That's crap. Braun was going for the ball and jumped straight up going for the ball. There was no obstruction or foul on that play. Crayton comes flying out and does his best volleyball hitter impersonation which ended up with the Chivas goal. If Crayton knew how to punch a ball instead of pretending it's a volleyball that goal would have never happened.
Its all good, Boots. It seems like no matter how many games we win and no matter who we beat, we get no respect. We're use to it here in Galaxyland. You're subtle dis was another in the list of many we get. Ignorance is bliss. That said, best wishes to DCU and the the stadium issue.
While Burch gets beaten a lot on head balls, I do not fault him on the Lillingston goal. He was covering the goal line because Crayton was out. The disappointing thing on that play besides Crayton missing the punch was Namoff and Jakovic ball watching next to each other and neither looked to cover someone in the middle.
This is how close it was. Their back legs are overlapping. Now consider the angle of the camera. It shows a larger gap than reality, if the camera was in line with this it would have looked even closer. If you want to know why the linesman missed it look at his position, he is in front of Galindo. And remember it happened in real time in a split second. So, in my book any linesman would have had a 50/50 chance of getting it right. It was that close. Props to FilAM for the shot. Will have to disagree on this one. He did not take an elbow. Braun's arm was down and Crayton fell into it but it was certainly not his elbow he hit. Maybe the forearm or wrist. What FSC showed clearly was an angle that had Braun's elbow bent but on the side of his body and Crayton falling into his arm/stomach straight on. Maybe whatever shot he took hurt but if he was good enough to get back up realizing the ball was still in play, I think he played it up. Yeah, I am busting on Crayton because he makes so many poor decisions.
When we got home and I turned on the match, CHV was up by one, and they scored the second only a few minutes after I started watching. Rather than turn off the match in disgust, I kept watching...and I wasn't disappointed. Bad calls are to be expected, and we do seem to get burned on them more often than not. I'm just glad the same AR didn't wave Tino's goal as offside because an offside Gomez made a play for the ball.
Watch the replay - http://web.mlsnet.com/media/player/...e=v_free&gid=2009/05/16/dcumls-cdcmls-1&_mp=1. He's not offside.
Can't see it from work, so I'll take your word for it. Of course, though, a player being onside doesn't necessarily mean they'll call him off, either, past experience has shown.
You realize, of course, that the referees are instructed that it doesn't simply depend on the position of the feet, right? That instead, they're told to consider "any part of a player's head, body or feet", right? The mowing lines help too. That's 1 yard offside. I can't even believe we're having this conversation. Yes, you're right -- a major factor, if not *the* major factor, in why he missed the call was that he was out of position. Do you have it on your DVR? If so, I recommend going through all the angles they show it from, and single-stepping if necessary, which is what I'm doing right now as I type. They replay the goal from several angles, and the most useful in this regard are the fourth and fifth replays, which are the ones they show immediately before, and immediately after, the first scene of Crayton on the ground with a line of medics with white crosses standing nearby along the endline. In both of these, and especially the second of the two (Replay #5), I don't know how it could be any more clear that he hits Braun's arm at or immediately below the elbow, or that Braun's folded arm is across the front of his body (hell, in the second one, you can see that Braun's right hand is around his left chest at the time of collision -- on the side??!?!) Like I said before, I don't think he played the situation well. But that's independent of this.
In a perfect pro-attacker world, one day, this will indeed be onside - but the way the rule is written and enforced in today's world, that is beyond obviously offside. The linesman is a good 3-5 yards ahead of the play, I've positioned myself better as a parent helper/linesman at U-11 games. I hope that linesman went home and ate some bad clams, or is even as we speak developing a chronic case of the H1N1.
On this note, did anyone else notice how on the post-game show, C. Sullivan completely misunderstood the email from a viewer on this very point? The comment was, essentially, it was nice to see the offside call wrong in favor of the attacker for a change, when usually you're much more likely to see them get it wrong in favor of the defender. Which (this game excepted ) has been a long-standing gripe of mine. Too often, linesmen seem to regard their duty to be to find any possible way to rule the attacking player offside. But Sullivan just glanced over at the camera and said something about "I think you're talking about the possibility of adding a fifth official" which may or may not be a good idea, but which was absolutely not what the email was about. Sometime I think these guys are (understandably) so busy trying to think of what they're going to say next that they can't really listen to what the other guy is saying. Oh, and did you know that Christopher Sullivan thinks Christian Gomez should be a 90-minute player? I don't know if he found time to make that observation.
