Pick three...there was a maximum that I could assign to the poll, so I took the refs with the fewest games out. Some issues with alphabetizing, but everyone else should be there.
Who has actually seen all these guys referee anyway? Maybe this reflects the lack of interest in MLS in general? It would be interesting to find out how many on our board really follow MLS enough to be able to cast a meaningful vote. It seems to me that most are too busy doing their own games to have time to go to or even watch on TV an MLS match. Plus others whose soccer TV time is spent on leagues like EPL, La Liga, and the like, as well as the two UEFA cups and WC qualifiers. PH
^ agree 100% with PH I hardly watch MLS regularly. I know a majority of the referees tho. It's tough for me to really know who is hot and who is not. I tend to watch towards the end of the season and usually when it's a referee I like! I watch almost every EPL match. Whatever Bundesligs match is shown on Fox during the week. I watch at least 3-4 Champions League matches. 2 Europa league matches. Ocassionally some Serie A and La Liga, mostly the big games. I also watch USL Pro matches and USL PDL (via YouTube). You get the idea! I just simply don't have the time to watch MLS
Plus MLS is genuinely unwatchable. It's such an inferior product compared to the European game. Also, the regular season in MLS is just meaningless. Everyone makes the playoffs. Only thing I watch is Instant Replay. That's the way I gauge who is doing well and who isn't.
I hope you would admit that this means you are gleaning almost nothing about a referee's management skills, his rapport with players, his general consistency on foul selection, etc., etc., etc. Also, you're not able to assess anyone who is omitted, which would be the referees who see the fewest amount of controversial plays. Sure, watching Instant Replay allows you to see who might be "missing," the most KMIs. Even then, that catalogue is being filtered through Simon Borg and his merry band of Twitter followers. I get it's difficult to watch all MLS matches, for some of the reasons pointed out above. So I understand what you're saying. I just hope you don't think watching Instant Replay on a weekly basis means your assessment is anything close to comprehensive.
Glad you agree with me, but with all the games you watch, when do you have time for anything else, including going to work, sleep, refereeing your own games (and the bathroom)? PH
Of course it's not comprehensive at all. I don't claim it to be. I really couldn't tell you who the best referee is in MLS. I'm sure there are posters on this board who have access to the assessment scores so they can tell you who statistically is the best referee in MLS from an evaluation stand point. I catch the highlights and there is somewhat of a pattern. Some of the better referees appear less or appear in positive stand point on there. Others don't.
Fair points, although you could probably say the same thing about most of the people that actually vote for the awards. The players: I'm sure there are a few that can objectively say who's good...but I'd say the vast majority of the players are biased by how their calls effect them and their teams. Media members: Well, we've seen how well most media members understand the Laws (cough, cough)...but I'd say this category probably sees the most games in the least subjective matter, although there certainly are many homers among the media. And my favorite: MLS club staff (including coaches, technical directors, chief business officers and PR directors) Is there anyone on this list that you think could give a reasonable opinion of refs? Maybe TDs, but who else. My point is that even those here that don't watch a whole lot of MLS are probably as qualified, if not more qualifies, to determine who the best refs are.
So you're arguing that people who don't regularly watch a product might be more qualified to pass judgment on a component of that product than three groups who are intimately involved in said product every single week--just because they all come from groups that could cause them to have biases? Sorry, but I'll take a group of MLS coaches or beat writers and (definitely) players over a group of online referees who admit to only occasionally watching league matches. It's absurd to argue those here who don't watch a lot of MLS are as qualified or more qualified than the people who literally live and breathe in the league itself. No one ever said process for this award is perfect. It's not. But a collection of BS Referee board members who don't regularly watch MLS would be worse. You want a really meaningful award that is close to objective? Let the ARs vote for the Referee of the Year and vice versa. A few personality conflicts would be the only biases you would have there. If you polled all the ARs, you'd find out who the best referee was this year.
Are Kelly, Maruffo and Toledo the three best referees in the league? Because that's who the "people who literally live and breathe in the league itself" picked. Or would you rather have Penso, Villareal and Fischer?
