Same thing Geiger thought last year. Old habits die hard and it’s really hard to understand, immediately that both a head injury occurred and it’s serious. Penso will probably get dinged for that. But with the culture of our game referees are in a hard spot there. They likely get more flack for wrongly stopping play too quickly on a non-head injury than they do for waiting 5-10 seconds on something that turns out to be serious. We have reverse incentives to what we are trying to accomplish.
12 posted. Judging additional stoppage time will be interesting here. We are talking more than a quarter of the half. Almost inherently he’ll have to put on another minute. If there’s time wasting you’ll get to 14.
Thought Penso did a pretty good job. 1. Disallowed ATL goal - I'm pretty sure Penso had the foul during play. In one of the replays I swear he starts to bring his hand up to his mouth. But decided the let play continue and check VAR. I'm not sure I like that he wants VAR to bail him out, but maybe that's some of the instruction they're getting these days? 2. That 1st Red-->Yellow was interesting. I'm fine with red, but kind of okay with yellow. Not sure it's clear and obvious to overturn, but I like that Penso made a decision on the field first. 3. I saw Lawrence go down and was immediately like "stop play!". Not sure why Penso didn't right away, but it's a pretty freak accident that one wouldn't expect from what happened. Really difficult to know in the moment at the professional level.
Put me down in the not clear and obvious camp on the Larentowicz red->yellow. I'm open to argument, though.
Oof, I think Tata Martinez needs a game or two off. They're so intent on raging at Geiger, they're even upset about the Larentowicz review for some silly reason.
It’s nuts how much vitriol Atlanta United has for Mark Geiger. Of course, United fans think every loss is because the referees have it in for them, so I don’t take their stuff very seriously.
Either Way Larentowicz should have been sent off. His tactical tackle on Adams in the first half should have been his first yellow.
It was an odd play. At first it did not appear to be a head injury. Meara, however did recognize it and was coming out of his goal to get attention of RB training staff and Penso. In doing so, Atl nearly scored because Penso allowed the attack to continue. Penso was in a tough spot. Atl almost scored based on his choice. It would have been odd seeing a goal scored in such a situation, with a celebration, rush to get the ball, RBNY pissed off and trying to help a teammate. And if he blows immediately, Tata is losing his shit on the 4th official. I don't have too much of a problem with how he handled it. It did not look like a head injury as it looked like he just landed bad on his shoulder.
I didn't think Penso had a great game at all — not sure how he misses the foul that got spoted on VAR considering he was in perfect position to see it, the DOGSO red is a huge miss, and I thought the head injury was poorly managed. It doesn't take much to have a quick look at the guy a couple times within five seconds and see he is motionless on the ground.
But it's true! If we lose, it's because of the referees; if we win it's in spite of them. We dug our own grave in that match. Ugly.
If digging your own grave means playing very poor defenders. RBNY game plan to pressure exposed what a truly horrible defense Atlanta has when actually forced to defend in their final 3rd.
I've seen comments from neutral observers on this forum (neutral meaning not ATL fans) that VAR ruined the match. Then again, I think those same neutral observers have a huge ax to grind against VAR and think it sucks.
If this is directed at me, I don't think I said this match was ruined. As a product, it was certainly exciting, wasn't it? But I do think this match shows many of the limits of VARs for fans (which will look like inconsistencies in some places) and/or puts to rest the idea that VR will eliminate or even greatly reduce controversy. I mean, in order we had ... 1) A goal rightly called off for a foul that helped allow the goal to be scored. 100% correct application of VAR, yet there does not seem to be a consensus from even nonpartisan fans. 2) Penalty allowed to stand despite likely being deemed "soft" by neutral observers. You had an upper body hold with lower body contact, so a foul call and penalty is justified in Law and not clearly wrong. Therefore, VAR rightly allowed the penalty to stand. 3) SFP red card changed to yellow card via VAR intervention. Yellow likely the preferred decision by most professional referees so likely seen as a correct VAR intervention by PRO. But it does lend to the idea that a "soft" red card can be downgraded but a "soft" penalty can't be overturned. Are fans okay with that? 4) Goal allowed for the team that benefited from the earlier goal being annulled, despite a hint of a foul in the build-up. Completely justified decision by the VAR, but one that will lead to cries of inconsistency. 5) No VAR intervention on a potential DOGSO call. This would really be my only practical critique of VAR last night. I think that, in a different game, Geiger might feel compelled to refer Penso to the monitor on that call because if #1 and #3 above justified intervention, surely this did as well. In this case, the human pressures of having so much controversy already could have dissuaded him from doing something he otherwise might have done. And that shows some of the human limits of VR, which always gets referred to as "technology."
Oh, no, not directed at you @MassachusettsRef, just a random comment on the match based on what I read elsewhere. Sorry for the confusion.
A bit of semantics but I'd expect someone that is a referee to know the difference. He didn't 'miss' it, he made a decision. Also, his original decision was that it was a foul. He both started a hard sprint towards the foul and brought the whistle up to his mouth, and then decided against calling it and allowed play to continue.
Oh, Zlatan. VAR got this one right, I'd say. After Video Review, Zlatan Ibrahimovic receives a red card for violent conduct. #MTLvLA https://t.co/qF8UcCZYuy— Major League Soccer (@MLS) May 21, 2018
I wonder about the yellow card to the MTL player, though. I get that it helps sell everything and that MTL is fine with it, since they're up a man. But the MTL player either intentionally stepped on him (red) or he unintentionally stepped on him (nothing). I'm not sure splitting the difference and going yellow really stands up to scrutiny here--if anyone really wanted to scrutinize it, that is! It's simultaneously a good piece of refereeing insofar as feeling the game and getting justice, but an odd use of VR, because the clip doesn't show a clear yellow card offence. Also, I know players to get used to VARs, but situations like this belie the notion, argued by some like Mark Clattenburg, that VR will act as a preventative tool for stupid actions because players will know they'll get caught.
Here is a YouTube clip of it. Some actually pretty interesting and insightful comments from the commentary. I know its against protocol and something that PRO and others feel that VAR isn't ready for yet, but his point about "not even needing to go the monitor" is spot on. I think it will inevitably be the evolution of VAR eventually. By the way, the yellow to the Montreal player is completely ridiculous and something that would never be given without VAR if the AR saw the Ibrahimovic slap. Also, if you are giving the yellow to the Montreal player, shouldn't the restart be a penalty kick then? He stepped on Ibrahimovic first?
The more I watch it, the more I don't understand how they restart with a DFK coming out if you decide to give the yellow to the Montreal defender. I'm not advocating for a penalty kick here or a yellow to the MTL defender at all. It would be preposterous as I think it was incidental. But if you are splitting the difference and deciding to give the MTL defender yellow, then you HAVE to restart with a penalty. I see no other restart from a LOTG stand point? Or is he being booked for embellishment?