Posted this in the game thread as well, but wanted to start a new thread to also show what the red-card appeal rules are. MLS Rules on Red-Card Appeals
Think its good they admit the ref screwed up but it doesn't give back the minutes of a man up advantage we lost. We might have got points out of this game had not the ref taken away our advantage. Where is the penalty on the refereeing staff that made a totally bad call?
I think the ref was making a lot of poor judgment calls throughout this match. He should have shown a couple of yellows earlier to members of BOTH teams(the Soares foul especially comes to mind) and maybe things would not have gotten so far out of hand that he had to throw the red cards around.
The penalty is in the bad assessment he no doubt got for the match, and the fewer games he'll be allowed to ref. If w saw him on a game this weekend that would be a surprise. I know some people will want their pound of flesh, but I have no problem with the league if they don't want to publicly announce when refs get suspended, or whatever they might call it, as long the league is doing something. Refs have to develop a well, and the league making a statement basically saying we think this guy sucks won't help with that. Getting put on notice by being taken off games should be enough. The fact that the card got overturned should be an indication of just how bad a call they thought it was.
1- Im happy that our new look/attitude FO now has its players back, as sometimes in the past it seemed to be the opposite. 2- Glad to see MLS is evolving for thebetter also. The first step is admitting you have a problem...which in this case is the quality of reffing.
Just curious, did you (or anyone else) think it was a bad call BEFORE you saw the replay? Yes, it was a bad call, but even the best refs make a bad call on occasion. It's been corrected, there's no need to seek additional penalties.
I can honestly say that I did. It was even worse after the replay. That said, bad calls happen, and if the referee powers that be feel that this guy has potential, then they need to keep working with him rather than flushing him over this one game.
I absolutely thought out was a bad call, motivated purely by the fact that he'd given one out already. The first red was a player lunging straight at a player, studs showing, foot off the ground, clear contact made. Second red was a player stretching a leg in front of a player trying to block a clearance (side of his foot or manufacture's logo showing you might say), wasn't even clear if there was contact. The ref knew at that point that he was lost, as he showed by the fact that he then didn't blow his whistle for the remaining 15 mins, even though there were some clear fouls to call both ways.
Disciplinary Comm. suspends SEA's Gonzalez; NE's Cardenas wins appeal May 8, 2012 Greg Lalas MLSsoccer.com Revs break new ground with successful Cardenas appeal May 8, 2012 Kyle McCarthy MLSsoccer.com
Good to see Kyle putting his law degree to use. Some may remember that he passed the bar last year. Now I, too, have passed the bar, but a lot of the time I will decide to stop in... This quote from Mike Burns cracks me up... "We certainly weren't trying to be the trendsetters or the leaders in this regard..."
When it happened, I thought it was a foul on Olave. And yes, I thought that in real time. And I said on the game board that I couldn't imagine what the ref thought he saw that caused him to pull red. That said, let me quickly admit that I'd be a horrible referee. I think they have an incredibly hard job especially with games as fast and physical as MLS games, and I'd be amazed if they didn't get several calls wrong every game.
I'm a people-pleaser, thus, I could never ever be a referee. Even those little kiddie games, I can't take those puppy-eyes.
Good point, but ... ... my beef is that refs must be %100 sure when giving a straight red - and too often they aren't completely certain. That's a call that radically and irreversibly alters the game (and often ruins it IMO), so they need to be absolutely sure. They can always put the player in question on a short leash (and let him know they are doing so) if there's a little bit of doubt. Too often the "rolling on the ground in agony" influences the ref, as it did in this case. What I really think happened (and happens too often), is this studs-up mandate is overemphasized/overused. It's pretty clear that the refs are told that if they see the bottom of the shoe, it's a studs-up play and therefore a strong red-card possibility. It's asking an unreasonable threshold for players to *never* expose the studs. We've seen Shalrie get a red for using his sole purely to control a ball. As long as there isn't direct contact to a planted leg, or above the foot, or the sole isn't used to intimidate, it shouldn't be a red card and often not a foul.
I thought it might be trouble as soon as it happened. You can't make a frontal out of control lunging tackle with your foot knee high and studs showing without a high risk of a red card. That Cardenas pulled his foot down at the last moment and tried unsuccessfully to get out of the tackle mitigates the foul to the level of a yellow, but that was not apparent to me (and presumably also the ref) in real time. Two inches higher and he breaks the defenders ankle. I don't want to fault Cardenas, but it was an over-enthusiastic dangerous tackle in a game where there already had been a red card and you have to know the ref is likely to punish it severely. Regardless, blaming the ref for our failure to get points from that game is ludicrous. We were disorganized, worn out, and ineffectual, so we lost.
Cardenas didn't initiate contact with Olave. Olave landed on Cardenas's foot. It wasn't a red card, it wasn't a yellow card, it wasn't even a foul on Cardenas. And how can it be considered out of control when Cardenas actually pulled out of the tackle enough to avoid initiating contact? That would seem to show complete control.