MLS needs foul control, Penalize the goons

I agree.

 

I thought the young center ref for the DC-NE match did a fine job. He dished out 5 cards, awarded 3 penalties and kept a hot match under control. BTW, 7 goals were scored. I hope Mr. Geiger doesn't get blackballed for making calls that should be made like Rich Grady did.

 

I hate the thug mentality of our unskilled defenders in this league. How many times do we see a guy plow into the back of a player when reciving a pass, or how many times do we see players flying recklessly into tackles. How many times do we see a guy get beat and start shirt pulling or hack fouling. I see it every game at a constant clip.

There is a line though to where enforcing this becomes counter productive. Defenders still need to be able to defend and be aggresive.

League wide behavior won't change overnight though, this needs to be a league directive and it will take a few months of players getting suspensions and bookings before they ease up.

 

Freddy Adu dives quicker than you can say Carlos Ruiz and Youri Djorkaeff got a number of calls for no other apparent reason than that he was a big star in Europe. If you are going to state a case that not enough fouls are being called in MLS, you could find much better examples than Adu and Djorkaeff from April 16.

Yes, Danny Szetela was a bit clumsy with Adu but he is supposed to be an up and coming star--shouldn't he get special dispensation? (I think not.) On the contrary, he seemed to draw a foul just by standing near Freddy. Of the two sandwich plays on Djorkaeff, my recollection is that one was a good non-call and one was a poor non-call. But not even the great Youri Djorkaeff is going to get every call.

There is a fine line between a clumsy challenge and an excellent defensive play. Most clumsy challenges are honest defensive plays that go slightly awry. While I don't like seeing clumsy challenges, I wouldn't want to see defenders (or attackers) afraid to defend.

Galarcep says "being more stern and consistent when it comes to issuing yellow cards for bad tackles would be a good start. Issuing red cards for blatant fouls, which happen way too often, wouldn't hurt either." So apparently he wants to see more yellow and red cards.

Yet he also laments: "unfortunately, the few who might pull out an early [tone-setting yellow card] card fall into the 'card happy' category." So maybe he doesn't want to see more yellow and red cards, implying that there are already a number of refs in MLS who issue too many cards.

Does he want refs to issue early yellow cards for fouls that aren't really yellow-card worthy (and thus are "tone-setting") or not? What happens if that player does something really yellow-card worthy later on in the match?

Red cards for blatant fouls? That's an interesting idea. I don't recall seeing the word blatant in the Laws of the Game, but maybe it's there. Picking the ball up in the middle of the field would be a blatant foul, but is it a red card offense? If "blatant" it isn't in the current laws, should it be? Aren't reckless and professional fouls already cautionable offenses?

Galarcep indicates that teams should preach "fundamentally sound defensive techniques" and not "hacking". Why didn't MLS coaches think of this before?

Galarcep refers to "the back-line butcher" and says "defenders get away with murder" but defenders are generally in their own penalty area where they really can't afford to give up a foul much less a yellow-card offense or they are just outside the box which is a dangerous area to give up a free-kick. He doesn't mention that it is defensive midfielders and attackers that tend to lead the league in fouls. The last true defender to finish the season in the top ten in fouls committed was probably Danny Califf in 2001.

Tab Ramos may indeed have been injured by MLS hacks--I wasn't getting Direct Kick back then--but then Galarcep implies the league isn't really any different now: "Referees blow the whistle these days, but do little more to discourage defenders from intentionally taking down offensive minded players." Yet Elliott and Guppy were cautioned for professional fouls in the DC-Crew game and Testo got one for persistent infringement, all in the first 60 minutes.

"The creation of the persistent infringement yellow basically let defenders know that they could get away with a reasonable number of fouls before having to face a card." Well, you can't get away with any fouls if they are cautionable. Jesus Ochoa got a caution in the 5th minute for a tackle from behind in the Dallas-Chivas game. Is Galarcep arguing against the PI rule?

Yes, I am willing to critique what Ives is saying, and I think most of it is wrong. At least, with the examples he uses. Instead of penalizing the goons, we should penalize the hacks.

 

There was a play in the 29th minute of the Fire-Metro match that just had me shake my head-it's was a full-on rugby tackle from the back. Not the least bit of attempt to play the ball.

It's not exlusive to MLS, but it you do see the cynical side far too much in the league here.

 

Well, since you asked:

I'm a little tired of seeing the Adu/Hejduk confrontation mischaracterized. Put another way, it did not happen anything at all like you describe it.

Adu had the ball, Frankie was on his back. There was contact, to what degree I'm not going to bother debating, and it's not germane anyway.