and we're assuming that screenshot captures the exact moment ball left foot. I think he was closer to two yards offside. It was the worst blown offside call I've seen in the league in years. DC was possessing, Chivas was countering, the trap was a pretty necessary part of our backline's strategy. Jakovic played quite well. The trap, or a high line, does more than catch them for the occasional call, it closes down the space they have a bit the rest of the time. And goalkeepers don't have "right of way". You can't obstruct keepers but you can go for the ball, and as a side benefit disrupt their ability to play it cleanly, so Crayton screwed up a bit when he mostly missed on the punch. Shades of Nick Rimando. Our forwards mostly had a tough night, their defense is very organized and they are good athletically. Other than that, I thought we played well. Positive soccer on the road.
yeah, they do seem to get caught up on certain things, and the producers and announcers can't seem to either bring up the proper arguments, or the announcers often fail to listen (or the producer is talking too much and they can't hear) to what's being said to them. I had the same thought as you when that answer was given. I believe I may have said the same thing I say whenever I watch a politician answer a question on TV: That's a nice opinion, but it's not an answer to what you were asked I think what Sullivan meant was that Gomez should start to be his most effective - which I do essentially agree with as the best way to use Christian. However, I would much rather start him Wednesday and next Saturday than to have started him last Saturday
Which announcer early in the game confused Crayton & Thorton? Other than both of them wearing blue & both being Black, they look nothing alike.
The conversation that I was having is that it was very close to call in real time. I agreed it was offside. You didn't think it was even remotely close. I did exactly that before I posted and based on the last replay I disagreed that he hit Braun's elbow. Which is what you originally stated. I believe he hit Braun's forearm or wrist but ran into his body as much as his arm. I said "on the side" as in that last replay you can see Braun's bent elbow at the side of his body. I haven't had a spirited discussion on here in a while. Thanks Bootsy.
Hmmm...now that everyone knows this bothers you, you'll probably be hearing it a lot more! A pretty mild insult, considering what we call other clubs...
I wanted to physically and emotionally harm them several times last night. The first half especially was torturous listening to them.
Great effort. Fred had his best game of the year. His effective play created more space for Q and Emilio. We still need more from Gomez. Jakovic, Wallace and Jacobson were soild again. Keeper job is still up for grabs. If Crayton can not demonstrate that he is clearly superior to Kocic over the next month, I think we go with Kocic and say good bye to Crayton and his high salary at the end of the season. It's a pity because I like Crayton's personality.
I'd have to agree with most of this assessment of Burch's play. He's not a very good defender, and honestly he's not very effective at what he's supposed to be good at. His passing was pretty bad for most of that game. He needs a lot of time to get off one of those crosses that his supporters seem to love so much and I think opposing teams know this and make it a point not to give him that time.
If I'm remembering this correctly, he also had a pretty bad giveaway to whichever mini-goat player it was who then passed the ball through to the CLEARLY OFFSIDE p) Galindo. If it wasn't Burch, or it can be shown that it wasn't as bad an error as I'm remembering, then apologies. I only watched the game once. But yeah, his defending sometimes leads a lot to be desired, although he did make at least one very nice tackle, winning the ball, right on the sideline that I remember. And as for his offensive prowess...his freekicks were nothing to write home about Sat. night, and as Primate notes, it takes him way too long to line up one of his shots or crosses in the run of play. He's very, very easy to read.
Here's the problem this creates: If Gomez is not in the game and Burch is not in the game, who takes free kicks? To put another spin on this question, if we don't have a respectable free kick taker, what's to stop our opponents from having a hack-athon on Moreno, Emilio, Quaranta, etc., from midfield right to the top of the box?
I'm sure Tino will be more than happy to step up. Jacobson has a rocket from 25 or more out. Agree with your other question though. Not so sure how respectable either would be considered.
I still don't. A yard offside, which is what I've described it as repeatedly, isn't close IMHO. A close call is one that could go either way. There's no question that's offside. The only thing I can think of is that we mean different things by "at the side of his body." Imagine putting your hand on your heart like you're saying the Pledge of Alliegance in elementary school (I can't remember whether they still do that). When you do that, your elbow is where Braun's was. It's "to the side" in the sense that it's not directly in front of him; but it's not "at his side" as it would be if he had his elbows out or had his arm down at his side. As for where Crayton's face hit, yeah, his elbow. I'm guessing that by elbow you mean (or think I should mean) the very outside point of the joint. To put it as precisely as I possibly can without it being my face involved, I claim that the the replays show that Crayton's face struck Braun's arm at a location on the arm that was closer to the hinge of the elbow than it was to the midpoint of Braun's lower arm; but I can't possibly tell whether either the bony processes of the elbow joint itself, or a point immediately lower on the arm, is what hit his face.
I see what rugman is saying -- that the call, due to the AR's angle, was probably not as obvious as we see from that vantage point. Still, an obvious call, though.