Noel Kenny - political move or not

[pacref]

Was the decision to remove him from the pool political or was his performance in the DC V KC match really THAT bad.

If it was a political move (catering to the players and coaches), I feel that anyone assigned to do a MLS game should refuse. For the good of the game, MLS need to learn play by the laws, not how they want to interpret them.

Is this not the second time in a few weeks that MLS has sided with the players against a referee decision?

In case you haven't read about the decision here is the link to the MLSNET page

http://www.mlsnet.com/content/02/mls0815conduct.html

[genpabloescobar]

I doubt it. Every referee at that level is assessed at every game. His performances were failing. I don't think it's any different from any other profession (except, perhaps, civil service).

[Greyhnd00]

Originally posted by pacref
Was the decision to remove him from the pool political or was his performance in the DC V KC match really THAT bad.

If it was a political move (catering to the players and coaches), I feel that anyone assigned to do a MLS game should refuse. For the good of the game, MLS need to learn play by the laws, not how they want to interpret them.

Is this not the second time in a few weeks that MLS has sided with the players against a referee decision?

In case you haven't read about the decision here is the link to the MLSNET page

http://www.mlsnet.com/content/02/mls0815conduct.html So do you think he should be untouchable??? If he sucked he knew that he would face the consequences. I would be interested in hearing about some details of the game. As a side note I watched about 10 minutes of the soccer saturday match with chicago and Hristo Stoichkoff HIT the referee with a shot on goal. ANYONE can make a mistake but it was not a quick break situation and the reff put himself in a bad spot AND he almost got hit less then five minutes later. Wonder if he passed.

[GlennAA11]

I posted the details, from my perspective, of the game in the other thread about encroaching on PKs.

[SoccerPsycho]

Part political move, cause there was quite a ruckus, but there was no denying that Noel sucked. If you fail one assessment you've got problems, so he deserved to be booted.

[writered21]

Originally posted by pacref
Was the decision to remove him from the pool political or was his performance in the DC V KC match really THAT bad.

If it was a political move (catering to the players and coaches), I feel that anyone assigned to do a MLS game should refuse. For the good of the game, MLS need to learn play by the laws, not how they want to interpret them.

Is this not the second time in a few weeks that MLS has sided with the players against a referee decision?

In case you haven't read about the decision here is the link to the MLSNET page

http://www.mlsnet.com/content/02/mls0815conduct.html

Please note Kenny was in part removed because he asked to be. That should tell you what he thought of his own performance.

Cheers,
ECM

[MassachusettsRef]

Originally posted by writered21

Please note Kenny was in part removed because he asked to be. That should tell you what he thought of his own performance.
Or possibly something about his personal life. Not many of us will ever know the exact details, so we should probably take the underlying reason (his 2 failed assessments) on face value.

That being said, I think the publicity about the move is meant as a political appeasement to fans. There was no such press release--as far as I can recall--when another referee was "suspended" earlier this year. And there certainly haven't been any in past years, even though over half a dozen referees have been removed from the pool over the past few years.

[Footer Phooter]

Originally posted by writered21


Please note Kenny was in part removed because he asked to be. That should tell you what he thought of his own performance.

Cheers,
ECM

He asked to, but he also recieved two failing grades, so he would have been removed regardless.

[superdave]

"Asked to be removed"? This is like when a coach who comes in last place resigns.

[KMJvet]

It's sort of aggrevating that MLS picks out only certain controversial calls to "explain" and pass judgement on. I've seen nearly every televised game this season and IMO there's no referree that has more to explain, or should have more failing assessments, than the two Kevins, especially Terry. It sure feels like there's a lot of politics going on.

-KMJvet

[schmuckatelli]

Originally posted by KMJvet
It's sort of aggrevating that MLS picks out only certain controversial calls to "explain" and pass judgement on. ...It sure feels like there's a lot of politics going on.

-KMJvet
That may be so, but Kenny just flat had difficulty controlling matches. The controversial calls were merely an outcropping of an overall problem.

[KMJvet]

Originally posted by schmuckatelli

That may be so, but Kenny just flat had difficulty controlling matches. The controversial calls were merely an outcropping of an overall problem.

