RSL 2019 Game 4: Salt Lake at LAFC, Sat 23 Mar 8:30 pm MDT

it does always seem to end up in some version of "Waibel had this done but for..."

Hell, even the absolute flops of Yura and Pool Boy get spun to things like "well had Petke just given him a chance and lost the ego". The irony there is that Waibel is the one who helps make the decision to have Petke be the coach. So, even if this is true, Waibel appointed the fall guy.

And do NOT get me started on "natural position" nonsense that gets thrown around. If nothing else, this game showed that Lennon is not a forward at this level. Yet people will stick with that story til they die

 

Further on Piatek - there is ZERO guarantee Piatek turns into the player he is now if he comes to RSL/MLS instead of going to Genoa. Some players thrive in certain leagues/styles/etc. Moving across the world as opposed to just down to Italy is a big difference just from a personal perspective. Add in the differences in leagues, exposure, etc, and nothing about this is guaranteed to be the same.

It also is weird to hear we're that close to that level of player but end up with a Sam Johnson level of player. How is that possible? How do you get a top 5 guys from a huge list of players and have THAT much of a talent gap in your top 5?

 

My takeaway here is that I get the people who don't like Brooks at RB - I like him fine, though I'm not sure I'd start him over Herrera anymore - but I think a lot of people have talked themselves into Brooks being a better RW than he actually is.

I wouldn't start him at winger over any of Plata, Baird, Saucedo, Rusnak, or Savarino. Really, the choice is Brooks at RB, or Brooks on the bench.

 

Same this offseason, where it was either the guy who totally dominated the Colombian First Division and scored 29 goals in a season, or a guy who had the fourth most goals in Norway.

 

Really? That's kind of what he's known for. Not Robbie Findley fast, but very good speed.

 

It's not exactly either of those slides. The player being in an offside position by itself does not determine whether or not the player is deemed offside. In your argument, the reason he should be deemed offside is because he was in an offside position which impacted Toia's decision making. That's not how passive offside is judged. It's not the nature of being offside, but the actions/movements when offside that impact whether he's active or not. In fact, as those two slides discussed, the attacker did nothing to challenge Toia's interception of the ball once it was played (which is the point at which offside comes into consideration), nor did he make a gesture or movement to deceive Toia. In fact, Toia's reaction to slide tackle came (mostly) prior to the ball being played. Offside does not even become an issue until the ball is actually played. It sucks, but that's the reality of the passive ruling. I'm puzzled that people keep bringing up how the offside position impacted Toia's reactions, because on this point the rule can easily be applied and the attacker is clearly passive.

The only viable argument for the attacker being deemed "active" comes from his actions relative to Rimando, not Toia. Did he make a gesture or movement to deceive Rimando? After someone on this thread pointed that possibility out, I reviewed the play several times and I think there may be something to that, although it's far from conclusive. At the end of the day the law leaves a lot of judgment to the referee, and it's hard to say decisively that a mistake was made.

The fact that this is so confusing, even to people who have been around the game for a very long time, means that it's probably too complicated. Even more confusing than how to judge a catch in the NFL.

 

This is not Elfath's decision. Instead, the VAR official who is located in a booth with replay available has to deem that there was a "clear and obvious error made" and then relay that message to the center referee.

 

I think he's more than the average "kinda fast". Prior to Sam Johnson he was reportedly the fastest guy on the team and Plata is pretty fast. Not sure what your standard is, so maybe that's not the level of speed your looking for, but I think it puts him in pretty exclusive company across the league.

According to Dunny when he made his debut, Sam Johnson is faster than Robbie Findley. Haven't really seen that yet, but hopefully we'll see it in action soon.

 

If that's really how the rule is supposed to be interpreted, it's a bad rule. What constitutes an "action/movement while offside"? Does running to where the ball will end up (unless Toia touches it) count? Why wouldn't that be deemed a "movement"? And bringing in the idea of whether he made a gesture or movement to deceive Toia is just stupid. How is the ref supposed to divine whether he is trying to deceive or not?

