Jovan has been assisting since Sigi came on board. I think it's probably temporary, but each game it extends on, I wonder...
DPs, Lletget and Ema... and after tonight, maybe Kempin. Most everyone else I'm indifferent about but, the problem is, I'm not confident that this FO could do much better if given a second chance.
So when is Sigi going to be a winning coach for us? Are our players that bad? Magic Eight Ball says It is Decidedly So.
Just pointing out Bruce only got two wins from ten when he first took the reigns. We were that bad then; we're that bad now.
I'm so depressed by the galaxy right now, but there's no escaping that we still have not had all our pieces together. We show up with two DP's not playing and then go down to 10 men. But there is no denying that we are a mess. I don't know what happened to Sigi saying we gotta start by not bleeding so many goals. 4 games into his tenure and we are 1 for and 7 against. Last week looked a little better than the week before, same result. But tonight was awful. I had to leave around minute 60, but we hadn't mustered anything at all. We just look completely impotent out there.
I have to say I thought I'd be OK with VAR but I absolutley hate it for the reason you talked about. I love the flow of a soccer game and the instant excitement or anguish you feel watching the game. VAR makes you celebrate and then feel crushed or sigh with relief only to realize triumph shouldn't have - and then you get used to it and after every play you don't celebrate because it's like the AR could raise his flag 2 min after the goal and take it away. And the wait still feels long to me. VAR would be great if it was seemless (just an earpiece to a 5th official watching the live feeds with his own DVR) and the calls were only overturned if they were obvious. I'm OK with goals counting when a guy was a 1/2 step offside, or maybe the ball deflected off a hand in a crowd of people. I'm not sure it's worth the fuss to get all those calls perfect so we can stop the game more.
Don't know what to say anymore. Cole seemed a bit reckless but I still don't think that's a red. I support VAR but it's sucked so far for us. Not convinced Pedro touched the ball or was in goalies line of sight either. Still, we lose this game no matter what. They should have had 3 goals before the red card. Ride kempin/Diop the rest of the way if only to learn if either is worth keeping.
Though funny how often those two things coincide. 2006-2008 there were lots of unlucky calls and talks of the team being “snake bit”.
Yep. And it looks like there was a hint of offsides on Kamara's goal as well. So they sure are going hand in hand this year....
Well, Rowe will at least have to be on the bench for the Rapids game 9/2 since Diop was called up by Senegal for their World Cup Qualifiers on 9/2 and 9/5. https://www.lagalaxy.com/post/2017/...ed-senegal-national-team-world-cup-qualifiers
The use of VAR in this game violated every thing they told us VAR would be. Here is what Howard Webb - who is in charge of implementing VAR - said a couple weeks ago: "Because of the subjectivity of the sport, it's important that people know we're not going to deal with the 50-50 calls or 70-30 calls," Webb said. "And we're not asking the VAR to ask himself or herself the question, 'Was the decision right?' They're going to ask the question, 'Was the decision clearly wrong?' "The default position is that the on-field decision is correct unless we have evidence to the contrary in the video." The refrain from Webb has become "maximum benefit from minimum interference," with any and all VAR decisions stemming from that principle. As he emphasized, the goal is to address a handful of match-changing plays and not attempt to achieve accuracy on every call throughout a game. In another explanation it was said: As such, in MLS, PRO is liming VAR usage to plays that involved the following "high-leverage" situations: • Goals • Penalty kicks • Straight red cards • Mistaken identity You may notice that VAR will not be used for yellow cards (including second yellow cards that lead to red cards) or common fouls that do not result in penalty kicks. This is simply PRO drawing the line. VAR was used 3 times. First it was used when the ref called a simple foul on Cole. Why would this be reviewed despite not falling into any of the categories that are up for review? Before being reviewed the call was a common foul. Correct or incorrect - no VAR triggering incident happened. Secondly I don't think the review showed the initial no card call was 100% clearly wrong. In fact the CLB home announcers said at the time they didn't even think it was a foul after seeing the review. I disagree (it was a foul in my eyes) but you have to remember that this is MLS where refs ignore foul after foul after foul and have established a culture where