Controversial calls can be an "outcropping" of any of a number of match-after-match reproducible problems.
Failure to control a match isn't actually the worst sin IMO. It doesn't hold a candle to failure to maintain impartiality or being enough of a professional to maintain match fitness. Kevin Terry has repeated problems with 1) fitness-associated inability to keep up with the run of play and 2) deciding calls based on a judgement of the impact of their outcome instead of just calling things consistantly based on what actually happened. Kevin Stott has a reproducible problem with bias against certain teams and players developing as a game wears on and creeping into his impartiality.
Other referrees have more minor, but consistant, issues. Erich Simmons (and the other very young ref who's name is escaping me for the moment) has a reproducible problem of never calling advantage. Most of the referrees are actually rather consistent when it comes to their weaknesses that results in controversial calls. MLS chooses to worry about some of these and make a big deal of it and yet turns a blind eye to others. I think the fact that DC United and Ray Hudson are quite vocal played a big role in the Kinney decision as opposed to his weaknesses being any more glaring than other same mistake again and again problems. Corrrect me if I'm wrong, but it wasn't failure to control matches that utlimately lead to Kinney's dismissal. It was a specific controversial call not stemming from a match control issue.

-KMJvet

[billf]

Originally posted by KMJvet


Controversial calls can be an "outcropping" of any of a number of match-after-match reproducible problems.
Failure to control a match isn't actually the worst sin IMO. It doesn't hold a candle to failure to maintain impartiality or being enough of a professional to maintain match fitness. Kevin Terry has repeated problems with 1) fitness-associated inability to keep up with the run of play and 2) deciding calls based on a judgement of the impact of their outcome instead of just calling things consistantly based on what actually happened. Kevin Stott has a reproducible problem with bias against certain teams and players developing as a game wears on and creeping into his impartiality.
Other referrees have more minor, but consistant, issues. Erich Simmons (and the other very young ref who's name is escaping me for the moment) has a reproducible problem of never calling advantage. Most of the referrees are actually rather consistent when it comes to their weaknesses that results in controversial calls. MLS chooses to worry about some of these and make a big deal of it and yet turns a blind eye to others. I think the fact that DC United and Ray Hudson are quite vocal played a big role in the Kinney decision as opposed to his weaknesses being any more glaring than other same mistake again and again problems. Corrrect me if I'm wrong, but it wasn't failure to control matches that utlimately lead to Kinney's dismissal. It was a specific controversial call not stemming from a match control issue.

-KMJvet

Kenny failed his assessment in the DC game. Period. He could have failed for a number of reasons. I don't think there is anyway to really know if he failed for one incident or if he failed because his overall control of the match was lacking. For all we know, he could have failed because he allowed too much dissent. None of us are privvy to that assessment, so we can't know with any certainty.

That said, match control is a major component of referee's performance at that level. It has been stated here before that you will almost never see a referee make a techical mistake at that level. Consitency, man-management, positioning and the like are going to play a larger role in the overall assessment. The match was not televised, but the reports seem to indicate that Kenny lost a degree of control of the match. That, in and of itself, could cause a failed assessment.

I don't see enough of Kevin Terry's games to have an opinion on his officiating. However, he passes the fitness test every year. It's a rigorous enough test that most people would puke after taking it. He's obviously passing his assessments, and fitness is a component of that, and he's maintaining a Fifa badge, so he must be doing something right. I'm interested in knowing of some instances when you feel he's made a call based on the game situation, and I ask this in all seriousness.

As far as Kevin Stott is concerned, I think he's an excellent referee. His threshold for what constitutes serious foul play might be a little lower then that of some referees, but he's done a very good job in every game I've watched him work. I don't think he's a biased referee at all. He takes his job seriously and he seems very aware of tactics and player tendencies. He also seems to have a good feel for the moment of truth in a match. The Petke-Diallo situation last year comes to mind here. When he does one of your team's games watch how quickly he gets to potentially volitie situations. It's like he has a sixth sense for sniffing thme out. Perhaps he seems to pick on certain players or teams because those players or teams don't adjust to the game he is calling. You'd have to give an example or two of his bias rather than making blanket statement, so we know where you're coming from.

All in all, the MLS assessment program is designed to develop a referee's weaknesses, so if a referee really does have problem like the ones you described above, they are worked on.

[KMJvet]

Originally posted by billf

I don't see enough of Kevin Terry's games to have an opinion on his officiating. However, he passes the fitness test every year. It's a rigorous enough test that most people would puke after taking it. He's obviously passing his assessments, and fitness is a component of that, and he's maintaining a Fifa badge, so he must be doing something right.

