The assignments for Week 25 of the 2018 Major League Soccer season: 08/14/2018 LA Galaxy v Colorado Rapids StubHub Center (10:30PM ET) REF: Kevin Stott AR1: Eduardo Mariscal AR2: Cameron Blanchard 4TH: Chico Grajeda VAR: Ismail Elfath 08/15/2018 D.C. United v Portland Timbers Audi Field (8PM ET) REF: Robert Sibiga AR1: CJ Morgante AR2: Logan Brown 4TH: Fotis Bazakos VAR: Mark Geiger Los Angeles FC v Real Salt Lake Banc of California Stadium (10PM ET) REF: Dave Gantar AR1: Apolinar Mariscal AR2: TJ Zablocki 4TH: Baldomero Toledo VAR: Allen Chapman 08/18/2018 Seattle Sounders v LA Galaxy CenturyLink Field (4PM ET) REF: Mark Geiger AR1: Frank Anderson AR2: Mike Rottersman 4TH: Dave Gantar VAR: Younes Marrakchi Philadelphia Union v New York City FC Talen Energy Stadium (7PM ET) REF: Fotis Bazakos AR1: CJ Morgante AR2: Craig Lowry 4TH: Alejandro Mariscal VAR: Edvin Jurisevic Vancouver Whitecaps v New York Red Bulls BC Place (7PM ET) REF: Joseph Dickerson AR1: Jeremy Hanson AR2: Nick Uranga 4TH: Sorin Stoica VAR: David Barrie Montreal Impact v Chicago Fire Stade Saputo (7:30PM ET) REF: Baldomero Toledo AR1: Brian Dunn AR2: Andrew Bigelow 4TH: Rubiel Vazquez VAR: Geoff Gamble FC Dallas v Minnesota United Toyota Stadium (8PM ET) REF: Ismail Elfath AR1: Matthew Nelson AR2: Jeff Hosking 4TH: Chico Grajeda VAR: Kevin Terry Jr Sporting Kansas City v Portland Timbers Children’s Mercy Park (8:30PM ET) REF: Allen Chapman AR1: Michael Kampmeinert AR2: Peter Balciunas 4TH: Marcos Deoliveira VAR: Kevin Stott Houston Dynamo v Real Salt Lake BBVA Compass Stadium (9PM ET) REF: Armando Villarreal AR1: Corey Parker AR2: Felisha Mariscal 4TH: Robert Sibiga VAR: Jorge Gonzalez San Jose Earthquakes v Toronto FC Avaya Stadium (10PM ET) REF: Silviu Petrescu AR1: Gianni Facchini AR2: Jason White 4TH: Daniel Radford VAR: Alex Chilowicz 08/19/2018 Atlanta United v Columbus Crew Mercedes-Benz Stadium (4PM ET) REF: Jair Marrufo AR1: Ian Anderson AR2: Jeffrey Greeson 4TH: Ted Unkel VAR: Jon Freemon D.C. United v New England Revolution Audi Field (7:30PM ET) REF: Christopher Penso AR1: Cameron Blanchard AR2: Kyle Atkins 4TH: Alejandro Mariscal VAR: Edvin Jurisevic Los Angeles FC v Colorado Rapids Banc of California Stadium (10PM ET) REF: Nima Saghafi AR1: Eric Weisbrod AR2: Jose Da Silva 4TH: Daniel Radford VAR: Alex Chilowicz
I thought Sibiga did well in the DC United/Portland game last night. All the cards United received were earned, and he did a solid job with man management otherwise, having extended conversations with players on a few occasions.
The conversation with the DC player who foot stomped Blanco was nice. I imagine it went something like "Hey I know I was pretty close and should have seen it, but I totally mistook a foot for the ball so do it again or I might call it"
Thoughts on how Fotis handled the 1000% SFP here? Good hustle from the 4th official to try and get there. https://matchcenter.mlssoccer.com/m...nion-vs-new-york-city-fc/details/video/168361
More impressed with Morgante dropping his flag to handle it. That’s the sort of stuff that doesn’t get taught. And it’s too bad. ARs seem to think their flag is a holy relic at times.
