Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Copa América 2016 - Refereeing' started by bhooks, Jun 26, 2016.
He sure did! He moved it twice. Why no magic spray and why was nobody watching Messi?
He did use the spray. It dissolved because the set up took so long.
Lopes had poor grade 8 mechanics last night. The reversed throw in call was simply amazing too. Plus, the mass confrontations, the players lobbying for cards, the theatrics of both players and referees all added up to a really weird night.
Maybe @MassachusettsRef can shed some light on his appointment to the final?
Adapting a line from a famous movie: You just need one word... "Brazil."
Words you don't need: ability, merit.
If ever lower level referees needed an (another) example of the crooked processes at the highest levels, this was it.
That was posted June 14, so Mass Ref was anticipating that assignment.
It was easy to anticipate and obvious once Brazil was eliminated. They used to control FIFA for many years
and the same thing happened at the WC in both 1982 and 1986. Now their influence in FIFA is diminished,
partly due to the corruption scandals involving Brazilians, but they still control CONMEBOL.
I'd like to see the same thing but do you think this is because of cultural differences or playing styles?
Many years ago, they used to bring in referees from England for the Copa America. See here:
Maybe they should do this again!
Yes, we critique refereeing performances and decisions on this forum, and yes the referee on the final deserves some criticism.
But will people at least acknowledge that this was a ballbuster of a game? This was a difficult game to manage from the very beginning. The referee took a certain approach in the 1st half - he was at least as emotional as the players, if not moreso. He tried to set the tone with a couple cautions. Nothing seemed to work. Perhaps his approach was all wrong, but at least he appeared to have a game plan. Some of his theatrical mannerisms and emotional outbursts were funny to watch but not terribly effective.
Clearly he seemed to raise the bar for a caution much higher in the 2nd half.
I honestly don't think he did that terrible. Honestly, I think the players were worse than the referee. It didn't seem like the players from both teams came to play the game during the first half.
I will give him that at least got past the usual "finalitis" of avoiding red cards at almost any cost. But these referees
must clamp down and put a stop to the antics early in the game.
The bogus concept of "management" must be eradicated at all levels of the game, because the players
and coaches have wised up to it, and exploit it.
Not saying it wasn't a difficult game, but the 2ct was so bizarre that ANYTHING else was going back uphill. Yes, the players came out to hack and chop, but it seemed he wasn't anywhere near prepared to handle that possibility.
I agree this was a difficult match and I'm not sure anyone would have been able to handle it. The players didn't cover themselves in glory for sure. But his style seemed needlessly confrontational and over-the-top. However, the organizers bear the responsibility for assigning him in the first place. I noted in one of his earlier matches that his card technique was way too overly dramatic. Maybe that works with 14 year olds, but professional players are going to just roll their eyes and think this guy is a buffoon.
I can't imagine him being picked for the Euro's.
Again, I wonder if this is a cultural thing. The South and Central Americans seem to be very emotional and confrontational, and perhaps this referee has, in the past, developed a particular style that successfully met this with equivalent emotion. If pros thought this guy was a buffoon and didn't respect him, I don't think he gets to the final of a major tournament, much less chosen to referee AT the tournament. As you say, it's not like the organizers had never seen this guy before, nor is it likely he changed his style for the final, so in the immortal words of Dennis Green: "He was who we thought he was."
I'm glad to see the comments on this thread because I thought I was losing my mind seeing the comments on certain social media groups. Quite a few people in those groups thought Lopes performance ranged from very good to outstanding, even some highly respected people in the US soccer referee ranks.
Let me preface my comments by saying that I thought this was a very difficult match and I laud Lopes for the manner in which he handled the verbal abuse by both sides. I also thought his foul recognition was very good outside of one specific instance. That being said, how anyone can give him a satisfactory grade on this performance is completely beyond me.
It became very apparent that Lopes was going to try to set the tone early with cautions. While that usually isn't my approach, nor do I think its the best route, sometimes its necessary. However, once you give a caution in the 16th minute to Diaz, you better be aware of the ramifications of such a caution in the big picture.....1) this player will potentially be sitting on a caution for the remaining 74 minutes 2) there's a possibility this early caution may handcuff you in giving another one later in the match) 3) there's a possibility that this player will pick up a second caution and force a match critical decision (send off), and 4) much to your dismay, this second caution may be of the tactical nature, as it was 12 minutes later when Diaz was given his marching papers.
So, what are you left with in the 28th minute after you send off Diaz?
A pretty pissed off Chile, knowing that they now have to play the rest of the FINAL shorthanded, for what is perceived (rightly or wrongly) as a SOFT foul. If that doesn't increase the temperature of the match, I don't know what does. From that point on you had FOUR more cards in the next 15 minutes or so until halftime.
What would have been my solution?
1) Maybe kept the yellow in my back pocket on the first caution to Diaz, not burn a card that early. Having seen the play from a different angle later though, I would have probably gone yellow there as well, simply because of the tactical nature of the foul.
2) I surely would not have gone red I the 28th minute. My personal opinion is that it was a cleverly disguised tactical foul. That being said, I also have discretion in deeming this tactical and I think theres enough wiggle room in this one for interpretation. I have two other outs, namely, wave play on and indicate Messi embellished/initiated the contact, or give a simple dfk to Argentina at the spot of the foul.
Either one would have been a rather easy sell. Instead, Lopes goes for the option which has the greatest impact on the game, the send off.
So when he encounters the challenge from behind on Vidal by Rojo about 15 minutes later, he goes without hesitation straight RED...even though it wasn't even a simple foul, much the less red. IMO, after the send off of Diaz he was just looking for a reason to even up the send offs, and this was it. Unfortunately for him, he completeley botched it.
So in the first forty five minutes you have two match critical decisions and you completely miss one and didn't use the best options available to you on the other.
Not very good at all.
Lopes supporters will claim the flurry of cards (6) in the first half had their desired effect. My contention is that only after Lopes sent off Rojo did the match quiet down, given that Chile now felt a sense of justice, but the send off was 100% WRONG.
and then we get to what I think his greatest fault was.......namely his ego and temperament. Ive never seen a referee issue a card while balancing on one leg like a flamingo, nor have I ever seen a ref bang a DISSENT card right into a players face in the 94 minute like Lopes did to Kranevitter. For that matter, I have never seen a ref pound his chest repeatedly, give numerous thumbs up to his ar, and then start clapping like he was applauding at the opera...after a missed throw in signal.
The perception was that Lopes thought this final was about him, not the players/teams.....and perception is often reality in these cases.
all true and very well stated...but I still think that he forgot the initial yellow card and thus somebody whispered into his earpiece about the 2nd yellow.
Well then, even worse....he couldn't keep track of the ONLY player sitting on a card, 28 minutes in?