You're the second person to say this about his passing fitness tests and thus everything must be good enough. I don't know what's in these fitness tests, but I can tell you that Kevin Terry essentially never runs. I don't know if the fitness tests don't test the right thing, or if Terry doesn't maintain his training once the test is passed, or if he's simply lazy come game day. I suspect he could go all day at a slow jog, despite his being overweight. But the question is, does he not run because he's not training to run (training for endurance at a jogging pace and training for running are different) or it is because he's lazy.
He can do pretty well in Spartan and Naperville. But put him in a big stadium where the field's big and he's basically with the play only when it comes to him or it's slow. I think he understands how to get positioned, he just doesn't accomplish it. And soccer's not a game of simple extended jogging, you need to be training specifically for running fast for short intervals interspersed in with all that jogging some walking. I don't expect him to keep up with Carlos Ruiz or Landon Donovan on a breakaway, but he doesn't even try. I'm comparing him to other MLS officials who seem to do fine in this regard. The big, long-legged guy (Jair is his name I think) does great at this, almost to the point of getting in the way on occasion. But at least he's always working to be close enough to the play to see it well.
I think it's difficult, but I do think you can be fat and fit; but if Terry wants to do that, I think he'd better be running like everyone else. And beyond just the problem for it's own sake, I think the effect is that he guesses on a lot of calls from being too far away. I think he'd be a lot better referree if he cared about correcting this very correctable problem.
Again, I don't know if the problem is that the fitness test doesn't measure fitness for true game-required skills--but even if the fitness test is flawed, there's no stopping Terry from adjusting his training. And if Terry doesn't train once the test is passed or if he's just lazy and could run if he thought is was important, that's a problem that assessments should point out, no matter his fitness test results.

I'm interested in knowing of some instances when you feel he's made a call based on the game situation, and I ask this in all seriousness.

Okay, here are two examples that stick out in my memory. A week ago Saturday's game Quakes vs DC. Prideaux gave Landon a vigorous two-handed shove to the back after play was dead. It was seen and called by the AR. Jack and Ty were pronouncing Prideaux out of game for his stupidity.
I'm fairly sure it was seen by KT in addition to the AR because the ball was already dead. Landon embellished it a bit by not simply going down, but going down with a certain drama. Landon got a card. Fine. But there's no way Prideaux walks away with no card for that push. Except he did walk away. I suspect the reason was he was carrying a yellow already and Terry thought "a yellow means I have to give him a red and I don't want to take a tied-up, hard fought match and make one team play down a man." His decision had nothing to do with what actually happened, it had to do with what would be the impact on the match.

Another example, Quakes vs LA in LA. Carlos Ruiz attempted to score a goal by playing the ball with his hand. He was carrying a yellow. Terry saw it, but chose to call a push by Ruiz on Cannon so as to avoid giving Ruiz a second yellow and a sending off, even though the infraction was intentional handball to score a goal and no push occurred. Ignoring what happened, he found a way out that didn't result in players going off. I suspect he does this so as not to, in his mind, impact the game, or some such.... problem is of course, it impacts the game just as much because it overrides the truth of what the players actually did.

As far as Kevin Stott is concerned, I think he's an excellent referee. His threshold for what constitutes serious foul play might be a little lower then that of some referees, but he's done a very good job in every game I've watched him work. I don't think he's a biased referee at all. He takes his job seriously and he seems very aware of tactics and player tendencies. He also seems to have a good feel for the moment of truth in a match. The Petke-Diallo situation last year comes to mind here. When he does one of your team's games watch how quickly he gets to potentially volitie situations. It's like he has a sixth sense for sniffing thme out. Perhaps he seems to pick on certain players or teams because those players or teams don't adjust to the game he is calling. You'd have to give an example or two of his bias rather than making blanket statement, so we know where you're coming from.

With Kevin Stott's matches, you can predict many of the cards before they happen. You can just see it and feel it in his body language that's he's ready and wanting to get the cards out. I don't mean to imply he walks on the field wanting to be Mr Big Pants in charge center stage like Hugh Dallas. But just that once thinks happen, he lets his emotional reactions become part of his judgement.
Perhaps you see this as player's failure to read his warnings. I'd be okay with that, expect that for when the cards or calls actually come that I've sensed were coming, they don't fit the infraction. Unless I misunderstand persistant infringement, it has to be either repeated fouling by the same player or repeated fouling of the same player. But with Stott, if there's been 3 or 4 fouls in a span of 2 or 3 minutes, by either team, you can just know that whichever team he thinks is the aggressor is going to get that next card, no matter what the foul is by whom or on whom. It's a fine line, I'll grant you between knowing a player's reputation and using that to your advantage vs having a preconceived bias. But fact of the matter is, I think Stott would do better reffing in a league where he doesn't know the teams and players for awhile. Stott seems to be pretty good in other respects, but I don't like referrees that get in whistle and card happy moods. I haven't seen him do a game except as 4th official in awhile, maybe he's calmed down some.