Freddy made a meal out of it, crashing to the ground like he'd been shot. Fair enough. It's ruining the game, but everybody is doing it (including Frankie when he gets a chance) and until the league cracks down it's going to keep happening.

In any case, the whistle was blown and IMMEDIATELY Frankie turns his back on Adu and WALKS AWAY, arguing with the ref, presumably claiming Adu dove. At this point, Adu is ON THE GROUND and nobody is paying any attention to him.

BUT THEN Freddy hops up off the ground, and goes running up behind Hejduk, who is yelling at the ref. Adu starts in yelling too, presumably at Frankie.

It is then AND ONLY THEN that Frankie turns, quite clearly can be seen saying "Shut the f*** up" and shoves Adu backwards.

Now there's a whole bunch wrong here. No question, and I'm not going to even START picking sides.

But Frankie was not going after Freddy - in fact he was OGNORING Freddy - until Freddy chose to come up behind him and start yapping at him. No, Frankie should not have reacted like he did either. Both were at fault.

But the bottom line is that Hejduk DID NOT "act like a little bitch" over the call, the dive or the card. Rather, he reacted to an opponent saying something he didn't like.

It's a whole different topic: "guys who shoot their mouths off at opponents when they should shut up and play". Nobody covered themselves with glory, but your characterization of the incident is simply false.

 

I can agree wholeheartedly and without reservation. It's gotten to the point that every bloody time a whistle blows, some clown or group of clowns gathers around the ref, waving their arms and hollering.

What is it that they think is oging to happen? Do they think the ref will change his mind? I don't know about you but I've never seen it happen. Bottom line, the refs put up with way too much of this, and it's getting way, way out of hand.

Shut up and play, quit the damn diving and punish the repetitive fouling (there really is a rule about it).

The refs need to grow backbones and crack down hard. They'll get some wrong, there'll be some major injustices, but eventually players will learn that they need to just play the game and stuff the theatrics.

 

No, not really. Look at what Steve Morrow did in Dallas the years he was here. Artful defending that looked nothing like what the author is talking about. He was about quickness, position, and cleverness.

 

I thought Brian Hall did a decent job during a very heated Galz-Chivas game.

One thing that Ivan did not bring up, I believe, was that the MLS refs don't give our cards when fouls are committed by many different players against a particular offensive star. During the Barcelona-Milan CL game, Ronaldinho was fouled several times by the various Milan defenders but Ambrosini got a yellow for his first foul.

 

Look at our best defender, Eddie Pope. The bizarre straight red he got this weekend aside, how many fouls does he commit a game? How many cards does he get? Not many in both cases. Quality defending doesn't rely on fouling to get the job done. If you're quick and in position you won't need to bump them. Slide tackles look cool but they're really a desperation lunge for when you're too far out of position to get to the ball.

 

Szetela fouled Adu CONSTANTLY. That matchup was a good example of what the problem is. Szetela should have picked up a yellow for PI, and if he hadn't modified his behavior due to the yellow, by the end of the match he should have been looking at a 2nd yellow.

 

I agreed with Ives's take even before he wrote it, though my recommendation for what to do about it was a little different.

My take on that issue is that refs get labeled as a quick-draw McGraw for issuing PI yellows even if they aren't. And I don't know how we expect a ref to remember that a player committed 4 fouls and not 3 to tack him with a PI. You could sit around waiting forever for the league's refs to routinely hand out the PI if the league doesn't take a firmer grasp on matters.

Just as a point of info, the league's top foulers list last year was dominated not by defenders but by defensive and 'two way' midfielders. That speaks to strategy IMO. Coaches seem to be having guys foul deliberately in the midfield to slow the flow of the opponent's attacks. If you do it before they ever get to the final third, it isn't as obvious.

Code:

FOULS COMMITTED
PLAYER                           TEAM    GP    FC
Simo Valakari                    DAL     26    73
Brian Mullan                     SJ      28    68
Bryan Namoff                     DC      27    62
Marcelo Saragosa                 LA      26    62
Amado Guevara                    MET     24    58
Ben Olsen                        DC      25    58
Kyle Beckerman                   COL     29    57
Diego Gutierrez                  KC      28    53
Ronnie O'Brien                   DAL     29    53
Davy Arnaud                      KC      30    52

On the 2003 list, there's some more attack oriented players:

Code:

FOULS COMMITTED
PLAYER                           TEAM    GP    FC
Carlos Ruiz                      LA      26    76
Dema Kovalenko                   DC      26    67
Shalrie Joseph                   NE      28    62
Oscar Pareja                     DAL     24    58
Chad Deering                     DAL     27    57
Brian Mullan                     SJ      30    57
Evan Whitfield                   CHI     27    57
Chris Albright                   LA      27    56
Chris Henderson                  COL     26    56
Brian Maisonneuve                CLB     23    55

But even there, note Ruiz was fouled (87) more than he committed (76), just as was Arnaud (111) in 2004.

