Join Now
"This video is no longer available"
All of us owe a debt of gratitude to loyal BigSoccer member "bradd" who managed to preserve actual footage of the Blanco incident prior to it's mysterious disappearance:'
As to the original clip, Major League Soccer really needs to learn how to leave well enough alone.
When Blanco's meltdown finally happened, it wasn't even on their watch. League officials had to know that, given his history, it was only a matter of time before something like this happened, and surely dreaded the inevitable day when they would be forced to drop the sword of Damocles smack on the head of one of their biggest, most popular stars.
Instead, the man had the courtesy to indulge his road show Rage O'Rama in a US Open Cup match, thereby making the whole thing USSF's problem. MLS was off the hook.
The only time their name even came up was when DC United decided - apparently on their own, contrary to early reports - that they would be sending the video on to MLS HQ where it would likely be subject to much giggling and rewinding during coffee breaks but not much else.
(Still capture is from Luis Arroyave's EXCELENT POST ON THIS TOPIC which I highly recommend)
Then a funny thing happened. A full 18 hours after the brief video clip which showed Blanco laying an apparently pretty girlish smack on Clyde Simms appeared on YouTube, it was gone.
In it's place was the notation: "This video is no longer available due to a copyright claim by Major League Soccer, LLC"
Say what?
Now it's true that YouTube is routinely and tirelessly patrolled by minions of the English Premier League who zealously file DMCA claims on any video which dares to show even a smidgen of EPL footage. Ditto UEFA during Euro 2008 and FIFA during the World Cup.
MLS has always been different. YouTube is replete with MLS videos, game footage, compilations and various player highlights and hijinks set to every piece of bad music recorded in the last ten years, with the possible exception of Push th' Little Daisies by Ween.
Thank God.
Yet out of the blue, here they are demanding the takedown of a video clip from a game which isn't even one of theirs, presumably based on the somewhat shaky grounds that since they own the uniform designs that are depicted they have the right to limit the exposure of said uniforms in ways they don't much care for. Like, for example, assault and battery.
Of course we'll never know for sure just what their claim is, since no reporter will ever ask them and no MLS suit will ever say.
But the strangest thing about the league's ham-fisted foray into the Wonderful World of Censorship, the thing that more than anything makes you scratch your head is this:
In 2008, mlsnet.com implemented the "Quickkicks" video summaries of each game. Of note here is that, along with every goal and every big save and all the rest, they include clips of every card, yellow or red, from every single match. Many times, they repeat the incident in slow-motion so we can fully savor the carnage.
(Just as an aside, in case you didn't know, MLS Quickkicks clips can be embedded in BigSoccer posts, just like YouTube clips.)
So if this had actually been an MLS match, we wouldn't need a YouTube clip of this incident: MLS WOULD HAVE POSTED IT THEMSELVES.
For example, here's an ugly incident from last week that the league currently has available on their own website
Yet they have demanded that a similar clip from a game which wasn't under league auspices be taken down. Very, very odd.
It is also being reported that DCU does in fact have some video of Blanco head butting a DC official, although the Fire is describing it as BLANCO'S "FOREHEAD GRAZING THE CHEEK OR JAW AREA" of said DC official.
Um. Sure, Sounds likely.
It does seem fair to add though that it is highly unusual, even unheard of, for a "DC official" to trot over to the Fire bench and start hassling Blanco about leaving the field.
It is the referee's responsibility to see that he excuses himself from the field, and normally a coach or other staff member from the player's own team escorts him to the locker room.
I cannot conceive of why some United staffer would have taken it upon himself to start jawing at the guy, and that leaves aside the fact that it's a clear violation of the rules for anyone from DC to be in the Fire's technical area.
The USSF Disciplinary Committee will be meeting "in the near future" (my money is on Christmas 2009) to decide on what action to take. Which sounds ominous, but in fact about all they can do is ban the guy from US Open Cup matches for a while, a somehwat less than Draconian punishment.
However all that shakes out, it's obvious that MLS wants this swept under the rug. And while I can understand their desire to prevent, say, Jim Rome from doing 30 seconds on "soccer violence" with this tape, the cat is out of the bag, boys.
As to the original clip, Major League Soccer really needs to learn how to leave well enough alone.
When Blanco's meltdown finally happened, it wasn't even on their watch. League officials had to know that, given his history, it was only a matter of time before something like this happened, and surely dreaded the inevitable day when they would be forced to drop the sword of Damocles smack on the head of one of their biggest, most popular stars.
