akindc, you took the words right out of my mouth- altidore plays like a thug in the MLS, because he is allowed in some way to act like a thug
That reminds me of something I once heard from Kermit Quisenberry. He said that while the MLS officials were at a pre-season camp, one of the guest speakers was Landon Donovan. Donovan was asked why he acted one way (worse) during league games, and another way (better) during national team games. The simple answer was, "Because you guys let me."
And if someone from the mls was also in attendance he was thinking, "You're damn right they do." Or even more likely "You're welcome"
There seems not to be, but I'll start it. I don't think it's a RC, and I'm not one to normally shy away from a RC. My analysis will also have nothing to do with "it's the playoffs" or "MLS wants their stars in the game", so @bothways, @Pierre Head, @GlennAA11, and others will likely disagree with my analysis. 1) Watch the eyes of both players. Neither is looking at the other. I do think that Altidore "felt" the MTL player coming more than the MTL player did, so Altidore braced for impact more. Many of us watch the replay by just watching one player or the other. Watch them both. 2) Watch the speed at which they are moving toward each other. By the time Altidore jumps, and probably before that point in time, the MTL player is moving toward Altidore faster than Altidore is moving at him. 3) If both of those players stand next to each other, the MTL player will be at the level of Altidore's shoulder. I.E., if they didn't jump and ran into each other, their collision would be the same. 4) Altidore is a much stronger, bigger player. When collisions happen, in any sport at any level, the bigger guy rarely takes the worst of it. This causes us to "imagine" some contact sometimes. Altidore can't use Excessive Force, but he's allowed to use a normal amount of force. It also makes us, as humans, feel some sympathy for the MTL player. We have to get past all of those optics & analyze the play. 5) Ultimately, if you slow the challenge down on your TV like I did, you will see that the contact is a shoulder-to-shoulder challenge, but since Altidore's shoulder is slightly higher than the MTL player, and the MTL player isn't bracing for impact, the whiplash causes his head to make contact with Altidore's shoulder. 6) Altidore was slightly pushed. When someone is airborne, even a strong someone, a slight push can alter their trajectory somewhat. I do not think this is a big factor, but it leads into my last point... 7) Even if you disagree with everything I wrote, there was WAY too much doubt on that play to send off a player. Seeing it in real time, one time, every one of us probably thought he targeted his head or hit him with an elbow or something. The video shows you it wasn't that at all. So, I have two non-conspiracy reasons why it wasn't a RC: I don't think it met the standards or the criteria, and secondly, even if you or the crew disagrees with that, it was not clear enough in real-time to be able to give a RC without guessing.
This is a reasonable analysis by LW (congrats on your Nobel Prize BTW!), and may be correct for this particular incident. But it doesn't take away the fact that over many years the same pattern of officiating has emerged in the playoffs, which makes it easy to judge this incident through that lens. The fact is that during the playoffs, more so than during the regular season, the LOTG are not properly applied, thus making this a sort of pseudo-soccer, not quite the real thing. Not up to the level of exhibition entertainment "sports" such as the Harlem Globetrotters, but certainly not for the purists. This is one reason why MLS is not taken seriously by genuine soccer fans, who prefer to use their TV sports time watching leagues such as EPL, Champions League, Bundesliga etc., all of which are more abundantly available than MLS games. Even the sports networks have figured it out and buy and show the games the fans prefer. I realize many may not like to hear this and chose to disbelieve it, but it is very apparent. The head honchos have taken the wrong approach in their otherwise admirable efforts to bring the professional game to the USA. "The answer is blowing in the wind." PH
I agree with everything you say about the Laws and MLS, especially during the playoffs, but I don't think that has anything to do with why MLS isn't taken seriously. I think MLS isn't taken seriously by "genuine" fans because the soccer simply isn't as good as all the other leagues you mentioned....don't think it has anything to do with the refs. We've seen "bury the card" reffing in every major competition, not just in MLS playoffs.
I think a YC in this particular situation tells everyone that you don't have the courage to send off a player. As-is, the video replay the teams see after the game either proves you're right or proves you're wrong. No option is going to be a YC. If he targeted or attempted to target the player's head, then he's gone. A YC feels like you're guessing. In an Adult game on the weekend, or any other youth game a YC could come across the same way, or it could be a safe alternative for the "something happened here, but I'm not sure what"-type of punishment. Depending on the teams' attitudes, either could work. There is no replay evidence to go off of, so it's more of a situation where you might actually benefit by hedging your bet and giving a YC if you're not sure it was a RC or not. I'm not advocating guessing, but we've all had those situations where some card - any card - calmed things down a bit for weekend players.
I don't know that the officiating had anything to do with it necessarily, but if you watched that game and didn't find it entertaining, then something is wrong with you.
I agree with this and add in a "hipster" caveat of "Its not Europe so it much suck" that also factors in. That's not to say all fans who watch European soccer and not MLS are like that, but if you walk into your local British bar at 8am on a Saturday morning and ask the local NFL fan who's there to see Man U play his analysis of this MLS season he's probably going to respond he's never watched MLS or he hasn't watched MLS in 5 years but it sucks.