Do you ever debate on the merits or do you just respond to questions you can't answer or points you can't rebut by moving the goalposts? At no point did I say Kelly, Marrufo and Toledo were the best or not the best in the league. And at no point did I say the process for selecting this award is good. In fact, I said it wasn't. In the other thread, I pointed out exactly why those three would end up as the finalists given the voting process. That being said, at least the people taking these votes are involved in the league every week and have a familiarity or direct involvement with all the referees. They have something to base their judgment on, even if it's not perfect. You explicitly said above that people who don't even watch the league regularly are at least as qualified if not more qualified to judge which referees were the best over the course of the season. That's laughable. And I'm pointing that out. Personally, with one match and everything on the line in MLS, I'm taking Stott or Toledo every time. As I said on another thread a week ago, I thought Fischer and Penso had great years based on what I observed (http://forums.bigsoccer.com/threads...nments-and-discusssion.2036364/#post-34755867 gee, I wonder if my statement on the board skewed these results a bit?). Those would be my four, but that's admittedly from historical knowledge + watching a few games + extended highlights + Instant Replay, just like @RedStar91. In other words, I'm not that qualified at all to pass judgment and I admit that.
This has to be one of the more nonsensical statements I have heard. While I have never agreed with how this award is chosen, it is painfully obvious that the people who see more of the games due to its being their job, would be more qualified than the casual observers on this board. Even your own survey results tell you this, which is what I was pointing out earlier. PH
I don't disagree entirely with this because clearly there are teams of officials involved here. I can remember when there where very good referees from a technical viewpoint in a previous professional league, but they were not really very nice people. So they would never get a vote from ARs, who were sometimes expected to carry the referee's bag and open car doors for them! The one group of people who could provide a far less biased opinion for this award would be the assessors. There may be one or two with favorites, but overall I think you would get a fair evaluation over the entire season. PH
I'm not sure exactly how you guys define "qualified", but to me if you consistently fail at a task, then you are not qualified to do it.
We got a George Carlin in the house... I'm a student so I have the luxury of always having internet access. I stream a lot of matches through my ISP/Cable company. I also don't have TiVo... so I catch the extended highlight reel and replays through my on demand service. As far as work goes I have a seasonal job and refereeing to make rent A lot of MLS matches are not on my OnDemand service by FS1 but since NBCSN picked up the EPL a lot of full games and extended match day highlights are included.
Here are my thoughts...literal thoughts *He wants to bash the process. Cool. I think it's stupid, too. Let me keep reading...* *Probably...I kind of like where he's going* *Where is he going with this?* *Wait...he wants to have an MLS award that's not voted on by MLS?* *Holy s---. There's just...there's just no way that anyone in their right mind can say that* He's talking about how he has consistently failed at that task of offering an alternative system for determining the ROTY. And how he is not qualified to do so. Clearly.
Gotcha! Nice life! But being a student, how do know about George Carlin? He's been dead for 8 years, and was at his peak in the 70s & 80s. Unless you are one of those who has returned to school after working for a few years. But I am flattered by being compared to him, one of my all time favorites! PH
Let me make this as simple as possible. I am pointing out that the current system is so bad, that we that frequent this board would elect more worthy recipients than the current voters do. If you guys want to obsess over the word "qualified", have at it.
Just waiting to hear "liar," "wrong!" or "nasty woman" in this thread . . . the horse is dead, let's bury it
I watch most MLS games. (And lots of other leagues too.) I've long since been over the Eurosnobs. I also recognized long ago that what I think makes a well-officiated game isn't the same as what PRO thinks or what MLS thinks or probably what the players or coaches or GMs think. For the matches where I care about the outcome I know I am not objective but I do try to be fair. So clearly, I should be the one who gets to choose.
Im a millennial. Lol How can someone not like George Carlin? regardless of his various stances on hot topics. His seven dirty words comedy is golden! I had a hunch that you enjoyed his comedy!