I believe you're mistaking Stott's unflappable demeanor for timidity. He's done like 350 games and been in the league since day one. When regarding what he views as silliness, he simply doesn't care and doesn't allow himself to be baited. Now, you can criticize his approach on the merits. But "timid" is definitely the wrong description.
I'd argue that backing down from confrontation by players has a lot to do with escalation of fouls and games getting ruined. I'm not arguing that he changed his mind or favored a side because of ignoring dissent, but the game got worse and worse. and seeing Larentowitz being shoved in the chest multiple times as Stott jogs by. only to get a post match VAR red card for a stomp that was retaliatory seems proof enough. that said, it was a nice warm up for the Gold Cup final
As I said, I think you can certainly criticize his overall approach and/or his handling (or lack thereof) of individual incidents. I just don't think--actually, I'd say I'm sure--that "timid" is the wrong word to describe Stott. Timid implies fear or a maybe even a general sense of inexperience. Stott's approach is calculated, based on both his experience and his reputation. You can credibly argue it didn't work here; my quibble is just with the description.
https://matchcenter.mlssoccer.com/m...ders-fc-vs-real-salt-lake/details/video/25125 Watch Stott issue this red card. He is not timid.
What you have to consider is that the VAR is checking things non stop. They also aren't going to insist on a review until they are certain of something, especially VC. So yes the timing may be odd since the match had ended, but ultimately nothing incorrect occurred. The VAR recommended a review as the referees were on the way to the locker room.
Watching some USL2 match via streaming and I tune in, a yellow card in the 21st minute and I hear from the coaches line: “That’s his first foul!! Come on!” A foul is a foul, no?
Stott is the Honey Badger of Referees. Not enough to bring it back after the end of the game and give him a red?
I assume that when looking at potential fine the multiple prior shoves that led to the Larentowitz foul would be taken into consideration?
He's on $210K this year and I don't think he's ever been a max salary player in this league. (This is not to diminish the fact that $210K is quite well off compared to the average person but there's a difference between most MLS salaries and the image of "athlete rich" most people have)
And he's also one of those players that was making league min for a LONG time before he was making that much money. And league min was dirt poor money back then. $22.5k a year I think?
No one implied they care or not. We simply stated some facts to dispute you're incorrect statement that he's rich. He's not. He's well off now because he paid his dues and the league grew and the player's CBA now reflects that. He's middle class. But he's not rich.
1. I was replying to a person who obviously cared because they brought up the subject. 2. Hes in the top 5% in America, which is a rich nation. He's rich.
Can a middle-class family earn $200k? https://www.nytimes.com/2019/07/09/reader-center/middle-class-families.html
Interesting tidbit I didn't know in this weeks "Definitive Angle" re: the Rooney #RedNotRed, if the referee describes a SFP red to the VAR in a way that doesn't match what the video shows, then the VAR is not supposed to maintain the "clear/obvious" standard, but should lower his threshold for intervention. I hadn't heard that before.
The Definitive Angle - Week 18 http://proreferees.com/2019/07/12/the-definitive-angle-mls-week-18/ Explanation of the Rooney incident is just a bit contradictory. Reproduced below for when PRO inevitably fixes it. This tells me this decision was a point of contention among The Powers That Be this week.
So it was wrong to review it, but since they did it was right to overturn it? The clear-as-mud transparency of PRO strikes again!
Pretty sure they were discussing and wrote it up both ways--but forgot to delete the disfavored view before publishing. Sloppy. But I agree this is a close call and neither of the views is completely unreasonable.