I'm too busy posting on BS to acknowledge my Nobel Prize. (the kids here are googling all of this right now...). Historically, over the 21 years of MLS, I will agree with you. There was an entire decade where the stars couldn't be punished. That apparently gets you a gig with FOX these days... However, regarding your posts on the situations this year, I will disagree with you. Almost vehemently. In the MLS regular season, the referees should generally try to stay in the same framework as each other to ensure consistency over 340 games. We should all do that in all of our leagues. All games count the same for everyone, so consistency is paramount. In the playoffs at all levels of soccer, there should be an overall consistency with the other ongoing games, but there should also be more of an open mind to adjust to the players and the way they are playing in that game. There were plays in the TOR-MTL game last night that were fouls in other playoff games this year. However, that game (and the first one) had sky-high intensity, and calling more fouls would lead to a ticky-tack feeling from players, fans, and viewers. The best referees in the country should be able to referee those games and keep them in the thin area that exists prior to the game going over the edge. If 2 teams are playing for their season - something they've worked all year for - then we as referees should be able to adjust. Period. There should be no way we allow VC or SFP, but if the referees see a tackle that is probably UB, but the players are all perfectly fine with it, then that's a situation where the referees should possibly swallow that card and move on. I trust those guys to have enough experience to determine those situations and understand when to act. Separately, to specifically address your concerns about ignored RCs because it's MLS or because it's the playoffs... There was chatter for a RC on Alonso in the opening round game of Seattle vs SKC. On the potential 2YC at the 4th official's feet, video proved that Feilhaber saw Alonso coming, dragged his foot and made sure to make contact with Alonso's leg, and that Alonso actually got some of the ball. We are a long way from a clear RC there. On the Villa kick out, the referee was right there, saw the players messing around, and saw the kick out. In the regular season, that could easily be a RC because there were others like it that the referees punished and that the DisCo punished. In that game, that play looked no worse than two guys having a tussle. I've already broken down the Altidore situation above. There have been a couple of other incidents that I forget off hand, but they were also not clear RCs and were not out of line with what the games and the players expected. If you're in the camp that feels these RC plays were missed, what reason would you give on this board during the regular season if the same decision was made? Wouldn't we analyze it by the criteria I gave here? This board has debated DOGSO to death, but rarely/never said "he just didn't have the courage to give it." Why all of a sudden do we naturally go to the "courage" discussion when it's the Playoffs? Why can't we break down plays and determine why each one wasn't clear? If a referee makes a mistake during the regular season, then there are parameters to have the red card suspension revoked. A player missing part of 1 game is not impactful when you consider a 34 game season. In the playoffs, if a bad red card is awarded and then rescinded, you're looking at a player missing a portion of 1 game out of a 2 game home-and-home series. That's huge. That's why I empathize with the referees who want to be certain that any RC they give is "clean". You and others may still disagree, but I simply think that we're watching these games and saying "it's probably a RC, so pitch him" and the referees are looking at it like "I want us to be completely comfortable with any RC we give". That's not a bad thing.
And if you wanted to go all conspiracy theory on it, it's fair to note that a Colorado (sans Howard)/Montreal final would have been an MLS execs nightmare...an almost unmarketable, star-free (see Drogba possible come off the bench!) ratings nightmare. Now, you'll be sure to see the JORDAN MORRIS vs. BRADLEY and ALTIDORE promos right and left. It's still two medium market teams and a ratings nightmare, but a little less than it could have been.
I am not sure that any MLS final produces a ratings bonanza. In fact the ratings have been steadily dropping since 2001 (1.0) to 2015 (0.4). So it would make no difference which teams got through. A big question is why. From my perspective, the more they turn fans off with the way the game is played, the fewer will bother to watch on TV. There are better alternatives, and it is not all the "Euro-snob" stuff that is driving it. PH
This discussion is not about entertainment. But in any event it depends on the definition of entertaining. That World Series game this year was highly entertaining but the baseball purists would point out the poor plays. Many people find the circus to be entertaining as well. In other words entertaining does not necessarily mean good soccer. PH
Well, this is what I see, from the official Laws of the Game, 2016-17: In the Offside section: "2. Offside offence A player in an offside position at the moment the ball is played or touched by a team-mate is only penalised on becoming involved in active play by: • interfering with play by playing or touching a ball passed or touched by a team-mate or • interfering with an opponent by: Offside 78 • preventing an opponent from playing or being able to play the ball by clearly obstructing the opponent’s line of vision or • challenging an opponent for the ball or • clearly attempting to play a ball which is close to him when this action impacts on an opponent or • making an obvious action which clearly impacts on the ability of an opponent to play the ball OR • gaining an advantage by playing the ball or interfering with an opponent when it has: • rebounded or been deflected off the goalpost, crossbar or an opponent • been deliberately saved by any opponent A player in an offside position receiving the ball from an opponent who deliberately plays the ball (except from a deliberate save by any opponent) is not considered to have gained an advantage. A ‘save’ is when a player stops a ball which is going into or very close to the goal with any part of the body except the hands (unless the goalkeeper within the penalty area)." That is where I see gaining an advantage. Either he gains the advantage by playing the ball or interfering with an opponent. And yes, this applies to both parts as described later in the sub-paragraph (bolded above).
Did you see the word *not* in front of the second section you bolded? The " gains an advantage" clause refers specifically to a ball that rebounds or is saved. No need to muddy the waters, he interfered with an opponent, you can stop there.