05/10/2017 Columbus Crew v Toronto FC MAPFRE Stadium (7:30pm ET) REF: SORIN STOICA AR1: Claudiu Badea AR2: Logan Brown 4TH: Hilario Grajeda 05/12/2017 Houston Dynamo v Vancouver Whitecaps BBVA Compass Stadium (9:00pm ET) REF: FOTIS BAZAKOS AR1: Danny Thornberry AR2: Cameron Blanchard 4TH: Daniel Radford 05/13/2017 Toronto FC v Minnesota United BMO Field (3:00pm ET) REF: ALLEN CHAPMAN AR1: Adam Wienckowski AR2: Jeremy Hanson 4TH: Dave Gantar Colorado Rapids v San Jose Earthquakes Dick's Sporting Goods Park (4:00pm ET) REF: EDVIN JURISEVIC AR1: Jeffrey Greeson AR2: Mike Rottersman 4TH: Baldomero Toledo Montreal Impact v Columbus Crew Stade Saputo Stadium (5:00pm ET) REF: SILVIU PETRESCU AR1: Daniel Belleau AR2: Andrew Bigelow 4TH: Mark Kadlecik D.C. United v Philadelphia Union RFK Stadium (7:00pm ET) REF: CHRIS PENSO AR1: Peter Manikowski AR2: Oscar Mitchell-Carvalho 4TH: Younes Marrakchi Orlando City v Sporting Kansas City Orlando City Stadium (7:00pm ET) REF: RICARDO SALAZAR AR1: Kyle Atkins AR2: Kyle Longville 4TH: Rubiel Vazquez New England Revolution v Real Salt Lake Gillette Stadium (7:30pm ET) REF: HILARIO GRAJEDA AR1: Adam Garner AR2: Kevin Klinger 4TH: Nima Saghafi Chicago Fire v Seattle Sounders Toyota Park (9:00pm ET) REF: JORGE GONZALEZ AR1: Jason White AR2: Brian Dunn 4TH: Alejandro Mariscal 05/14/2017 Portland Timbers v Atlanta United Providence Park (4:00pm ET) REF: ALAN KELLY AR1: Matthew Nelson AR2: Ian Anderson 4TH: Alex Chilowicz New York Red Bulls v LA Galaxy Red Bull Arena (6:00pm ET) REF: JOSE CARLOS RIVERO AR1: Corey Parker AR2: Jose Da Silva 4TH: Caleb Mendez FC Dallas v New York City Toyota Stadium (8:00pm ET) REF: ROBERT SIBIGA AR1: Eric Weisbrod AR2: Jeff Muschik 4TH: Daniel Radford http://www.proreferees.com/2017-mls-regular-season-assignments---week-11.php
Following his ankle injury last week, Jorge Gonzalez is replaced by Nima Saghafi Chicago Fire v Seattle Sounders Toyota Park (9:00pm ET) REF: JORGE GONZALEZ NIMA SAGHAFI AR1: Jason White AR2: Brian Dunn 4TH: Alejandro Mariscal
And that will be his 5th whistle of the year. I'm not intimately familiar with the CBA, but I believe that triggers a clause where he now becomes part-time (or something similar--maybe another poster can shed light on the exact mechanics). If I have that right, it's important because it means Saghafi's slots are not "trial slots" anymore. That opens the door to other referees getting a first shot later in the season.
https://matchcenter.mlssoccer.com/m...us-crew-sc-vs-toronto-fc/details/video/103062 Can anyone explain to me why this shouldn't be a red card? It falls under the category of "push" or "pull" and "no attempt to play the ball."
Why it shouldn't? No. Why it wasn't? I think there's a phenomenon where, when the foul gets closer to goal, referees don't tend to think of DOGSO immediately because so much else is going on in their head (penalty decision, goal kick/corner decision, potential collision, potential goal/no-goal decision). I look at that replay and I 100% back that it's a DOGSO red if you show the clip in a classroom. But I also look at it and admit I might not realize it for a few seconds or maybe longer. And then, once there's no demand for a red card, what do you do? The other penalty in this match is perhaps just as interesting: https://matchcenter.mlssoccer.com/m...us-crew-sc-vs-toronto-fc/details/video/103065 I'd be very interested to learn if the yellow was classified as a DOGSO-yellow or an SPA-yellow. SPA in the penalty area can now (technically July 1st but it's clearly been in practice at the top levels for a while) only be given if there's no chance or attempt to play the ball. So if that's the call, I think Stoica is in a defensible position (we can make the regular arguments about whether or not the wide touch made this no longer an OGSO or not--I personally think it still was, but it's debatable). However, if he classified it as DOGSO-yellow, I think that's wrong. This is one of those examples where a goalkeeper is beat, has already missed the tackle/challenge, so deliberately fouls. If you determine it's an OGSO, I believe this is supposed to be red. Two more test cases that show how subjective and difficult this new change is. And as more and more DOGSO penalty incidents don't get red cards, it makes it more and more difficult for referees to give them at the lower levels.
