2017 MLS Week 7 Referee Discussion

Discussion in 'MLS Referee Forum' started by bhooks, Apr 11, 2017.

  1. bhooks

    bhooks Member

    Apr 14, 2015
    Club:
    Arsenal FC
    04/14/2017

    Philadelphia Union v New York City
    Talen Energy Stadium (7:00pm ET)
    REF: JOSE CARLOS RIVERO
    AR1: Peter Manikowski
    AR2: Kevin Klinger
    4TH: Allen Chapman

    Vancouver Whitecaps v Seattle Sounders
    BC Place (10:00pm ET)
    REF: KEVIN STOTT
    AR1: Jeffrey Hosking
    AR2: Cameron Blanchard
    4TH: Dave Gantar

    San Jose Earthquakes v FC Dallas
    Avaya Stadium (11:00pm ET)
    REF: ARMANDO VILLARREAL
    AR1: Ian Anderson
    AR2: Apolinar Mariscal
    4TH: Alejandro Mariscal

    04/15/2017

    Montreal Impact v Atlanta United
    Stade Saputo (1:00pm ET)
    REF: ALAN KELLY
    AR1: Danny Thornberry
    AR2: Jeffrey Greeson
    4TH: Silviu Petrescu

    Orlando City v LA Galaxy
    Orlando City Stadium (2:30pm ET)
    REF: CHRIS PENSO
    AR1: Jeremy Hanson
    AR2: Andrew Bigelow
    4TH: Rubiel Vazquez

    Chicago Fire v New England Revolution
    Toyota Park (5:00pm ET)
    REF: TED UNKEL
    AR1: Adam Wienckowski
    AR2: Eduardo Mariscal
    4TH: Fotis Bazakos

    New York Red Bulls v D.C. United
    Red Bull Arena (7:30pm ET)
    REF: SORIN STOICA
    AR1: Adam Garner
    AR2: Oscar Mitchell-Carvalho
    4TH: Alex Chilowicz

    Columbus Crew v Toronto FC
    MAPFRE Stadium (8:00pm ET)
    REF: NIMA SAGHAFI
    AR1: Corey Rockwell
    AR2: Kyle Atkins
    4TH: Hilario Grajeda

    Houston Dynamo v Minnesota United
    BBVA Compass Stadium (8:30pm ET)
    REF: ROBERT SIBIGA
    AR1: Jonathan Johnson
    AR2: Felisha Mariscal
    4TH: Ismail Elfath

    Colorado Rapids v Real Salt Lake
    Dick's Sporting Goods Park (9:00pm ET)
    REF: MARK GEIGER
    AR1: Kermit Quisenberry
    AR2: Logan Brown
    4TH: Daniel Radford

    Portland Timbers v Sporting Kansas City
    Providence Park (10:30pm ET)
    REF: DREW FISCHER
    AR1: Frank Anderson
    AR2: Daniel Belleau
    4TH: Ricardo Salazar

    http://www.proreferees.com/2017-mls-regular-season-assignments---week-7.php
     
  2. ptref

    ptref Member

    Manchester United
    United States
    Aug 5, 2015
    Bowling Green, KY
    Club:
    Manchester United FC
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    Nima Saghafi with his 2nd middle of the early season. Looks like he will be the next to move to the referee list when someone retires.
     
  3. MassachusettsRef

    MassachusettsRef Moderator
    Staff Member

    Apr 30, 2001
    Washington, DC
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    This was discussed a little in another thread. No need for a retirement. I'm fairly certain he moves up midseason and I think some expected it at the start of the season.

    On an unrelated note, I'm going to move the VAR clip into the general VAR thread, because it has almost nothing to do with MLS.
     
  4. SccrDon

    SccrDon Member+

    Dec 4, 2001
    Colorado Springs
    Club:
    Colorado Rapids
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    Kinda feel sorry for Geiger here. A rivalry match between 2 lousy teams sounds like a potentially difficult assignment.
     
  5. threeputzzz

    threeputzzz Member+

    May 27, 2009
    Minnesota
    Nothing to do with Rivero's performance (he did fine) but that goal by David Villa - wow.
     
    rh89 and usaref repped this.
  6. Bubba Atlanta

    Bubba Atlanta Member+

    Mar 2, 2012
    Yep, Atlanta
    Club:
    Atlanta United FC
    #6 Bubba Atlanta, Apr 15, 2017
    Last edited: Apr 15, 2017
    Argh! That's not a red under the revised Law! :mad:

    That'll be the PRO play of the week.
     