Instead, the man had the courtesy to indulge his road show Rage O'Rama in a US Open Cup match, thereby making the whole thing USSF's problem. MLS was off the hook.
The only time their name even came up was when DC United decided - apparently on their own, contrary to early reports - that they would be sending the video on to MLS HQ where it would likely be subject to much giggling and rewinding during coffee breaks but not much else.
(Still capture is from Luis Arroyave's EXCELENT POST ON THIS TOPIC which I highly recommend)
Then a funny thing happened. A full 18 hours after the brief video clip which showed Blanco laying an apparently pretty girlish smack on Clyde Simms appeared on YouTube, it was gone.
In it's place was the notation: "This video is no longer available due to a copyright claim by Major League Soccer, LLC"
Say what?
Now it's true that YouTube is routinely and tirelessly patrolled by minions of the English Premier League who zealously file DMCA claims on any video which dares to show even a smidgen of EPL footage. Ditto UEFA during Euro 2008 and FIFA during the World Cup.
MLS has always been different. YouTube is replete with MLS videos, game footage, compilations and various player highlights and hijinks set to every piece of bad music recorded in the last ten years, with the possible exception of Push th' Little Daisies by Ween.
Thank God.
Yet out of the blue, here they are demanding the takedown of a video clip from a game which isn't even one of theirs, presumably based on the somewhat shaky grounds that since they own the uniform designs that are depicted they have the right to limit the exposure of said uniforms in ways they don't much care for. Like, for example, assault and battery.
Of course we'll never know for sure just what their claim is, since no reporter will ever ask them and no MLS suit will ever say.
But the strangest thing about the league's ham-fisted foray into the Wonderful World of Censorship, the thing that more than anything makes you scratch your head is this:
In 2008, mlsnet.com implemented the "Quickkicks" video summaries of each game. Of note here is that, along with every goal and every big save and all the rest, they include clips of every card, yellow or red, from every single match. Many times, they repeat the incident in slow-motion so we can fully savor the carnage.
(Just as an aside, in case you didn't know, MLS Quickkicks clips can be embedded in BigSoccer posts, just like YouTube clips.)
So if this had actually been an MLS match, we wouldn't need a YouTube clip of this incident: MLS WOULD HAVE POSTED IT THEMSELVES.
For example, here's an ugly incident from last week that the league currently has available on their own website
Yet they have demanded that a similar clip from a game which wasn't under league auspices be taken down. Very, very odd.
It is also being reported that DCU does in fact have some video of Blanco head butting a DC official, although the Fire is describing it as BLANCO'S "FOREHEAD GRAZING THE CHEEK OR JAW AREA" of said DC official.
Um. Sure, Sounds likely.
It does seem fair to add though that it is highly unusual, even unheard of, for a "DC official" to trot over to the Fire bench and start hassling Blanco about leaving the field.
It is the referee's responsibility to see that he excuses himself from the field, and normally a coach or other staff member from the player's own team escorts him to the locker room.
I cannot conceive of why some United staffer would have taken it upon himself to start jawing at the guy, and that leaves aside the fact that it's a clear violation of the rules for anyone from DC to be in the Fire's technical area.
The USSF Disciplinary Committee will be meeting "in the near future" (my money is on Christmas 2009) to decide on what action to take. Which sounds ominous, but in fact about all they can do is ban the guy from US Open Cup matches for a while, a somehwat less than Draconian punishment.
However all that shakes out, it's obvious that MLS wants this swept under the rug. And while I can understand their desire to prevent, say, Jim Rome from doing 30 seconds on "soccer violence" with this tape, the cat is out of the bag, boys.
Share
Post a Comment
Total Comments 16
Comments
-
From page 27 of the MLS referee handbook:
Quote:
"11.3.13 Sent-Off Players. A Player who is sent-off during a Game shall be escorted from the field of play and bench area by a Game day staff member designated by the stadium or Home Team. Each team should be informed of the designated staff member prior to the Game. Although each Player is ultimately responsible for his actions, the Player’s Team bench personnel shall facilitate its Player’s leaving the field without delay. The Home Team designee shall work in concert with Team bench personnel, display a high level of sensitivity for each situation and ensure that the player is shown to the appropriate area (e.g., the locker room or team’s suite) for the remainder of the Game. The same procedure shall be followed for any Coach or other bench personnel not listed as an eligible substitute who is dismissed from the field."
Since this was at the soccerplex and not RFK stadium security was pretty light, but it is the home team's (DCU) job to have him escorted as I understand it.Posted 10 Jul 2008 at 08:50 AM by jgildea8 
-
Because DC shot the video and we're under single entity, MLS actually has something of a copyright claim.
