again for the umpteenth time that he would leave the league because of it? And if nothing is going to be done to than what is the point in making these statements in the first place?
I have given up on understanding what the USSF and MLS do exactly. Not getting good air time for a US / Mexico match in the US for instance. But that is another whole piece of USSF poopoo.
gocaps
22 Aug 2005, 04:45 PM
I have given up on understanding what the USSF and MLS do exactly. Not getting good air time for a US / Mexico match in the US for instance. But that is another whole piece of USSF poopoo.
The oddest part is that it was a USSF official's article, but on the MLS website.
And Thamlin, you're right. It's astonishing to me that a call on a play that was by their own admission close - it says so right there in the article - is being reprimanded while the Thornton no-brainer enormo-botch gets quietly tucked away.
RMDad
22 Aug 2005, 04:53 PM
So what does this do for Jaime's had to sit out a match erroneously?
I doub't that match will be replayed.
Again USSF falls short, by failing to announce disciplinary action against the Ref involved.
And I REALLY dont want to hear some ref lovers' 2 page BS answer, a public letter of apology to Jaime, and a head on a platter will suffice.
Mark
MattMathai
22 Aug 2005, 05:12 PM
OK, so what happens now?
What now? Let me tell you what now. I'ma call a coupla hard, pipe-hittin' ***s, who'll go to work on the homes here with a pair of pliers and a blow torch. You hear me talkin', hillbilly boy? I ain't through with you by a damn sight. I'ma get medieval on your ass.
Funkfoot
22 Aug 2005, 06:44 PM
Well he already served the suspension, and we won the match anyway. But Jaime should not have to forfeit his pay if MLS is saying the suspension was wrong.
TOTC
22 Aug 2005, 06:45 PM
OK, so what happens now?
Global workers' revolution?
Stan Collins
22 Aug 2005, 07:18 PM
What now? Let me tell you what now. I'ma call a coupla hard, pipe-hittin' ***s, who'll go to work on the homes here with a pair of pliers and a blow torch. You hear me talkin', hillbilly boy? I ain't through with you by a damn sight. I'ma get medieval on your ass. Yeah, but what now between us?
BigKris
22 Aug 2005, 09:32 PM
Yeah, but what now between me and you?
Oh. THAT what now. There is no me and you. Two things: don't go tellin' no one about this. This ********'s between me and you and the soon-to-be-living-the-rest-of-his-short-ass-life-in-agonizing-pain, Mr Rapist here. It aint nobody else's business. Two: you leave town tonight. And when you're gone, you stay gone. You lost your Los Angeles privilages.