Was Video Evidence used on Kljestan's Red?

Discussion in 'USA Men: News & Analysis' started by AGF Aarhus, Jun 19, 2009.

  1. Maximum Optimal

    Maximum Optimal Member+

    Jul 10, 2001
    Correct.
     
  2. S.J. Jim

    S.J. Jim Member+

    Jun 11, 2006
    S.J.
    Club:
    San Jose Earthquakes
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    Cleats up... from behind... yeah... did anybody else see Kljestan swing the sledgehammer at the guy's groin as he slid under him? I can't believe nobody has mentioned that part...
     
  3. Fire-Chop

    Fire-Chop New Member

    Jun 8, 2004
    I just watched the replay and was shocked that this was the challenge I read about on BS. Clearly not from behind, clearly not studs up, clearly not high. He was late and went too far into the player. I don't think that constitutes red.

    Looking at the replays the play was stopped somewhere around 54:10 with the card comming at 55:55. There was quite the gap and time to think about this for the ref. He also went over to talk to the 4th official when Benny was subbed in a couple of minutes later.

    We are right to focus on how poorly the US has played and that this tackle should not have happened, rather than the Ref, but I would say this was poor officiating.
     
  4. supersoft

    supersoft Member

    May 3, 2002
    Baltimore
    And yet, there it is.

    "Advantage should not be applied in situations involving serious foul
    play unless there is a clear subsequent opportunity to score a goal.
    The referee shall send off the player guilty of serious foul play when
    the ball is next out of play."

    pg 117, http://www.fifa.com/mm/document/affederation/federation/81/42/36/lotg_en.pdf
     
  5. superdave

    superdave Member+

    Jul 14, 1999
    VB, VA
    Club:
    DC United
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    I thought it was proven that the Zidane play wasn't shown on the widescreens at the game, and that therefore the 4th couldn't have used video evidence to send him off.
     
  6. TimB4Last

    TimB4Last Member+

    May 5, 2006
    Dystopia
    Who knows what was proven, not proven or covered up. I don't think the suggestion was that the fourth official was watching the video himself, necessarily, but that he was in communication with someone else who was.

    Here's the official FIFA version ...

    http://soccernet.espn.go.com/news/story?id=373704&cc=5901

    Believe what you want. All I'll say is that there was a very long delay if the foul had been directly observed, and that it's curious that only the fourth official directly observed the foul. I took it for granted - and still do - that the fourth official was in contact with 'higher ups' (literally), who confirmed what he thought he saw (if in fact he saw anything the first time around).

    I would be shocked if the four officials could only communicate with each other, as it's easy enough to picture an emergency situation in which you would want to communicate information to them immediately.
     
  7. giffenbone

    giffenbone Member

    Jan 22, 2006
    Raleigh, NC

    owned
     
  8. Rainer24

    Rainer24 Member

    Jan 6, 2008
    Nashville, TN
    Club:
    VfB Stuttgart
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    I don't know if the 4th official told him to issue it, but I don't for a second think he was originally going to give a red. Either the 4th official told him to give it, or he was influenced by Ramires's theatrics. I tend toward the latter, as that happens all the time, even when Egypt don't get caught cheating on TV the day before.
     

Share This Page