  7. GlennAA11

    GlennAA11 Member+

    Jun 12, 2001
    Arlington, VA
    depends. If he's calling pushing or holding it's still red
     
  8. Bubba Atlanta

    Bubba Atlanta Member+

    Mar 2, 2012
    Yep, Atlanta
    Club:
    Atlanta United FC
    That's not what I saw through my prescription high-def #ATLUTD goggles.
     
  9. sulfur

    sulfur Member+

    Oct 22, 2007
    Ontario, Canada
    Definitely a foul via the hands...

    but the better question is... were all of the considerations for DOGSO met? Personally, I'm not entirely sure... mostly on the control/likelihood of consideration.
     
    MassachusettsRef repped this.
  10. jarbitro

    jarbitro Member+

    Mar 13, 2003
    N'Djamena, Tchad
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    Yeah, but it was a cynical foul. He was the last defender, and was beat, and absent the foul it was probably going to be a goal. The ATL keeper didn't help by being frozen too...had he come off his line would have been a tougher sell. I think the send-off is correct because while the attacker didnt' have the ball, it was just kind of sitting there for him.
     
  11. MassachusettsRef

    MassachusettsRef Moderator
    Staff Member

    Apr 30, 2001
    Washington, DC
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    Ended up being Elfath on this match.
     
  12. jdmahoney

    jdmahoney Member

    Feb 28, 2017
    Plymouth, MN
    Club:
    Chelsea FC
  13. TLR2

    TLR2 Member

    Mar 26, 2016
    Club:
    Everton FC
    Can't find good video just yet, but Frank Anderson with a shocker, calling POR offside on a backpass. Very unusual call from him, he's usually so great.
     
    rh89 repped this.
  14. fairplayforlife

    fairplayforlife Member+

    Mar 23, 2011
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
  15. GoDawgsGo

    GoDawgsGo Member+

    Nov 11, 2010
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    Kelly said post match to pool reporter that he thought there was no play on the ball and it was an upper body contact foul. Unfortunately I don't think Kelly is interpreting the entire law change correctly.

    "an attempt to play the ball or challenge the opponent for the ball, the offender will be cautioned (yellow card) not sent off (red card)."

    While there is no attempt at the ball per se, the defender is certainly challenging an opponent for the ball, not committing a cynical non soccer related type foul. Will be interesting to see if they protest based on the law change. I think this is the exact kind of foul the IFAB and pundits wanted to stop seeing reds for.

    I don't even think it's a foul though. Just two guys battling it out and both end up going down. Defender does end up with his elbow and arm a bit high towards the end but mostly as a result of them just battling like you're supposed to. Kelly goes back pocket almost instantly. Curious if Thornberry had any input.
     
  16. MassachusettsRef

    MassachusettsRef Moderator
    Staff Member

    Apr 30, 2001
    Washington, DC
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    Wait, what are you quoting from?

    The Laws themselves say it's a red if it's holding, pushing or pulling. If Kelly said it was an upper body foul (you didn't use quotes there so not sure what his exact language was), then he's probably saying or implying it's a push or a pull.

    The change to the Laws was interpreted correctly here. I couldn't disagree more with your determination that the IFAB wants yellow here based on the nature of the foul. If you determine there was DOGSO here then the nature of the foul warrants red. For me, I side with @sulfur based on watching replay--at the time of the foul, the ball is in the air and between the players so there's a serious doubt as to what would have happened if there was no foul. That being said, in real-time this looks like an easy red if you call the foul just based on all the other factors and where the ball lands right after the foul is committed.

    Of course, these last few posts show just how confusing this change is and how subjective it is for referees. And that goes to the point that it was a bad change to make.
     
  17. rh89

    rh89 Member

    Sep 29, 2015
    OR
    That's not just on Anderson but on Drew Fischer. He's got to waive down Anderson on that. I was very unimpressed with Fischer's performance. While I don't feel he missed any MCI, his foul selection was all over the place.
     
    TLR2 repped this.
  18. Bubba Atlanta

    Bubba Atlanta Member+

    Mar 2, 2012
    Yep, Atlanta
    Club:
    Atlanta United FC
    Here's the video of the Gonzalez Pirez send off:

    http://matchcenter.mlssoccer.com/ma...act-vs-atlanta-united-fc/details/video/100481

    I still think it's marginal at best, and in the light of the previous week's guidance from PRO, marginal means err on the side of yellow not red.

