What has to be said is that the Jamaican Defender was stupid for sliding in for a tackle like that from behind with NO chance of getting the ball from that angle and position. He has no one to blame but himself for such foolishness. Dracula is going to give a Red card for that every day of the week.
A picture showing contact being made and people still deny that there was contact. Hatred really does impair people's vision.
This isn't really a good comparion in my opinion. Portillo's play acting was to a phantom slap on the face where he was intimidating the CR player... Jones exaggerated a foul but imo was justified in going down... he was through on goal, the Jamaican made a sliding tackle from behind, there was minimal contact but just enough probably to throw JJ off balance a little, so he went down. Imo the red card was on the Jamaican defender whose tackle was so late he missed both the ball and the player. You notice there were virtually no protests from the Jamaican players to the decision as well. Anyway, the decision was pretty moot imo as the US were clearly, despite their wastefulness in front of goal, running away with the game. I guess the question would be if FIFA were to use replays to punish players for simulation, who would deserve some sort of ban - Portillo or Jones? I think Portillo is guility but not so much Jones. I would say the difference here would be exagerrating a foul vs. making one up completely. A slap in the face is not a slap in the face when there's no slap in the face but a tackle from behind is a tackle from behind, regardless of hom much contact there is.
I didn't know that but that needs to change. If there isn't a conspiracy in CONCACAF against the Caribbean sides, especially against Jamaica, when they meet the USA, then its certainly beginning to look like one. I posted honest comments about the history of these games, which is on record and the moderator gave me a trolling warning; looks like they don't like to hear the truth or differing opinions on this site but... Last night performance by the referee was another one for the archives. He doesn't hesitate or consult with his assistants, he gives a straight red without any possibility of being 100% sure that there was a foul. That was honestly, one of the most blatant, spectacular dives seen in world football for a long time now; a real classic. Jamaica did not do themselves any favours by playing negative, defensive tactics, with 2 defensive midfielders, one of whom, Austin, should not have been starting any at all but... Even at 1 - 0 down, to a wickedly deflected goal. Jamaica, with 11 men on the pitch, were still very much in the match. It wouldn't cost CONCACAF anymore in referees expenses to bring in some good European refs who have no connection to the region; it would remove all doubts of bias or undue influence over the match officials.
Mate, a picture and video are two completely different things; one is static and the other 'live' replay. Simulation is pretending that there's been a foul that hasn't happened. The tackle was rash but not dangerous, the player did not raise his studs, he simply went for a ball that was there to be won. The ref might have been strectching it a bit to say that because Jones needed to evade the tackle it was illegal but that is not the rules. The simulation was blatant; Jones did not go down from the initial tackle, which would have been more acceptable. He was still on his feet, took two long strides, jumped in the air again and threw himself down. An English referee would have booked him immediately for simulation for what he did.
Jamaica would have lost yesterday with any ref from any country on this planet. Dont be in denial. USA was the better team.
Nobody's said they weren't; Jamaica did not show up to play yesterday and that si the main reason they lost, more than anything else but... It still does not negate to influence the sending off decision had on the match. One thing has nothing to do with the other.
Conspiracy? Refs from Europe? If you don't want to see your players sent off, there's a simple solution - don't commit ref-card worthy fouls. It doesn't matter if you're studs are up or not if you take a man down and are the last man to goal, it's considered a DOGSO - Deny An Obvious Goal-Scoring Opportunity. That was a DOGSO fould so the guy had to go. If he doesn't make that tackle then Jones is through on goal and it's most likely 2-0 anyway. Jones had the choice of taking the advantage or taking the foul. I guess he was knocked off balance enough to take the latter. I don't see what the big deal is here, it was the right call at the end of the day and the chances of Jamaica getting anything from that game were very slim anyway.
But if you look at the clip:[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=khbDD-6zHsI"]YouTube - USA vs Jamaica Dive with slow motion‏[/ame] The guy who got sent off did not argue. Not one peep. He left with his tail in between his legs guilty as charged. IF it were a stupid "conspiracy" as you try to emphasize and I were called for a foul that was false... ...I would argue until I was blue in the face about the injustice. Not walk away from it looking all sad and defeated and about to cry.
Any player will play to gain an advantage...that is the nature of the game. Do you notice the title of this video ? Dive with slow motion. Says it all about the poster of the video's opinion on the play. If you took an opinion poll of the world's neutral supporters who watched this match anyone will tell you.... That was as blatant a dive as you will ever see. The incidence of contact is not the issue; the rules are that if whatever contact was made was not enough to take the player down and he goes down purposely looking to gain an advantage, it is unsporting behaviour and punishable by a yellow card. That dive ticks all the boxes, regardless of how you attempt to justify.
Pathetic negative play from Jamaica, I have no idea why we continuously allow the US to play against us. Our form was so much better than the US in the group stages, and this 'could' have been a decent match if we continued doing what we were doing. Horribly disappointed, but it's just like Jamaica to give me hope, then pop it suddenly and unexpectedly SN: Lol at people trying to justify jermaine jones' dive.
Shows Whitmore's lack of experience and full control over the selection process of both personnell and tactics. I strongly believe that here are elements in the Jamaican dressing room that has Whitmore held to ransom for the teams that he picks as his strongets starting 11. These type of players have always been those to disrupt Jamaica's team if they do not get their way. I saw it on the pitch last night; it is almost as if , had Whitmore started the team that started the Honduras match, he would have had a rebellion on his hands and the 'rebels' played the worse game of their entire careers in a Jamaica jersey. We all know who I'm referring to and does Whitmore have the balls to drop those players to make Jamaica a better team that we know they can be ?