I think it just comes down to the culture of soccer here. Since, I started refereeing here, the teaching has always kind of been to look for reasons to not give red cards for DOGSO, especially pre-PRO. I know it's kind of harsh and over exaggerating, but these type of plays are not just missed as much in Europe. I think that has to do with the fact that the criteria for DOGSO has always been much looser and less strict in Europe than here in the US. They sometimes took it to extremes over there. From years of watching Serie A and Spanish soccer, any foul in the penalty area was at least a yellow and anything close to red was given as red. Where here, the pendulum seems to be completely opposite of no cards in the penalty area. I can't tell you how many times assessors and other referees have told me that the "penalty is enough punishment." I don't understand how he doesn't even go yellow because it's clearly a tactical foul with no attempt to play the ball. As far as the other PK, I just watched it again and you're right there is zero attempt to play the ball there, but how on earth do you sell that? Another reason why you shouldn't be changing punishment due to location of the restart. If these guys who have monthly seminars and clinics can't get it right, what hope is there for the weekend warriors who go to one clinic a year to get it right?
I think you're right here. And I think it still exists. I noticed this red from Rizzoli over the weekend. Can't help but think it's 100% technically right. But 100% would never be given in MLS and likely not the EPL either.
Somewhat unrelated but aren't law Changes effective June 1st now regardless of World Cup year or not.
Am I the only one who noticed that the goal line camera is not precisely in line with the goal line? I'm going to assume that they are using GLT in Italy, maybe I'm wrong. The camera is either being used for either affecting actual calls or sending video to fans across the world; fans who will form an opinion immediately and without reasonable investigation. It's not properly positioned. On the far post, you can see the bottom of the post and you can see that the far top corner is not in line with the endline. As a result, the goal line, for video purposes, on the far side of the goal is going to be about 6" wide. I can also buy the argument that the far post is not perfectly vertical and is leaning slightly backward. Since the front of the top corner of the far post is in line with the end line, we could reasonably infer that those two items are on the same plane and that the bottom of the post is what is wrong. Yes, this is picky, but this is another case of introducing technology that seems like it's a panacea, but when enacted in an imperfect way, results in errant results. This really comes down to a stadium-by-stadium, case-by-case skill set that is needed by the operations people. Close will not cut it for me. The technology must be 100% perfect accurate if we're bringing it in.
This is getting off topic, but based on a FIFA video from 2013, the camera system they tested used multiple cameras (HawkEye, the same company who does Tennis video replay). From my recollection, generally the Goal Line Tech replay you see on TV is a computer generated animation showing where the ball was, however sometimes the TV station will show the camera angle you are highlighting to show the real ball, then cut to the GLT decision based off the computer system.
Mandatory for those unless the competition chooses to apply it. I seem to recall that at least one league (Australia perhaps?) did that with the 16-17 LotG...
Oh boy, Nima Saghafi has a brutal couple minutes in CHI vs SEA. A penalty call for a clean tackle (imo), and then retook the penalty for an unclear reason - possibly keeper encroachment - but nothing that stood out as an actual breach of standards.
I have some video footage I want to make absolutely sure Chris Penso sees. If someone can provide me with a home address that I can independently verify is his, I will pay that someone $500 in the manner of their choosing (Paypal, money order, whatever). Thanks in advance.
Tackle wasn't clean IMO. Trajectory was always going through the opponent's legs, but it's deceptive because obviously he got a touch on the ball. That doesn't excuse the careless nature of the tackle, though. As for the retake, the official word was encroachment by both teams, and photographic evidence supports the call despite espn's absolutely garbage camera work. I think the real debate is whether the encroachment was worth calling. Seemed awfully trifling to me. However, Frei pulled a pretty good Brianna Scurry coming off his line so I thought that alone warranted a retake, but it clearly wasn't the call being made based on the AR's behavior.
Any thoughts on Saghafi's second yellow on Jones? As a former, slow, abused defender / midfielder / nonref / clear homer, I've never appreciated calls against stationary defenders when attackers attempt to run through them...
Meh, Jones ran to that position, made a fruitless stab at the ball, and made sure he got in the way. Kind of a silly thing to do.
GK encroachment also is a caution, so if there was no caution, that wasn't the call. It would be interesting to know if PRO has asked refs to crack down on encroachment