All in all, the MLS assessment program is designed to develop a referee's weaknesses, so if a referee really does have problem like the ones you described above, they are worked on.

I'll be watching next year to see if Simmons takes care of the advantage problem, and Kevin Terry is fit and running. If the problems are gone, I'll be happy. I've seen zero Kinney games in person this year, so I can't really say if the problem with match control is as bad as people claim. I'd be sort of curious how the all refs do across the board in games involving Ray Hudson coached teams.

-KMJvet

[billf]

Well KMJvet, I can understand where you're coming from. You've obviously thought that through, so I can't argue. I think Kevin Stott is a good referee, but he is a little more strict than some. I can see how some fans might not like that. That's just his style. If you can count on know his tendancies, then you know the players can as well. They may bicker about some calls, but they at least know what to expect game to game. That's the feedback that coaches and players constantly give back to the referee program. They would like officials to be consistent game to game, not all over the map.

On Terry, as I said, fitness is a part of the assessment process. The assessor will look at how close the referee is to the calls he makes and the like, so it would be talked about. If this does come up in his assessments, then it isn't something that casues hime to fail, nor has it cost him a Fifa badge.

The fitness test that the MLS referees have to pass is called the Cooper Test. My understanding is that it's a measure of overall fitness, but I don't think it measures how well a referee can keep up with a match. If you train as you said with a mix of distance running and sprints, then you should both pass the test and be able to handle the demands of a match. The test doesn't seem hard, but it's one that would make most people at least a little uncomfortable. It consists of a 2700 meter run (just under 7 times around a track) in 12 minutes, two 50 meter runs in 7.5 seconds, and two 200 meter runs in 32 seconds. I think there are about 15 minutes given between each test.

[KMJvet]

Originally posted by billf


On Terry, as I said, fitness is a part of the assessment process. The assessor will look at how close the referee is to the calls he makes and the like, so it would be talked about. If this does come up in his assessments, then it isn't something that casues hime to fail, nor has it cost him a Fifa badge.

Perhaps part of the problem is that the assessors do this from video instead of going to the games. Video is useful for some things, but it's not always very good for how far away a ref is away from the play. There's a big difference between "he's not the screen" based on what the camera man decided to tape and he's 20 or 40 or 60 yards away.



The test doesn't seem hard, but it's one that would make most people at least a little uncomfortable. It consists of a 2700 meter run (just under 7 times around a track) in 12 minutes, two 50 meter runs in 7.5 seconds, and two 200 meter runs in 32 seconds. I think there are about 15 minutes given between each test.

It seems to me the problem with the test, at least as far as not picking up Terry's problem, is that it ought to have an element thats about 12 sprints, either 40 or 50 meters in length separating each sprint with completing the rest of track lap in about 3 minutes in time to sprint again. Then a fifteen minute break and then the 200 meter runs seem reasonable. Then going on straight to the longer run, I think something like 5000 meters in 30 minutes would be good. If it were me, that's how I'd update the Cooper test to something more soccer game appropriate.

-KMJvet

[MassachusettsRef]

Sorry for joining the discussion late, but I have a couple things to add/reinforce...

First, sorry KMVJet, but Bill's right about Stott. Stott is, in the eyes of a large portion of neutral observers, the best American referee by far. He's probably the most fit (I'm sure you notice that if you notice Terry's fitness), and, as Bill has pointed out, his ability to recognize potential volitile situations and/or matchups on the field before they develop is uncanny. Actually, Bill's analysis of Stott is dead-on, he probably has a slightly lower threshold for serious foul play than most referees in MLS (Simmons and Grady probably fit into that category too), so that means more red cards. However, with all the talk about fans wanting the ugly tackles out of the game, I think that's a good thing (I'd like to think my threshold for excessive force is around his). Also, Stott's lack of tolerance for violent play probably has something to do with the number of CONCACAF assignments he gets, as FIFA/CONCACAF appointments typically require stern, authorative refereeing.

