Any qualified refs care to comment on the double-red in last night's game? To me it looked like Gonzalez was manhandling Trujillo to be sure, but using his arm as a tool, definitely not a red. On the other hand, Trujillo uses his second arm swing, at a minimum, as a weapon, and then moves to taunt Gonzalez on the ground. Why the red to Gonzalez? Fouling Trujillo too close to the Chivas bench?
I talked about this in the Sounders forum. To me the refs saw Leo's hand in the face of Trujillo. Maybe even gouging at his eyes, so could've been that. Or an elbow to the chest.
LY - I there must have been something like that, but I also believe that's the kind of thing that goes on, uncalled, in many matches. Maybe I'm a homer? Who knows? It just seems that Leo was defending tough, business as usual, and Trujillo went beyond tough play with his reaction.
Referees usually see a reaction like that, and they wonder why that happened. Then they replay in their head what happened and remember an arm/hand and a face. They think they might've missed something the replay shows clearly and they red card the person. That's just the kinda thing that might've happened here. Leo isn't exactly innocent here but it's a fast physical event, it happens and the referees have to react to it without the benefit of replay.
I'm not sure about the Gonzalez ejection. I believe I would have given a caution for UB. Now Trujillo deserved an ejection for VC. Usually we see double reds when there is mass confrontation.
Yup, FIFA's stress on equal punishment is the reason for the second send off. If a card is shown to Gonzalez, itI has to be red, but I think just the red to Trujillo would have sufficed.
IMHO, Leo did not deserve red. It was the easier call for the refs to make, but in mind, not the fairest one.
In the long conference that followed, the AR looked like he was saying "send 'em both off". Prus looked like he was saying "these were really good brownies". It seemed they decided that none of them saw anything, but Trujillo was really mad, so Leo must've done something really bad.
Can anyone explain this emphasis or provide a pointer to more info? It makes almost no sense to me. A yellow card offense can certainly trigger a red card response (or a yellow response, or a no response), but it shouldn't change the yellow into a red, should it? It also seems to put the assessment role on the retaliating player. e.g. "If I decide it's worthy of a response, it must have actually been an offense." For the record, I don't understand the post-game suspension of Materazzi, so maybe I'll never appreciate the wisdom of this approach. Also, this call highlights (to me) some of the frustration of fans trying to understand the team of officials' response: sometimes refs say, "Hey, I didn't see it, so I didn't call it," other times, "I thought I saw something," but this time seems like, "I didn't see it, but man, from the reaction, there must have been something I missed, something bad." Shouldn't the AR's flag go up the minute Leo started pushing on Trujillo's face if he sees something? He was out of the field of view of the camera, so I couldn't tell if that had happened. I've watched this in slow motion, and Leo clearly had his palm on Trujillo's face early in the sequence. Then, Leo had his hand on Trujillo's shoulder and Trujillo clearly got tired of it and hit with his left before swinging around hard with the right.
If Trujillo had played through Leo's foul, there might not have been any call all at all. But once Trujillo took a few shots at Leo, play had to stop. Now it's easier to red card them both and satisfy both coaches and benches that justice was served, then to try and split hairs. Easy decision. But IMO, not the fairest. (Did I say that already. And you can ignore the fact that I'm a Sounders fan. I'm being 100% objective here.
Yup, and it's not just USSF. Every clinic that I've attended, when these situations are covered, the concept of equal punishment is drilled into us. The national referees that I know also have all commented that its coming down fromm the highest levels - equal punishment. Now, that's not to say the referee has no leeway, and in this case, I don't think the second red was warrented. However, unless I missed something on the video, the reason I can suggested as to why Gonzalez was sent off is because of the directions coming down from FIFA/USSF/CSA/etc.
Don't confuse FIFA with USSF. But please note the bolded sections: So USSF is saying deal firmly with the instigator/aggressor, but don't overlook the reaction of the opponent if he also acts in an aggressive and intimidating manner. For example, it would be easy to overlook a poor reaction by an opponent and shrug it off because he was provoked, but USSF is reasonably saying that this is not the way to go. IMO, "the referee should ensure both players are punished uniformly" line is misleading. I think many would interpret it to mean that unequal levels of misconduct are to be punished equally, and this clearly cannot be correct.
Well sure, I know the difference between USSF and FIFA! No one had introduced this material into the discussion, so I thought I would. It might help explain the thinking of the refs on the game and the two reds for what on the surface do not look to me like equal levels of misconduct. As I said earlier, I'm not arguing for two equal cards in this instance. I would have liked to see yellow to Gonzales.