Hey at $270 for a replacement ervocom flag I wouldn’t want someone stepping on it! Especially if I’m footing the bill . But why was the 4O wearing his Vokkero receiver on his waist instead of the armband and also wearing a two way radio? I’ve seen 4O’s with them before is it just to communicate with staff?
Would have preferred he delayed showing the red until the mass confrontation was dealt with. He wasn't going to get anything out of a quick draw.
Some fascinating and really challenging incidents for VAR this past weekend. Lot of grey area for some of these calls. The two incidents in Atlanta highlight the difficulty that "clear and obvious" present to VARs. First you had the nightmare VAR scenario of PK incident/appeal on one end and then goal immediately on the other end. Honestly, I have no idea here. My gut tells me that is a PK and that it is close enough for VAR to get involved. I think "football expects" a penalty there. Honestly, I don't think PRO really is 100% sure either as to whether VAR should get involved there. Then you have the potential DOGSO/offside in the same play in Atlanta again. Again, really tough call. For me, it's DOGSO, but I can see arguments as to why not especially in regards to direction. With Marrufo that was never going to be a red card and I don't think FIFA wants that either. There seems to be a general trend from FIFA to be more player friendly and not give as many red cards. The interesting thing, in regards to VAR, is if a red card was given. VAR would obviously annul the red card as it was offside on the flick on. Here is where the arbitrary protocols of VAR can come into play. Imagine for a second if the defender was on a caution and the play happens and Marrufo gives a caution there and then a red card. Per the protocols, VAR is locked out. With Marrufo, the odds of a defender already on a caution 16 minutes into a game are slim and then getting another are even slimmer, but just for the sake of argument believe it could happen. For those that understand VAR protocols very well here. Can the VAR decide not to send this down for review because he saw that it was offside? So does he say "check complete for DOGSO because it was offside?" How does the review protocols work here? "I have DOGSO, but it is also offside" One other interesting note. For the good of the game, the VAR could game the system here and say "I recommend a review for DOGSO (even if he knows that it's not clear and obvious) and then Marrufo goes over to the monitor and looks at itand awards offside. I know I sound like a broken record here, but these two plays happened in the same game. But nothing really close like this happened in 64 games at the World Cup. FIFA massively lucked at the World Cup with VAR!
This is all a very good point. Technically, if a referee had a 2CT for a red card in a situation like this (one where the caution is illogical if it's for SPA, since the entire play is offside), then VAR has no basis to intervene because 2CTs and offside decisions are not grounds for an intervention. We are getting ahead of ourselves, though. The hope and more likely outcome in such a situation is that the AR is telling the CR the player was in an offside position. If the AR gets the call right (and there's no reason to believe he didn't here), you still get the result of foul only--despite what the commentators say on Instant Replay--because the foul occurs before the potential offside offence occurs. But that potential offside offence negates misconduct unless the foul is reckless or with excessive force. But back to the hypothetical world where a 2CT is given for a play where the fouled attacker is in an OSP but not properly adjudged to be in that position... yeah, per the VAR protocols, you're stuck. It's just like any other 2CT that is "wrong." Such a 2CT might feel more wrong than other dubious ones because it's essentially contrary to the LOTG, rather than just a poor subjective decision, but you open up a very slippery slope if VARs start finding ways to overturn some "bad" 2CTs but not others. So while I agree with you that there is a backdoor option for the VAR if decides to be disingenuous and recommend an OFR for DOGSO or even SFP, I don't think the competition authorities are going to be okay with that route. At least, PRO wouldn't. FIFA, as we saw this summer, is an entirely different ball of wax.
I don't know if AR communicated that it was offside. I personally doubt as it is a pretty tight call and I think ARs now are pretty much keeping the flag down on crossing incidents like that. Also, I think Marrufo would have communicated it that way instead of pointing direction and defenders near by as reason for no red. On the other hand, looking at the box score of the match, he didn't give any card in that incident. So it is possible. Marrufo would have communicated that though instead pointing to the defender near by and direction as the reason for no red card. I personally think it is just Marrufo's style of not giving many cards and being good enough to get away with it. Also, while technically giving a foul there is correct per the LOTG, everyone expects the IFK to be given there. You really think Marrufo or any referee would give a PK or DFK if the flag did go up? Or if red card was given there, you think after review they would rescind the red card but still give the DFK?
