Good question. It may be a "record and report" rather than prevent situation...? At this point, we don't know exactly when the officials were informed, and what they were informed of. Possibilities: FCD made the switch without telling the referees. This would be unlikely for a variety of reasons, but would have the most consequences for team and crew. FCD made the switch before they turned in their official lineup. Possible - there isn't always the best of communication between an MLS team and their media twitter folk for road games. Remember, most of the public information has been taken from FCD's Twitter feed. If true, no issue. FCD made the switch after turning in the official lineup, but told the crew. Assuming that MLS has a rule where the replaced starter is no longer eligible, then FCD played an ineligible player and there are definitely consequences for the team, and possibly the crew. At other levels, I have seen where it is not the referee's job to enforce league rules (most extreme example - in adult rec soccer, taped or hand drawn numbers are not legal - referees are instructed to document that on their report and the league enforces the consequences). My *sense* is that with an experienced crew, they probably didn't drop the ball. So either FCD complied and there is no issue, and this is just someone noticing the discrepancy on the FCD Twitter feed and asking pointed questions, or FCD made an illegal substitution and the crew recorded it. (Is it possible an experienced crew missed it? Yes. Not probable, though.) In the latter situation (FCD played ineligible player/crew recorded and reported), though, wouldn't the league know about it on Saturday and be able to make a decision pretty promptly? I will be curious to see how this one plays out, for a variety of reasons.
I don't think we have them yet. It appears this is a question being asked by the Orlando Sentinel after someone noticed that the FC Dallas Twitter posted a lineup with Barrios in the starting lineup. I *believe* I saw (but don't have access to right now) that the starting lineup posted by MLSSoccer.com on their app had Akindele as the starter, and that this publication is produced from the official match information, as opposed to a Twitter feed that could have been operated from Dallas (they don't always send person managing the twitter feed) and didn't have the most current information. OTOH, clearly, it is entirely possible that (a) FC Dallas made a mistake/did it intentionally to see if they could get away with it or out of desperation, (b) the crew (b1) didn't catch it and/or (b2) didn't feel it was their responsibility to enforce it and instead recorded and reported.
Without having access to the official starting line ups given to the referees at roster exchange everyone is just guessing. Who cares what a Twitter account says whether it's the teams official one or not? Of course this could be a huge deal that results in a forfeit and referees probably being toast for the rest of the year, or it could also be absolutely nothing.
Exactly. And the reporting has been VERY inconsistent/undocumented. Its pretty frustrating. And what kills me is someone is going to produce the report at some point. If it isn't produced up front, the aggrieved party will produce it. There are so many media outlets that should have a copy of it (Orlando Sentinel, the SB Nation Orlando City outlet, etc.) that I am very surprised no one on their side has produced it.
do we know for a fact the line up was submitted to the ref or just what FC Dallas posted on twitter?— Jon D.🇺🇦 (@JDSportsfan85) October 4, 2017 Paul Tenorio is reporting that the tweeted lineup matched what was given to the refs as the official lineup.
Well, why did he do the drop ball outside of the area then? And I actually don't know what the training is--is this treated as an inadvertant whistle, which would then be the drop ball up the field, or as a restart with a drop ball in the area? If the later, its not what Gonzales did, and that is hugely unfair to the defense anyway. That takes this from a cleared ball away from danger to a drop ball in the area? I guess it doesn't matter, b/c he didn't do either. This is exactly the time for this argument though because this is *THE* argument for VAR, and I don't think it holds up. Here is an obvious referee error with play-off implications. This is as big as it gets, and as big of a fix as is possible. And I"m saying its still not worth it. It slows the game down, results in serious bush-league Sunday-at-the-park kind of refereeing with a drop ball and a keeper inside the area, oh no, never mind, right on the edge of the box let's just split the middle, after a delay, and after the ref is surrounded in protest. I'm saying that all of this is WORSE for soccer than a missed PK that changes the play-off race. I don't expect everyone to agree with me (especially fans of the otherwise aggrieved team), but there are worse things for the game than than a missed PK call in a play-off race. Namely this.
http://proreferees.com/2017/10/04/play-of-the-week-30-outside-interference/ According to the POTW, there was a whistle from the stands that led the keeper to believe the foul had been called.
I think the problem so far has been that while it has corrected some errors, even more continue. The level of controversy certainly hasn't been reduced. And there is still a good deal of confusion by all parties
And I have seen confirmation in 2 other places. While not absolutely sure, I feel confident that the Barrios lineup was in fact given to the referees.
MLS gotta MLS: Source tells me #MLS has decided to fine FC Dallas for the Barrios roster violation. No points dropped or added for either team.— Paul Tenorio (@PaulTenorio) October 6, 2017
Yes, it's treated like an inadvertent whistle. As far as being "hugely unfair to the defense", you should recall that the options we have here are a PK against the defense or a dropped ball. Which one is "hugely unfair", now that the officials have decided that it's not a PK? You're insisting that fixing a bad penalty kick is not worth it? Especially one with playoff implications for Montreal? I'll just simply say that I, and probably everyone else, disagree with you. I can't stress to you how much I disagree with you. I really can't.
MLS Media Resources FC Dallas Fined $75,000 of Allocation Money and $25,000 for Roster Violation NEW YORK (October 6, 2017) – Major League Soccer has fined FC Dallas $75,000 of General Allocation Money and $25,000 for a roster violation during the September 30 match against Orlando City SC. Prior to the match, FC Dallas listed Michael Barrios in the club’s starting lineup as part of the official match day roster. The official match day roster is submitted 60 minutes before kickoff. A player who is removed from the official match roster’s starting lineup within 60 minutes prior to kickoff may not participate in the match, with the exception of the goalkeeper. Fifteen minutes prior to kickoff, FC Dallas requested Barrios be moved to the list of substitutes and Tesho Akindele moved from the list of substitutes to the starting lineup. The referee crew incorrectly allowed the change to occur and notified Orlando City SC of the change to the official match day roster prior to the match. Based on the change to the match day roster, Dallas wrongly believed that Barrios could participate in the match as a substitute. Barrios entered the game in the 84th minute, replacing Maxi Urruti. “The referee crew’s administrative error and decision to place Michael Barrios on the official match roster was carefully considered while making the decision to sanction FC Dallas for this rule violation,” said MLS Deputy Commissioner Mark Abbott. “However, all of our clubs are aware of game day roster rules and FC Dallas should have removed Barrios from the official match roster.” FIFA delegates management of roster rules and sanctions for violations to the respective leagues throughout the world. There is no international rule for changes to a match day roster.
what evidence do you have that they're lying? and about what? Have you done an investigation of what actually happened?
The "roster violation" was having an ineligible player as a named substitute. If he hadn't played, this wording would make sense, but he did, and calling the fielding of an ineligible player a "roster violation" is disingenuous at best and a deliberate lie at worst. I have done some personal investigation as to what went on behind the scenes. MLS is using the referees' mistake (basically confusing the text of Law 3 with what's allowed by the league's rules of competition) and their own intentionally vague disciplinary rules as a scapegoat and using a wording that protects against the "ignorance of the rule is no excuse" argument. They don't want to rule a forfeit because they feel that Dallas acted in good faith, asked for permission, and only fielded an ineligible player because they were told there would be no problem. That's fine, but it's still not simply a "roster violation." Lesson for referees here: call the league office before you allow anything out of the ordinary unless you're absolutely sure of the rules and probably still then.