Anyway, I know it's just your own opinion, but the perception that Stott favors or is biased against teams and players is hard to phatom. If you ever met the guy, it would probably be impossible to come away with the impression that he could be biased against a team/player. He is, and this is my own opinion granted, extremely even-handed. Any quick cards or 'overly' authorative refereeing is because he's aware of developing situations/problems on the field--not because he's out to get anyone. If you can 'see' his cautions before they happen, that's not an altogether bad thing. It shows, to me, that he's not only recognizing persistent infringement, but that he's following certain patterns and following up on verbal warning/admonishments.

Also, a minor point, and I'm not sure if you know this, but MLS referees--starting this year--get two assessments per match. First, there is an ISO (in stadium inspector) who is a local national referee. That person debriefs the referee, as any other assessor would, after the match. The second assessment is a video assessment (that's the new component) from a select group of national/FIFA assessors who have been placed into an MLS assessor's 'pool'. Men like Silva, Baharmast, Bratsis, etc., are in this small group. Some here might know the more technical aspects of the process, but I'm pretty sure there's communication between the ISO and the "assessor", so that the assessor is not just going by the video.

[KMJvet]

Originally posted by MassachusettsRef

First, sorry KMVJet, but Bill's right about Stott. Stott is, in the eyes of a large portion of neutral observers, the best American referee by far.

I'll try my level best to throw out my biases and give Stott a fresh look next year. But I still think Brian Hall is the best American referee by far. And, just to be clear, I don't mind if Stott cracks down on dangerous fouling. My problem with him is the scenerio where player A commits a bad foul and gets warned, player B commits a bad foul (but not quite cardable) and gets warned. Player C commits a wimpy foul by comparison and out comes the card even though Player C's foul was nothing compared to B's.

Can I ask a question, btw.... is a dummy play considered a play of the ball, in terms of the offsides rule if the player doesn't actually touch it? Has this ever come up? I'm curious because of DC's second goal against the Quakes this weekend. No offsides call was made, which is clearly a wrong call if Pope played the ball onto Nelson. Pope was given the assist, at least as of this weekend on the MLS site. So the official scorer thinks he touched it. I thought he touched it, but a lot of people are saying he did not. On the replay, I think one view looks like he does and one like he doesn't. So, question is, if Pope tried to play it and failed, is Nelson offside anyway because the dummy is a play on the ball even though no actual contact with the ball is made.... or does Pope failure to touch the ball, turn out to be an advantage because it draws in the defender and Nelson was onside at the time the original ball was sent in to Pope?
I was pretty pissed after the game because I think this goal/call pretty much decided the outcome and I thought it was an easy offsides to call. Now I'm not so sure it was easy because it's tricky to see if Pope actually touched it or not, unless the dummy is a play on the ball, no matter if there's actually contact.

And if you saw this game, what was your opinion of Marufo. I thought it was one of the most unevenly called games all year, in terms of what was or wasn't a card or a foul. And actually the yellow card to Donovan brings up an interesting paradox. I have no problem with Donovan getting that card because he was an idiot and launched himself into the air and threw his head back instead of just falling down like a normal person. I think Pope did foul him though. Can a referree call a trip and simulation on the same play, or do they have to pick one or the other? Seems to me, both players should have been carded there. Pope for a playing the player instead of the ball and denying a scoring chance and Landon for embellishment instead of just falling like a normal person falls? This yellow card, too, I think demonstrated Marufo's unevenness... if Donovan gets a yellow for embellishing the contact, why not Mareno or Quintanilla for the same offense.
Also, f the refs can't both call the foul and book the embellishment, this simulation-yellow thing just isn't really going to work. Because there are a lot of plays where fouls occur but the fouled players response to it involves fabrication as well.... and picking which was the worst of the two offenses just doesn't work.

-KMJvet

[GlennAA11]

Wow. Very interesting how so many can have such divergent views of all these referees. :-)

With respect the the DC-SJ game, I was there. From the in-stadium replays it looked like Pope missed the ball on his attempted header. As far as I'm concerned as long as he did not play it to Nelsen there could not be offside on that play. I'm not sure whether Ryan was offside or not if Pope did play it. The replays I saw did not give a wide enough view of the whole field. In general I thought the ARs were very consistent in giving the offense the benefit of the doubt on all the close offise plays.