    Yes I hear you about push/pull/hold, but in view of the overall spirit of the change as I understand it, it should be clearly a push/pull/hold rather than a challenge for the ball, and after repeated viewing I still think this was the latter, even it if was an "upper body foul."
     
  19. JasonMa

    JasonMa Member+

    Mar 20, 2000
    Arvada, CO
    Club:
    Colorado Rapids
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    Some complaints from Rapids fans about the lack of calls last night. I disagree but I resent the tweet ehre in case any refs see something I don't.



    Also at least one complaint that the red card/PK in the 84th minute was unwarranted but IMO if that's not a red card/PK then nothing is.

    58 seconds into the highlights:
    http://matchcenter.mlssoccer.com/ma...rapids-vs-real-salt-lake/details/video/100662
     
  20. GoDawgsGo

    GoDawgsGo Member+

    Nov 11, 2010
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    #20 GoDawgsGo, Apr 16, 2017
    Last edited: Apr 16, 2017
    http://www.theifab.com/laws/additional-explanatory-documents/chapters/download-explanatory-documents

    Change of Law 12 Document from June 1 2016

    The pool reporter said Kelly said it was an upper body foul so I'd assume that was his exact response to the pool reporter.

    The defender is challenging the opponent for the ball just as the IFAB document reads, not being cynical (holding, pulling, pushing). Just two guys battling it out. If you think it's a foul that's fine as the attacker does gain better position about the same time he goes down, but the key is they are both playing soccer. The change was made for fouls like these.

    Key word being unless. How can you say the defender is not attempting to play the ball when the ball is literally right on him at the time the challenge is committed?
     
    Bubba Atlanta repped this.
  21. uniqueconstraint

    Jul 17, 2009
    Indianapolis,Indiana - home of the Indy Eleven!
    Club:
    --other--
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    IMO def a red card as well - the ball was going into the net if not for his involvement.
     
    JasonMa repped this.
  22. sulfur

    sulfur Member+

    Oct 22, 2007
    Ontario, Canada
    But, can you play that ball with your hands as a defender? In this case, the defender is trying to barge through the attacker's upper body to get the ball, and if all of the DOGSO considerations are met, then this falls into the red card side of things.

    From conversations I've had with national+ instructors here in Canada, the direction seems to be that the feel from "on high" is that players can only challenge for a ball fairly with feet or with head.

    In this situation, I see neither of those two things happening.
     
    jarbitro and fairplayforlife repped this.
  23. GoDawgsGo

    GoDawgsGo Member+

    Nov 11, 2010
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    The foul was charging. Charging is not holding, pulling, or pushing. Sounds like some instructors are just making things up rather than just reading the law change for what it is as well as not understanding the spirit of the change. Less reds, more yellows. More simplistically you get a red if you're not playing soccer, a yellow if you are.
     
  24. sulfur

    sulfur Member+

    Oct 22, 2007
    Ontario, Canada
    Nor is charging a challenge for the ball, especially when it comes from behind...
     
    Lucky Wilbury repped this.
  25. Lucky Wilbury

    Lucky Wilbury Member

    Mar 19, 2012
    United States
    The more I watch this clip, the more I have PK + YC. However, I am nowhere near "marginal call at best" like Bubba is.

    The defender steps on the right achilles of the attacker. That's the first foul. Then, the arm of the defender hits the head/shoulder of the attacker, which is probably/arguably also a foul. The reason this contact is made is because the defender decided to run through the player rather than run around him. The attacker is waiting on the ball to come down over his shoulder and he has every right to slow down a bit to allow physics to play out. When defenders make choices like that - contact that involves a multitude of contact points - they give referees the viable option of calling a PK & determining that it was an upper body foul.

    In other words, the defender's poor choices made this look like an upper body foul, which would be a RC.

    I think it's clearly DOGSO.

    I also think that the MTL player clearly leapt into the air after the foot contact and the arm contact from the defender. That doesn't help the optics of something like this, but it still doesn't absolve the defender of the fact that he committed 1, maybe 2, fouls.

    A bigger issue - watch when Kelly takes off. Watch his movement and his explosiveness. He's very slow to react and never is up to speed prior to calling the foul. I would argue a positioning choice and a better reaction would have saved him 8-10 yards on a play like that, and would have put him at an angle to be inside & 45 degrees of the foul.

    Separately, I don't know why we're still debating whether a push/pull/grab is a YC or a RC on a DOGSO play.
     
    jarbitro repped this.

Share This Page