 

In past years. Yes. This year. No.

In fact, in some causes, they are calling too much and not letting the games flow...

Also, the head officials do call persistant fouling, just not consistantly. In the DC vs Crew game. Freddy was fouled in some causes, and in others, he wasn't fouled, but still got the call. Same with Dork in the Chicago vs Metro. Anyone used to watch DC and Chicago in the 90s. They used to foul all the time in the mdifield to stop the attack or flow of the game. Remember Arena's moto: First fart, first spit, first foul (or something to that effect).

I don't want an NBA league where the "stars" get preferental treatment. Just need better officials which are respected by the players.

 

I find it a bit funny he uses the Crew as an example of teams using PI to stop attacking play when DC lead in fouls 19 to 12. Using DC Hack as the offended party just doesn't work, professional fouling has been their calling card for 10 years.

I also wonder why he uses Adu as an example and not say David Testo. True the Crew did foul Adu 7 of their 12 fouls, but 4 of those fouls were against Szetela and 2 more of those fouls, players were booked(Elliott and Hejduk[although not for the foul]). Szetela maybe should have been booked for PI, but one has to wonder was it really "technical" fouls by Szetela or inexperience? From memory, most of the fouls looked like Szetela was trying to go shoulder to shoulder with Adu just falling down. Szetela definatly didn't do anything to warrent a straight out yellow. Plus if you actually look at the PBP on Matchtracker, two Crew players WERE booked for Professional/PI fouls. Elliott got booked in the 37' for a PF on Adu and Testo probably got the yellow that Szetela should have earned with a PI on his one and only foul of Gros.

But then looking at Testo on the left for the Crew, all 4 fouls that Gros committed where on Testo, one of which was a bookable offense. The 4th and final foul on Testo(even though there should have been one more for Gros kicking him in the face) was the same type grab/push from behind tackle that earned Gros the yellow card 5' before and Gros should have been sent off with a second yellow. One has to wonder if Testo didn't get hurt 5' into the second half, how many more fouls he would have earned.

I agree with what Ives has to say, I just think he's got the wrong offender labeled.

 

Well, OK, I take your argument that Testo probably got Szetela's card, but I think that's mostly a distraction to the point that's being made. As a DC fan, I don't mean to frame the critique as something against Columbus in particular, and neither is it meant to be a protection of Freddy Adu, so much as of offensive play in general, and the deliberate timing of fouls to stop offense before it starts.

If you want to apply that logic to Josh Gros (4 fouls) or maybe even Brian Caroll (3), I could see it. In the long run, the game is better off if you hand out cards to all of those guys rather than none, because that's what it would take to make the players reform.

I can see what you mean on the latter part, but PF and PI are completely different things. A PF is basically a blatant or obvious foul when you've already been beaten, but regardless it's for one foul. The attempt to strategically foul players before the can get past to to interrupt the team's offensive flow is what PI is aimed at.

Well, OK.

To use a different example, it's disturbing to me that Davy Arnaud was both one of the biggest foulers (52) and biggest foulees (111) in the league last year. Since he's hardly the most devastating player in the league from a skills point of view, this suggests to me that the forward slot there has become a physical grudge-match, where you go to a guy who's more physical to deal with the physical tactics of the defense (and I'll give the benefit of the doubt that that's the reason, since he usually suffers more fouls than he commits), and a foulfest ensues.

This year, Arnaud has committed 13 fouls and suffered 13 -- in 3 matches. (5 of each in the last match). And yet he has neither been charged with, nor benefitted from, a PI card. Do we want more forwards in this league to be involved in 8 fouls a night? (Admittedly that's a bad sample size, but he was involved in almost five and a half a game over the course of a whole season last year).

The fourth foul Arnaud suffered was the fourth foul Danny O'Rourke (another plausible whipping boy) committed, with no PI card. But then again, since he'd had a card already for a reckless foul, do we believe a ref is gonna toss him for PI and put the Wizards up a man with 16 minutes to equalize? Likewise, in the first game, Brian Mullan got tagged with a PI (deservedly so, for his 6th foul), but O'Rourke committed 6 fouls and didn't get one. In fact, he's committed 16 fouls in 4 matches and has no PI cards this season.


