Well, as whether all the cards were deserved or not. This week's Week in Review seems to indicate that Montero's yellow was not justified. Similar situation in last week's NYRB/Chivas game with a NYRB heading the ball out of the GK's hands. USSF says it is definitely a foul (obvious), but that it wasn't reckless, so a yellow was not mandated. Still, with all the cards Toledo was flinging around, Montero was an idiot for doing it.
Nah, Seattle looked more dangerous after the Revs scored and stayed back. But I'd love to hear why Mariner was sent to the sin bin to share halftime beers with Nicol.
There's other reasons to give that a yellow. He wasn't going for the ball during a scoring chance. He deliberately decided to do something illegal. Personally, I thought he deserved a card for 2-3 absolutely blatant dives towards the end of the game. He had no choice to go down when the penalty was called, although it was anything but a penalty.
He was the center of attention because Harkes couldn't stop talking about him. Harkes has got to stop verbally masturbating the Refs, The players have some culpability in this too you know.
Why is heading the ball out of the goalies hand a foul? The ball was still in play, and Reis is an opposing player with possesion. I can see that if it's done in a dangerous manner a fouls a fouls. But why is a goaling protected from losing posession of the ball in that situation? Sorry if this is a bit naive, what are the actual rules?
A few years back I sat behind Nicol and Mariner when they played the Rochester Rhinos in a US Open Cup match. Lost all respect for these guys. They have no self control. They kept a game long conversation going with the 4th official. Early on when they were winning 3-1 they were joking with the guy and yelling only when their players were fouled. 4th official constantly and in a controlled manner told them to settle and many times like a 1st Grade teacher escorted them back to the bench. Why coaches feel that the 4th official has any incluence with the lead Ref is beyond me. Then when Rhinos scored a goal and it was 3-2 Oh boy the wheels fell off. Every foul or non foul went unchallenged with verbal abuse that made me think who do these guys think the are. About 40 Fookin Shites later I wanted to yell at them to STFU and worry about your team and not the 4th official.
According to this post by a ref in the PBP thread, yes the goalie is protected if he has the ball in his hands. The rule was changed 12 years ago. I know I was taught to keep both hands on the ball when I played goalie, but that was more than 12 years ago.
Yeah, I just read the "week in review" ref link that was provided. It clearly states that the ball is off limits when it's in the keeper's hands.
He was going for the ball and Montero ran into his kick. There was 0% intent by Ralston to play anything but the ball.
Montero does fall over a lot but he also gets beaten up a lot. His diving has nothing to compare to the three dives in last night's game. They were breathtaking. And Toledo calls out the stretcher, delays the game, loses complete control . . . .
I agree. Your interpretation is incorrect. The ball was bouncing, Ralston was responsible for not raising his foot to kick the opponent. It's a dangerous play. Intent is not in question. It was careless, which is why he did not receive a yellow for reckless play. He did get a yellow for dissent. When contact is made, it's not possible to be a dangerous play (indirect free kick) as JP stated during the telecast. I have no doubt that Ralston did not intend to kick Montero.
I believe it falls under Rule 12 "kicking or attempting to kick an opposing player" in a careless manner.
Could that really be considered careless? I thought it was more reckless of Montero to jump into a kick that was obviously already started. I'm happy with either call but that's what my instincts were when I saw the play.
It all started with Toledo allowing Montero to run (or fake running) in front of Reis when he had the ball and was about to try to distribute it (he did this every time)... while the attacking player does not have to move out of the way to let the keeper distribute the ball, shadowing the keeper to attempt (or pretend to attempt) to interfere with distribution is not allowed... usually, all the ref has to do when he sees that an attacking player makes a habit of this is simply warn him verbally... when Toledo didn't, it was pretty obvious that this was Reis' way of getting back... and it worked...
Announcers are always going on and on about intent, but really, except for handling, intent isn't that important. He kicked him. It was a foul.
There isn't anything wrong with what Montero did according to the rules of the game. He might have oversold the hit (he did have a miraculous recovery when he was told he got the PK), but that's a common thing in soccer. I think the carelessness on Ralston's part comes from Ralston not being aware of the field around him. Add in that he completely missed the ball and you've got a direct kick regardless of intent.
That and playing the ball to your own keeper with your feet involve intent, so you are pretty much correct.
What? If you're in the center circle, you would never ask a player to stop playing the ball just because he saw an opponent lining up a tackle. Why should an attacker in the penalty area be obligated to? It's like any other challenge. Ralston went for the ball, he missed, he kicked Montero in the stomach. Penalty. Get over it. And Ralston should know better. You can't be careless in your own penalty area. Ralston wasn't complaining last season at Crew Stadium when a Crew defender inadvertently tripped him up in the 90th minute of a previously scoreless game that led to a PK and a 1-0 Revs win. And that involved a lot less contact, and a lot less dangerous scoring opportunity -- but it was still a deserved PK.
I love BigSoccer. This is one of my favorites. Refs can "lose control" and be "card happy" in the same sentence. I swear... some of you guys wouldn't know a good referee if he walked up to you and sunk his fingernails into your scrotums. If players are out of control, and the ref's doing nothing, that's on the ref. If the ref is throwing cards and the players are still out of control, that's on the players. The Referee Cannot Make the Match Better Than the Players Will Allow. The bottom line is that some people get an impression early in a match that a game is "our of control", or the ref is "part of the show", or "having a bad game", and once that happens, they view everything that happens from that point on from that point of view. And when John Harkes is on ESPN saying as much, well... it doesn't help any.
Just throwing out cards for no reason can't get control of a game, it only makes it worse. The card on Reis was a joke. If he would talk to the captains, talk to the coaches, and give cards for legitimate reasons, that's different. You try to look at two coinciding actions and make them polar opposites. "Card happy" and "no control" are not that at opposite ends of the spectrum like you want to believe.