So the guy sliding into the player from behind didn't initiate contact, the guy running away from the person sliding did? Even the most biased posters have to laugh at how stupid this sounds?
Have you ever heard of 'drawing a foul' ? Leaving your foot there so that contact can be made ? There might have been slight contact there but it did not take the player to the ground or cause him to lose his balance; he did that all on his won and the entire world has seen that. What's stupid here is your lack of understanding of the rules of soccer, also called the laws of the game. Referees get them wrong all the time as this one did last night. The rules of football do not allow a player to go down looking for a call simply because contact was made. What about that do you not understand.? That is one of the major areas of the game that FIFA is taking great efforts to clean up; diving and cheating by players to gain an advantage. Obviously the referees in CONCACAF have not caught up with Europe on this as yet. It was not just this match and this call; they have been allowing it throughout the entire tournament.
Who cares? Jones heel got clipped and the ball was going to get to the keeper before he could recover. We see this all the time in this sport. No way Jamaica was going to win this game either way. PERIOD. USA dominated play after that first save by Howard in the 4th minute... and were clearly the better side yesterday. But you don't hear many give credit where credit is due. USA advances, they earned it, they were the better team. End of story.
I've been the first to admit that the USA were the better side and Jamaica was not what they needed to be in this match but this issue of the call is totally seperate from that reality. You already named it, his heels got clipped, the ball was running away and he had no chance of getting back to it so he dived and got a player sent off. Admit that, as you already have done and we will be square on all points. Good luck to the USA but Panama will not be Jamaica. Lets see if the refs have any more gifts in the goodies bag for the good ole USA before this tournament finishes. Come back and talk to me if there are any really questionable calls that goes in the USA's favour against Panama.
You are misinterpreting the laws of the game. 1. A player does not have to go to ground for there to be a foul. The Jamaican player clearly clipped Jone's knee, thus committing a foul that was DOGSO and thus automatic red. It doesn't matter if Jones left his foot behind looking to "draw" the foul. The foul was committed. 2. Simulation (diving) is defined as "attempts to deceive the referee by feigning injury or pretending to have been fouled" in the laws of the game. While Jones embellished the foul, the fact that the foul occurred eliminates the possibility of simulation. Thus a referee CANNOT by the laws of the game give Jones a yellow for simulation. If you have any further questions or complaints take them to the referee forum here
Your points are well taken but emblemishing the foul is judged as simulation also, depending on the referees discretion. Football is a physical contact sport aand this implies an allowed level of contact. It will be interesting to see what other referees forums have to say about this particular incident. I have absolutely no doubt that embleshiment of the foul to the extent that Jones did would have earned him a yellow card in the EPL, where I work and watch matches every single week. Jones very well knows that if he tried that playing for Aston Villa in the EPL, he would most certainly have been booked for simulation and I stand firmly by that opinion based on solid experience of the game in the EPL. That type of dive would never, ever have conned even the most mediocre of EPL referees. Visit my site www.soccer-rules-controversies.com in the coming months for more of these lively and educational debates. We will have plenty to discuss and argue about when the EPL season starts again and I will now be paying more attention to MLS. I'm sure there's some juicy stuff going on there as well !
So the non-sliding player has the responsibility to get out of the way of the player who left his feet in a challenge? No. Never. Not even in a made up fantasy world. Not even going to mention the absurdity of the claim that he left his foot there to draw the contact since the video makes that statement a joke. Oops, guess I am going to mention it. Since you love to make things up that aren't really true just post the link to the actual verbage of the Simulation rule. Your make believe world is not up for debate.
[Obviously the referees in CONCACAF have not caught up with Europe on this as yet.] What? I have seen really terrible referre works from all over Europe, the Islands, Mediaterranean, Scandinavian, Italians, all over, some referrees in Europe could be counted within the dumbest of them all. Have you seen WCs? Champions legue? They f..k up matches like everyone else. The problem is that referring does not have to improve, it has to evolve, certainly. One little guy chasing a ball fastly moved around by skilled and strongest players than those of 1870, when rules were set, is definitely not enough. Even wih more ref's like in basketball, or even with reply as in NFL, things can go wrong. So don't blame it on the ref's so much as blame it on the players. Everybody is criticizing the poor ref for the Panama-El Salvador game but nobody talks about the players faking fouls or hitting each other behind scenes. Bunch of bullshit that I am ashamed of my son watching. As for the seems-to-be play of the game in the USA-Jamacia, I think a yellow card would have been enough for the Jamaican player given that another Jamaican was coming in from the right side and could put some pressure on Jones, who by the way, is a terrible actor, good for him that Chiquidrácula was looking from behind. There is slight contact which at certain speed can trump you very easily, but the way Jones pulls back his head like if he had been shot on the back, is just lousy. One of those terrible plays where everybody looks bad, players and ref. Saddly, it appears that ref's mistakes are part of the game, just as the dives and the fakings, and the under-the-table elbows and hugs in corners, etc. Some people state that that's the reason why the game is so appealing to the masses. Well..
diving simulation same thing. Its not like jamaica was gonna win but still...... have to say tho Jamaica showed that without Mexico and the U.S concacaf is prolly as bad as OFC
The Red card was issued by the REF. That was HIS CALL. I'd say 99% of all players would have done the same if thier heel was clipped and they had no chance to get to the ball. But the REAL point remains the same, the USA was the better side and deserved to win that game. And the USA has had PLENTY of calls go against them in the past.... did you not watch the world cup last year?