As to Marufo, I thought he did a fine job. Maybe that's because my team won, but I did not notice the inconsistency you complain of. He did lose control a bit towards the end when Dayak decided to act like a 6 year old, and certainly he should have at least warned Etcheverry and then cautioned him for his constant impeding of the GK. And how he missed the egregious backpass by Ibsen to the GK in the first half is a mystery. And I wish he had handed out a caution or two for the constant fouling of Quintanilla by the whole SJ team. Landon's dive was one of the biggest flops in the history of soccer and if any dive ever deserved a caution, that was it. Jaime is more subtle when he goes down, but there are many occasions in which he really does get fouled and no call is made because he has a bit of a diving reputation. However, of all the MLS refs I've seen this year I would rank Maruffo near the top. I thought Valenzuela did a very good job last week in the DC-NJ game too.

[KMJvet]

Originally posted by GlennAA11


As to Marufo, I thought he did a fine job. Maybe that's because my team won, but I did not notice the inconsistency you complain of. He did lose control a bit towards the end when Dayak decided to act like a 6 year old, and certainly he should have at least warned Etcheverry and then cautioned him for his constant impeding of the GK. And how he missed the egregious backpass by Ibsen to the GK in the first half is a mystery. And I wish he had handed out a caution or two for the constant fouling of Quintanilla by the whole SJ team. Landon's dive was one of the biggest flops in the history of soccer and if any dive ever deserved a caution, that was it. Jaime is more subtle when he goes down, but there are many occasions in which he really does get fouled and no call is made because he has a bit of a diving reputation. However, of all the MLS refs I've seen this year I would rank Maruffo near the top. I thought Valenzuela did a very good job last week in the DC-NJ game too.

I'd don't know if the issue is so much that your team won, as it was that DC United got the advantage of the unevenness. Actually, Marufo could have and probably should have cautioned Etcheverry for running away with the ball after the whistle was blown repeatedly after a Quakes player was fouled. Marufo merely looked at his watch implying he'd add it to the stoppage time... yeah right. Etcheverry gets away with an awful lot of unsporting 'play.' John Doyle, being the dolt he is, referred to Etcheverry as "smart." Because he can get away with it, perhaps he is smart. But I'd still call it unsportsmanlike behavior. And yes, Troy did lose his cool and act like a 6-yr old. He was frustrated with Etcheverry's stupid antics. I understand Dayak's response, but he should be more professional than that and not sink to Etcheverry's level. And as you mentioned Etcheverry should have been warned for the impeding of the goal keeper.
In terms of the Donovan call, he was tripped by Pope. The game tape is pretty clear on that being a trip. No one's disputing Landon didn't make a meal of the contact by not simply falling over. Shame on Landon for trying to play the ref instead of the game.....and a well deserved card. I suspect it had something to do with Marufo's not awarding the deserved penalty in the first half. But Landon is always stupid to try to get a call by embellishment. But Pope did foul him as it's very clear on the tape. Actually, and although it doesn't matter, it looks quite intential too in that he turned his foot outward to clip Landon's ankle once the ball was gone instead of just landing naturally on his foot. I have no problem with Landon getting that card for embellishment, but I personally can't give credence to any of your other opinions if won't admit that Pope did trip Landon. Actually Landon's sin is less than Moreno's IMO because for Moreno's dive (40th minute or so, at the top of the 18 yd box) was on a foul where he almost certainly could have even stayed on his feet. I'm okay with the foul that was given to Mulrooney for the shirt pull. But I think it's highly doubtful it was enough contact to actually knock Moreno over. But Moreno through his hands in the air and fell over on purpose to try to get a free kick at the top of the box instead of just playing his ongoing advantage. This is embellishment that's at least as bad as Landon's, who was tripped and had no hope of playing through it and staying on his feet. On that play, Moreno deserved the card, not Mulrooney, which is a great example of uneven calling. I'm okay, for example, with Dayak getting a yellow card for his tackle from behind, but how does Richie Williams not get a card after his 4th foul on Mulrooney. If a 4th foul on the same player by the same player isn't persistant infringement, what is? And frankly, the no call on the PK in about 28th minute is really inexcusable by Marufo. Etcheverry tripped Donovan. That should have been a PK and a yellow card for Etcheverry. Sort of uneven not to award the PK and then later to card Donovan for embellishment. And if Marufo didn't think Etcheverry tripped Donovan, then why not a card for diving there? Did he decide Donovan went down due to divine intervention. Personally, I think the refs are afraid to make calls against DC because of the Noel Kinney situation. But in this case, the video is darn convincing that Etcheverry did trip Landon.
I'm very disappointed in Landon and Troy for their unsportsmanlike behavior, but they doesn't hold a candle to Moreno or Etcheverry in that regard. And it was Marufo's worst game of the 3 I've seen him do.

-KMJvet