I did notice he was selling the no card with hand signals that indicated why it wasn't DOGSO. You could be right that, in this case, the AR didn't communicate to Marrufo that the player was in an offside position. But it's also possible Marrufo sold it that way precisely because it's an easier sell and didn't bother to get into the offside issues. We really don't and can't know from what is publicly available. My main point is that, in an ideal world, the AR does have the OSP correct and would be communicating that information. So there is an insurance policy before a call like this ever gets to VAR. Yes. And yes. On the first point, since this was changed the powers that be have been drilling it into professional referees that the time of the foul matters. If a player is yanked to the ground in the penalty area before a cross arrives, it's a penalty kick even if that attacker was in an OSP (notwithstanding the possibility that the player in the OSP interfered with a defender first, of course). Teams are being told this. Referees are being told this. FIFA and the IFAB wants more penalties and fewer offside flags for this sort of stuff. And the point is that the flag shouldn't go up if the foul occurs before the offside. ARs know this, too. The only think the offside position knowledge does is negate any misconduct related to the scoring or attacking opportunity. On the second point, 100% absolutely a red card would have been rescinded if it had been given on this play. You'd have video showing it was clearly wrong. Unless there was a major hiccup--the types of which, admittedly, we've seen too much recently--a VAR should be telling a referee to look at this again. In fact, prior to the recent instruction in MLS that referees need to go to the monitor for all calls, you could make an argument that this would be a factual review and that the VAR could just tell the CR to rescind the call. But that is probably a bridge too far in such a complicated situation.
I have no doubt that the red card would be rescinded here if it was given as well. I guess I didn't word the question right or am misreading your post but what do you think the restart would be? We both know what it should per the LOTG. Obviously a DFK as it occurred prior to the offside infraction. Would it be a DFK to the attacker or an IFK for offside if the red card was given and Marrufo did an OFR? From what your said, per the Laws and instruction, the red card would be rescinded but DFK still given since the foul occurred first. I know that. But my point is that I think it is a really hard sell to everyone. Fans and the public would go, "wait it's offside and the red card is rescinded, but they still get the free kick or penalty?"
AR did not raise the flag at all. Whether this was a missed decision or delayed because the referee was calling the foul who knows. Marrufo was immediately surrounded by a couple of Crew players asking for red. He quite publicly pointed out towards the corner and explained to them direction criteria was not met.
I get your point, but I don't think PRO or anyone else instructing referees cares that much about fans properly understanding what occurred; that's a problem for the IFAB, FIFA and MLS to fix. Some LOTG intricacies are already confusing. When you layer in the VAR interventions and lack of communication (at least in stadium, but also poor communication with broadcasters), things are just going to be confusing at times under the current VAR protocols and experiment. It's a fact of life and it's not worth worrying about for the officials. Referees are still learning this whole VAR thing as they go and the best practice is to just get things right--particularly the stuff that is objectively right or wrong. Because getting something objectively wrong after consulting VR is not a good place for a professional referee to be right now. So, yes, I think the restart would be DFK plus no red card if there was a VAR intervention in a play like this. The OFRs actually give the referee a good ability to manage players in situations like this (Elfath did it well the other night when he allowed the Dallas goal after review). I don't think selling the call on the field would be a problem at all. With that said, Rivero and Gonzalez botched a pretty simple post-VAR restart in DC last week (throw-in to the wrong team instead of a DFK for the fouled team) on a VC decision. So the officials in question have to clearly think everything through in order to make sure they get the right result after VAR intervention.