The way I understood the rule is that a player is deemed offside if their actions affect play and/or their team benefits from the player being in an offside position. That's my language, not the official rule book, but that's the spirit of how I understood the rule. By that standard, LAFC definitely benefited from the attacker being in the offside position, and the goal should not have stood. Clearly, I was mistaken in how I understood the rule, since everyone is saying that it was applied correctly (and thanks for your explanation above!). What's confusing to me is why my interpretation isn't the rule? It's going to be subjective no matter what, so why not just have offside be called if it creates an advantage for the offending team? That's seems much simpler and less prone for error that the convoluted system they have in place now.

 

Fair

In what world is a run in behind a defender NOT a gesture/movement to deceive? You think forwards are out here making runs for the fun of it?

You have me completely lost with this part. You're telling me Toia has said "I'm sliding" BEFORE the ball is played? This isn't FIFA. Toia isn't hitting the slide button out of desperation.

That's not how this game is played, though. Players don't make runs like that in a "passive" state. This is a fundamental misunderstanding of how the game is being played vs officiated if this is actually how this is interpreted. It leaves the door open for really shitty situations where players are obviously making runs to pull defenders out of position, yet don't "play" the ball - almost acting as a screen, if you will - to another player running on.

Rimando has to move to his left on that pass with Dio there. Otherwise he leaves his near post completely open for a simple tap-in.

 

I absolutely agree with you. Here’s my guess as to what happened in the VAR booth:
1. On the LAFC goal, I seriously doubt the official even thought to look for Rimando being pulled to the other side of the goal. I also believe the official simply got it wrong regarding the off-sides player’s influence on Toia’s decision.
2. On Bofo’s negated goal, the official probably felt that it wasn’t clear Kreilach was not intending to pass the ball to Bofo. Thus, no clear error by the CR.

Has anyone checked the referee thread? I don’t go there because it generally just angers me when I do.

 

If not faster, at least run, run, run, and run some more for 90 minutes. Make teams know that they are in for 90 minutes of non-stop running when they play RSL.

 

The referees are frustrated. They say both plays were called as they are being instructed from IFAB all the way down the system, so they are technically correct. But they don't like the false dichotomy either.

 

For whatever one additional opinion is worth:

First LA goal:
-Running toward goal is the antithesis of passive play. Utter horse excrement. If the rules call that passive, the rules need to be changed. Embarrassing. If there was no runner, No slide tackle is attempted, Rimando is in a different location.
-On the other hand, wtf kind of shit play was that. If youre going to panic, have a panic plan that isnt utter garbage. It would have been SO EASY to just kick the ball alllll the way out of bounds. Or, Kick it over the goal (tougher). I am not here to say the coaches at rec level, at age 10 (purple panthers heyo) gave me rules that are always best, especially not at pro levels, but some of the rules are good. If vision is poor: Be safe. It should not even be a thought process by pro league.

Bofo denied:
Brutal. Those are the rules. deflections are not backpasses. such a beautiful curler. I would like to allow deflections to be played, but that's not the current state of the game.

Red card:
I see his intent was all yellow, but he touched the guys neck. you are flirting with danger if you do that. I call that a 50/50 red based on the mood of the ref. There cannot in any way be any tolerance for people screwing around with peoples necks and faces.

 

They really need to tweak the rule. I get that it's 'correct', but it's absolute crap. No defender is just going to idly stand by in hopes that the attacker really was offsides, therefore, they're affecting the play. Just like how ours was offside. Also correct, but I fail to see how it's all that different, since Bofo was clearly not attempting to be in the play at the moment. The ball just happened to go to him.

 

It's clear people don't understand this rule, and I'm not sure most really want to. I get it. It's confusing, and in many ways not super logical. This is why many experienced referees usually just say "that's the guidance we're given from FIFA". And I actually find this rule much easier to follow than handling.

 

I supper trying to to increase scoring. I would like to see the rule changed so that ‘if any part of the body is in line with the last defender the player is on-sides’. Yes, the ARs will make the wrong call now and then, but they do that now.

 

And I lunch it.

 

I'm convinced that referees and people who call "handling" the way we do currently have never watched someone run/change direction. At least they haven't watched what arms do when people are doing that. "Natural Position" can die in a ********ing fire. If I'm jumping or changing direction, my arms are going to go away from my body to balance. That's how these things *points to body* work.

 

Talk about setting a low bar!

 

******** the offside rule. I hate that rute. Too much is up to the ARs decision and his or hers objective. Get rid of it and let the ARs worry more about out of bounds and policing fouls and diving.