The last time a red and yellow card were issued nearly simultaneously, it was a yellow card to Brek Shea for tripping Miguel Montano and a red card to Montano for striking Shea in the head (in his first MLS start) on July 11, in Seattle. Kevin Stott was praised in Week in Review 15 for his excellent positioning. No mention was made that unequal cards were given.
I think Prus was way too far away from this situation, and if you watched the game, that was pretty much normal. I also think that this is two games in a row for him that had two really absurd send-offs by him. Columbus, and now this one. Both had the same thing in common...too far away. If he gave the send off for the initial foul, that is just crazy.
That's a foul and a retaliation, which is not what the directive talks about. We're talking about when two players are going at each other....different. Note, I am not saying that it should have been two reds because I do not think that. I am trying to present a reason as to why that decision was made. My opinion is that the referee had the equal punishment directive too much in his mind. Edit: Re: Stott incident. I haven't seen the incident. I am assuming that based on your discription.
Thanks to all for some interesting insight and education here. It's clear there's some direction that I would consider confusing and poorly-written at best and ill-founded at worst. For example, as PVancouver points out, what does the word "uniformly" mean? Aren't all players and actions on the pitch judged uniformly against the laws of the game? I don't really think they mean to give each player the same penalty, do they? Key also is the player who "aggressively" initiates the disrepute. Perhaps some refs are confusing all players who initiate some activity that results in a "situation" with those who initiate it aggressively. I'm not sure if Leo was aggressively initiating disrepute, but my guess is that had that been the case, Prus should have been motioning to play on for advantage... My favorite part of this whole thing is the preface, "If the situation involves only 2 players, the referee has flexibility and discretion to manage." If it's 3 players, the ref's hands are tied. If 4, he calls Sepp Blatter. 5 is right out!
I don't know why the red to Gonzalez... I watched this clip 6 or 7 times just trying to figure out who Gonzalez was before going back and looking at the box score and realizing he was the guy who got slapped in the face. If it was 1-for-1, it's a tough red to Gonzalez. I know that's supposed to appease both teams, but it does seem to hurt a sense of justice. I think you have Prus in the late stages of a match failing to recognize a flash point (the defender grabbing/holding/hugging the attacker) right in front of the benches. That maybe should get the foul call early, so the attacker doesn't have time to get frustrated and lash out. But then again, I didn't watch the whole match, just the highlight, so perhaps this all came out of nothing. Prus wasn't the only guy who let his guard down. Ricardo Salazar was the 4th... it was interesting to see him move to the touchline as he sensed a problem developing, and you can hear him yelling at Gonzalez, "Let him go!" right before Trujillo clocks Gonzalez. His shoulders slump when it happens, like, "Man, we were two minutes from being done..." But then Salazar stood there and watched as guys streamed in before realizing that he needed to get in there and help defuse. In fact, George Gansner, the AR, got there before Salazar did, kind of crazy when you consider Salazar is a few yards away and Gansner is a good 10-15 yards at least. When Salazar does dive in, he does the smart thing and pulls Trujillo away before anybody can get to him. Unfortunately, when Osvaldo Alonso went after him, he released Trujillo and it looks like Nathan Sturgis confronts Trujillo with some chest bumping. The other AR, Brian Poeschel, has crossed the field and is watching this while Salazar pulls Alonso away. All in all, pretty interesting MC management... seems like both Prus and Salazar dozed off initially but then got in there and did their thing. Gansner was the only guy who seemed switched on to the entire process.
And I forgot to mention amidst all of this, 31st minute, Sanna Nyassi cleats Justin Braun in the face and doesn't even get a card?!?! http://www.mlssoccer.com/videos?catid=114&id=7868
Ouch! Yes, what happened there? That call isn't even that interesting, it just seems so straightforward. Reckless play. Not surprising, though, as avoiding it would have required Nyassi to have his head up...
Riley wasn't supposed to let go of Braun until AFTER Nyassi kicked the ball clear . I have to wonder why everyone is completely discounting Gonzalez' left arm into the chest/face area of Gonzalez. For me, if there was a red card for Gonzalez in this incident, this is where it is, yet not a single other person has even acknowledged that this event even occurred. Granted, it is not nearly dramatic as the head swings from Trujillo or even the holding and head rub from Gonzalez, but for me it certainly puts a red in the realm of possibility. Too bad we don't see it close up at speed.
Prus was at the top of the center circle, opposite his AR. Where do you want him to be? Prus' previous game was Colorado-Dallas--no red cards issued. Before that it was Columbus-Houston. Boswell took a second yellow for a reckless foul. We don't get a great look at it but it could hardly be considered an absurd red.
It should also be mentioned that Osvaldo Alonso clearly deserved a third-man in caution on the play, if cards are still being handed out for that. Of course, that would upset the "balance" of punishment.