The argument in favor of calling OS over the foul would be diagram 4. He's the only attacker with a chance at a ball played directly in the path of his run and he's going after it. Absent the foul, it would be proper to flag before he gets to the ball. But this play is one of the examples where diagram 4 creates more challenges than it solves. Since we are supposed to look at the timing of the foul vs the OS infraction, the exact moment when diagram 4 would apply becomes critical. I lean towards agreeing that it was too soon and the foul was first, but I don't think the current guidance is as crisp on this as it should be. (Or perhaps this is just one of those things that can't get that crisp and needs to rely on ITOOTR and the SOTG.)
I have kind of beat this play to death. The last hypothetical that I have is, what happens on a play like this where the attacker is offside on a through and dribbles with the ball and gets fouled outside the penalty area and it's clearly DOGSO, but the referee only gives a yellow or doesn't call anything? In the Atlanta play, the correct decision can be still made because the foul occurred prior to the offside infraction. But what happens if the foul occurs after the offside infraction like on most normal plays? For example, the Cakir DOSGO play we had on the other thread in Turkey where it was clearly red but he gave yellow and VAR ordered an OFR and he still went yellow. What if the attacker was initially offside? Even if it is offside, does VAR still have an obligation to order a review for DOGSO even though he knows it can't be given because it is offside? What is the order of importance in regards to the correct call? Is he still obligated to request an OFR for DOGSO? What takes precedence? Or does he just split the difference and stick with the decision on the field? I.e two wrongs make a right? It presents an interesting dilemma do you allow the free kick and potential goal to be scored due to an offside fraction? Also, how do you communicate this to everyone that you are not ordering a review because it was offside? Also when it comes to card accumulation, it could be a problem in tournaments. A defender could potentially be suspended due to an incorrect yellow card due to offside even though he should have been given a red card. Admittingly, this hypothetical is pretty rare, but, as VAR expands and becomes widespread across the globe something like this will eventually happen and these loopholes and incidents will occur.
8.17 on page 38 comes the closest to answering your question (though, admittedly, it doesn't completely answer the question): https://www.knvb.nl/downloads/bestand/9844/var-handbook-v8_final 8.17 addresses a situation where a clear penalty kick was missed but there was an offside prior to the penalty kick. It lays out pretty clearly the two options the referee can take, but both result in (rightly) there being no penalty kick. Helpfully, the IFAB explicitly points out that such a scenario is "not easy." For your scenario, if a DOGSO situation was clear and no foul was called, the same situation would seem to apply. VAR would say "CR, I believe you missed a clear DOGSO but, also, there was clearly an offside offence in the build-up." CR could then follow either route in 8.17 to properly communicate that information. The tricky situation is a yellow card given on a clear DOGSO or borderline DOGSO when the build-up was offside. Because, unlike penalty decisions, yellow cards for SPA cannot be automatically reviewed. If the action was clear DOGSO, I think the VAR could take a gamble and intervene; people might even expect it, because you have to imagine that both teams would be asking for the intervention (attack would want the red card; defense would want the offside)--it just wouldn't be credible for a referee to not consult his VAR in a situation like that. I'm not sure you can confidently declare the protocols and handbook support such an intervention, but you also can't say they prohibit it either. If the action was a borderline DOGSO, by everything written down and we've been told, the VAR's hands are tied. He can't tell the referee "hey, come look at this regular foul again that is definitely not obvious DOGSO so that you can see the offside and rescind the yellow card you already gave." The protocols are very clear that yellow cards--on their own--are not up for review. Where that line falls between "obvious" DOGSO and "borderline" DOGSO is, of course, in the eyes of the VAR. And it's another example that shows VARing can be just as subjective as refereeing.
I agree with all this, but would add one note...such a 2CT send-off (even if the player was offside--ever so slightly, but offside and missed) is not a "bad 2CT." There was no whistle, the play was close, and the foul was legit. Before VAR, players would have accepted this 2CT...and maybe even have been thankful it wasn't a straight red. Now with VAR, a straight red could be reviewed, and ideally the offside would have been called, but regardless if the 2CT was given, the player deserved it. The lesson: if you are sitting on a caution, don't do a dumb foul (even if the opponent is offside). Good luck messaging that, but Marrufo probably could.