That said, it's pretty stupid. It's also unsurprising from what can be called, charitably, a less-than-transparent organization.Posted 10 Jul 2008 at 09:01 AM by geordienation
-
Kay poo tava pasar!
Posted 10 Jul 2008 at 09:10 AM by TOTC
-
From page 27 of the MLS referee handbook:
Quote:
"11.3.13 Sent-Off Players. A Player who is sent-off during a Game shall be escorted from the field of play and bench area by a Game day staff member designated by the stadium or Home Team. Each team should be informed of the designated staff member prior to the Game. Although each Player is ultimately responsible for his actions, the Player’s Team bench personnel shall facilitate its Player’s leaving the field without delay. The Home Team designee shall work in concert with Team bench personnel, display a high level of sensitivity for each situation and ensure that the player is shown to the appropriate area (e.g., the locker room or team’s suite) for the remainder of the Game. The same procedure shall be followed for any Coach or other bench personnel not listed as an eligible substitute who is dismissed from the field."
Since this was at the soccerplex and not RFK stadium security was pretty light, but it is the home team's (DCU) job to have him escorted as I understand it.
-------------------
First, I'm not an apologist for Blanco's acts; he clearly deserved a red card, and anyone ejected from a match should promptly leave the field. I have always understood and expected (as player, coach, and referee) that this means completely out of the referee's sight and hearing.
If, on the other hand, the DC staffer took it upon themselves to invade the Fire bench area to hurry along Blanco, that's: (1) not terribly sensitive - and I mean insensitive in the "adding gasoline to the fire" context; and (2) certainly not working in concert with the team's bench personnel.
I also find it interesting that there's now some question whether MLS requested game film, or if DC misrepresented their voluntary act.
I'd love to know what actually happened, as the spin-doctoring all around is becoming ludicrous.Posted 10 Jul 2008 at 09:36 AM by Martininho
-
The point is noted, but I think if you look at the execution of that rule you'll find that under normal circumstances it's a neutral security employee (CSC or whomever) who escorts the player off the pitch, NOT an opposing team staffer wearing team colors.
They are indeed hired by the home team but are most assuredly not "team employees". There's a vast difference.
Anyone can readily see the inherent dangers involved in having a biased party in another team's technical area yelling at a player who has just been ejected.
Quite frankly, I have never seen it done. Ever.Posted 10 Jul 2008 at 09:56 AM by Bill Archer
-
Some reports (and there is understandably a lot of variety) indicate that the DC staffmember may have been stepping in to lend some protection to the 4th Official who may have been spat at or otherwise treated malevolently by Mr. Blanco. Foolish me -- I was 30 yards away and looking in the wrong direction.
Posted 10 Jul 2008 at 09:58 AM by Postmaster
-
Sounds like my life; at the US-Mexico Qualifier at Crew Stadium in February of 2001 I waited until just after halftime to run down to a stand and get my wife a water, thus avoiding standing in a long line.
I was gone maybe three minutes.
Which three minutes included Josh Wolff carrying the ball into the corner that was maybe 20 feet from our seats, breaking through two defenders and crossing the ball in to Ernie Stewart who scored one of the signally historic goals in US history.
But my wife really thanked me for the water.Posted 10 Jul 2008 at 10:06 AM by Bill Archer
-
Great post Bill.
Posted 10 Jul 2008 at 10:25 AM by Battler
-
jgildea8:
you're citing the MLS referee's handbook. as has been stated several times, this was not an MLS match, but a USOC match. Therefore, we would need to know what the rules are in USSF's book. Do you have those?
Not trying to be a d!ck, just trying to get some clarity, since this issue actually seems to be getting more complicated as we go on.Posted 10 Jul 2008 at 10:31 AM by Nerazzuri
-
According to posts in the other thread the USSF book does not spell out who's to escort players off the field after an ejection. Given that this was a game between two MLS teams I'm sure they just went with the standard setup for a MLS match.
Also, given that this was at the Soccerplex and not RFK, with the reduced staff that goes with it I wouldn't be surprised if they didn't have as many neutrals available as normal. They probably figured that they could take up the slack without thinking about the how sending a home staffer to escort a road player might add fuel to the fire. If so it was stupid, but the DC staffer may have been there as part of his job description for the night.Posted 10 Jul 2008 at 10:52 AM by Jasonma 
|
Post a Comment
|
Total Trackbacks 0