these kinds of plays are regularly waved on (see - NoCall Marrufo). Yes it is possible to reasonably argue that this a DOGSO play but I've seen the exact same type of contact happen in the same situation and most of the time in MLS DOGSO is not brought into play. Second was the pk that was awarded by VAR. The initial call was a free kick, outside the box. Once again this is not a triggering event for VAR according to Howard Webb. Secondly even after VAR was incorrectly triggered I don't think the ref should have been over-ruled. When I watched the replay there was clear contact a few inches outside the box. Others could argue that the contact extended into the box but the point is that pk vs no pk is debateable. In that case VAR should not overrule the on field call. Third was the "offside" goal being disallowed. This is the time that the event was one of those designed to trigger VAR (a goal being scored). But the ref called it a goal so the only way VAR could overrule is if replay showed 100% that Pedro touched the ball. Unless the VAR had angles not shown to the audience there was no such evidence. From the replays I saw you just couldn't tell. Worst of all was the delay in the overturning of both the ref and linesman initial calls. Ruins the game when goal is awarded, players are celebrating, the TV score changes, players are already getting back into their post goal positions and suddenly goal vanishes into thin air. This is exactly what we were promised wouldn't happen. tldr version: Two of the three times VAR was applied there was no VAR triggering event . In all 3 overturned calls (or no-calls) the replays did not show the 100% ironclad evidence needed to overrule the original ruling. Note that I'm not arguing that the VAR rulings were incorrect in isolation; if they were the refs original call I would be ok with them. I"m just saying tow of the incidents weren't VAR triggering events and the third was not clear enough to overrule both linesman and refs original call.
The aftermatch coverage with Cletus & Co. showed a freezeframe of Kamara and Pele at an angle that wasn't show during the broadcast. Of course the geniuses said that it showed Kamara was onside based on a line hastily drawn by the production staff that actually was at a rather generous angle to the bona fide straight line of play visible of the pitch due to the grass cutting line. Pele's foot was touching the right edge of that the grass line, and Kamara's head extended about a foot to the left of the grass line - very close but still technically offside if you're going by book (which is what VAR is supposed to be all about, right?). Yet no VAR or pause to review.
You are misreading how a review is triggered. DOGSO is a red card offense and is reviewable. Where a foul occurs is a penalty kick situation. It's not whether just the original call was a red or a pk that triggers review but also if they should have been. So if the VAR thinks there was a foul that should be DOGSO it's reviewable. Because it's a red card situation. If the VAR thinks a foul happened in the box but was initially positioned outside the box, it's reviewable because it's a pk situation. You are interpreting it as if it's only reviewable if the initial call was a red card, a pk, etc.
Edited for the sad truth. Thought the season was going to be bad, but couldn't have imagined it would be this bad.
I keep reading "value added reseller" for VAR, so I think we should change the name to CYBER-REF 2000 just for my own personal convenience. Thank you.
If you are right then yes I am misinterpreting it. And they are mis-advertising it. It was stated explicitly that its purpose was not to "ask if the refs decision was right" but to correct glaring errors. Misidentification of players was usually presented as the exemplar of such a glaring error and what VAR was designed to correct. Not one of the calls that VAR reversed in this game was a "glaring error." All were debatable calls so VAR should not play a part according to their own statements. Fouls right on the edge of the box that have to be called in or out by the ref happen almost every game. If VAR is going to review all of these then PRO should just say so and not pretend this is going to be a minimally invasive addition to the game. Instead its almost a 2nd ref who has authority over the one in the middle of the field. And yes, we suck.
The VAR does look at where fouls occurred with respect to the penalty box. Just because the CR doesn't go to look at the video themselves doesn't mean VAR didn't review it. Also, if the attacking team was allowed a quick restart before VAR could kick in I think the play is no longer reviewable. The VAR is exactly like another AR... They speak to the CR about what they see over the headset to help get calls correct. The CR can do what they want with that information.