{Editor's Note: I'll have to apologize if I've gotten any of this data wrong. It was the best I could do, and MLSNet doesn't make it easy to track this stat.}

 

You apparently don't understand what PI is. If the CR calls the foul, it's a foul, and is another step on the path to PI. And a yellow for PI is not the same thing as a yellow for a tactical foul; you can't elide them with a "/".

 

A point that has been brought up before but what Richard Mulrooney and Jovan Kirovski did last week should theoretically lower the amount of fouls committed within 25-30 yards of the goal.

Likewise, a more coherent and dangerous set-play approach (Crew scored off one vs. DCU) would also support that notion.

The other side of this argument is that the MLS defenders can't help themselves or they wouldn't be surrendering so many penalty kicks where the punishment is usually far more severe. In other words, they are what they are - brutal hacks and there ain't no other ways they can play.

PS. It could be argued that a continuous conversion process where many college midfielders and even forwards become defenders, defensive midfielders and wing-backs is at least partially to blame for this hackdom.

 

I agree to an extent, but note set pieces from that far away aren't all that dangerous even when you do them relatively well. (I say that in the sense that there's a big dropoff for goals scored on set pieces once you get outside the box compared to inside it, and the percentage even in the Premiership can't be real high. If they never gave the PI in that league, I'd have to think fouling at that range would still be a strategy).

Well, there were three penalty kicks in the DCU-Rev game this week, and those two teams do indeed have shaky d, but it was just as much due to offenses that threw themselves forward in numbers and exposed 3-man backlines.

More importantly, though, I only count 3 other PK goals total in the rest of the league so far. (One by Ronald Cerritos on 4/02, one by Carlos Ruiz on 4/16, and another by Ruiz on 4/23). I don't know right off if there's any missed PKs I'm not including, but it strikes me as quite low especially as a percentage of total goals scored.

For last year, I count 49 total PKs over the course of the season, as compared to 392 total goals, over a total of 150 games played. Yeah, 3:1 matches/PK and 8:1 goals to PK attempts are numbers are lower than the Premiership (about 5:1 and 13:1, respectively, if my count is right). But, while interesting to think about, I don't know how much that says, especially when given, as I pointed out, defensive midfielders are bigger serial foulers than defenders are.

I think "hacks who can't play any other way" is bound to be less of a factor than "coaches instructing the midfield to fould before they can get tot he final third" is.

Could be, but this happens elsewhere in the world, though a little younger, and to cite perhaps the ultimate example of this, Chris Albright is hardly the main offender, having committed only 37 fouls all year last year (only about a foul and a half per 90 is barely any worse than Eddie Pope, one of the better and cleaner defender's we've got), though his 7 cautions are a lot (dunno how many PKs he gave up, but certainly not many of those cautions could have been for PI).

 

Additionally, last week Amando Guevarra hit the post vs. Zach Thornton and Josh Wolff had his PK saved by Pat Onstad. So, this makes it 5 PKs this week alone.

 

Many arguments about who's at fault, but not many people disputing the consensus that MLS is a goon's league ...

Me, I'm not sure. I watch a lot of EPL and that seems about comparable. Italy appears to be even more cynical. Ditto for Argentina. As for Brazil, sometimes I see nice flowing soccer and sometimes I see stuff that would make Mike Petke blush.

Hell, my young 'un suffered 9 fouls in a 70 minute game on Sunday, including 2 yellow cards given to the opposition for PI. When beaten, defenders foul like hell. Every league, every level. Don't see how MLS is all that different.

 

I know exactly what PI means and I also know the difference between what's called a "professional" foul and what's usually considered dangerous play that gets striaght yellow.

Personally and it's just my opionion, I think you can put a "/" between them because there both fouling to stop the flow of attack. Only with a PF, at least in the sense of how Elliott was called for it, it is a more blantent attemept, then say with PI which is usually called for the same consistant ticky tack foul(usually by an individual, but can also be aplied to team) or the constant fouling of the same player(by individual or by team).

Regardless PI WAS called on the Crew late in the first half, although not on Szetela, for the hip checking the Crew was employing. And funny enough, Adu was only fouled twice more in the second half, well once more really because Frankie didn't do anything but breath on his neck but that's nit picking. Which is probably another big reason why DC was able to get up and down the field on the Crew so well in the second half. Also the PI call and Szetela's pention for fouling Freddy probably was a big reason Szetela was subed for late in the game as Andrulis didn't want Szetetla's inexperience to give DC a dangerous FK holding on to the lead.

Personally, I think Salazar actually did a pretty good job that game keeping the fouling in check and Ives should go looking somewhere else to prove his point. I can only think of three complaints, the obstruction call on Carroll I didn't think was there, Gros should have been tossed, and Buddle should have been awarded a PK for that Rock Bottom Stokes put on him in the box.