Excellent summary. I feel for Chapman, honestly. How many times in MLS playoff history has a keeper earned a *mandatory* caution during KFTM? That results in a 2CT? In the *last* year when a YC in regulation carries over? He messed up in initially allowing the sub, yes, so he's done for this season. But geez how many of us would have figured it out in real time?
So... anyone heard anything more about what happened during that long delay? If the entire crew is done for the year that would seem to indicate the VAR/AVAR were not the heroes here.
There’s no room for flexibility here. The Laws they operate under were followed correctly, and likely other clubs would protest the overturning of this red card.
I would think they need compelling evidence that the encroachment call was wrong if they're to have any hope for an appeal being upheld. Otherwise it's all even more of a sham than we already knew.
I will happily take the other side of a bet on this topic, and will also freely admit if I end up being wrong. We’ve all watched MLS in some form make a post-game decision “for the good of the game”, and we’ve argued why those decisions were unjust. In this case, you have a rule that essentially everybody agrees was flawed, that’s since been changed, that could’ve been avoided with an alternate interpretation, and if you leave the implementation, then a team has to start its second-string goalkeeper in a playoff game. MLS will find some way to paper over this, and it’s less or a sham (and for a better reason) than not suspending Nani or whatever.
I think the lack of a flag generated confusion. Imagine if the AR had put his flag up immediately after Gallese saved the kick. Would the entire Orlando team have stormed into the field? Would their manager have run off down the tunnel? I doubt it. It would have much more clearly communicated what was going on and prevented all that confusion. I pretty much agree with the entirety of MassachusettsRef’s comment. There’s no good reason not to put the flag up. The idea that the signal should be more subtle in case the referee wants to ignore it makes no sense, any responsible referee would trust the AR that had a much better view of it; if a referee is wanting to overrule his AR here, we have bigger problems!
Keeping in mind that they aren’t really overturning the red card, but overturning the suspension, I don’t know that it would be hard to say that, given the harshness of the Law and that it has been changed, a suspension is not needed. I’m not sure how that fits with their protocols and if they have to gin up something beyond that to justify.
Given my post above and some of the flack the AR in question is taking, I think it's worth noting that my understanding is he was explicitly instructed to not flag per the CR. So take that for what it's worth. I agree with the entirety of your post, including your agreement with me!
Yep. I think a lot of people tend to forget that leagues don't have to suspend at all for any red cards. The only thing that mandates a suspension is Referee Assault or Referee Abuse. Do 99% of leagues have automatic suspensions for all red cards of at least 1 game? Of course. I wouldn't referee in a league that didn't. I would have zero issue with MLS waiving his suspension. If they did, they aren't saying the card was incorrect.
On one hand, I agree with you. It was truly a perfect storm of events. However, as one of PRO's full-time referees, it's his job to know all of these different permutations. Perhaps those of us working games on a Saturday afternoon at the complex could be excused because we have other jobs and don't referee as our full-time vocation, but excusing Chapman for this would be like me saying "well, this accounting rule is really obscure, so don't blame me if I don't apply it and I submit a wrong report to the state". It's my full-time job to know, or at least know where to find, those obscure items before I submit something. At his level, he should know this and then go over it with his team as part of their pre-game. The lesson I'm taking from this is that I'm going to keep a card with KTFM issues like this in my referee wallet when I work games where KTFM is an issue. I'd MUCH rather take a minute and refer to my notes than try to remember all of these items and then forget something. The stakes are simply too high in a State Cup match to mess that up - to say nothing about playoffs at the professional level.
This was years ago so I might have difficulty finding it, but wasn't there a memo from FIFA stating explicitly that all red cards must carry a one-game suspension? The EPL and others continued to test that edict with their review system and I believe FIFA has been worn down to the point of simply not caring (plus FIFA has an appeal mechanism itself for international tournaments now) but I am pretty sure that FIFA's position is that all red cards must carry a mandatory 1-game suspension. Leagues and federations can then do what they'd like with appeals or review systems, but the 1-game suspension has to be automatic as a starting point.[/quote][/QUOTE]
I used to think so, but I've searched far and wide and emailed a lot of people and no one has ever been able to come up with anything. It's like this elusive myth we all wish were true. If it is true, it would also be nice if it were duplicated in the U.S. Soccer Policy Manual.
Articles 17.2 and 18.4 say all red cards have the automatic suspension: https://resources.fifa.com/image/up...-code-500275.pdf?cloudid=koyeb3cvhxnwy9yz4aa6 That document is, of course, only controlling for matches played under the direct auspices of FIFA or in FIFA qualifying competitions. But I am sure there was a memo in the 2000s that said the principle held for domestic-level matches. It was an attempt to smack down the EPL when it first started granting appeals regularly.
I was going to say, I'm pretty sure FIFA requires in their statutes that a red card be accompanied by a suspension of at least one game. It's in the same document that is referenced whenever someone argues that MLS is required to implement pro/rel. But then like you said, it's not been strictly enforced, and FIFA themselves have started to open avenues for appeal at their own competitions. Red card appeals are here to stay, I would suppose. Previous appeals on second cautions that I've been able to find: Matt Besler (3/2015) and Alejandro Bedoya (6/2018). Both were rejected.
While it's easy to say from the comfort of my chair, I'm quite confident that I would not be entertaining a sub during KFTM for anything other than an injured GK. I just don't see that as a particularly arcane rule. (It's in the KFTM summary I put together for my AYSO Region, which we distribute every year before the playoffs.) So, yeah, I think the four on the field can clearly be faulted for not knowing this off the top of their heads.
Point taken (RefIADad as well). So far of the matches I have centered exactly zero have gone to KFTM, so I probably would have confused "unable to continue" also.
11/24/20 Toronto FC vs Nashville Rentschler Field at Pratt and Whitney Stadium (6PM ET) REF: Robert Sibiga AR1: CJ Morgante AR2: Ian McKay 4TH: Rubiel Vazquez VAR: Alan Kelly AVAR: Claudiu Badea Philadelphia Union vs New England Revolution Subaru Park (8PM ET) REF: Joe Dickerson AR1: Kathryn Nesbitt AR2: Adam Wienckowski 4TH: Fotis Bazakos VAR: Dave Gantar AVAR: Craig Lowry Seattle Sounders vs Los Angeles FC CenturyLink Field (10:30PM ET) REF: Kevin Stott AR1: Mike Rottersman AR2: Jeff Hosking 4TH: Alex Chilowicz VAR: Jorge Gonzalez AVAR: Fabio Tovar
Overall playoff debut for McKay. 1st whistle for Dickerson. 1st 4th for Chilowicz. 1st VAR for Jorge Gonzalez. 1st AVAR for Badea. Got lost in all the other nonsense, but that was the first playoff whistle for Chilowicz the other day, as well.
What other centers do you think will debut this year? I am surprised we haven’t seen Vasquez (in the middle) yet.
I would be mildly surprised if Vazquez doesn't get a whistle this year. Beyond him, your options come down to Rivas or Touchan. Only 4 games left where you might see a debut, and Vazquez feels right IMO.
I agree. And Fischer seems like the other referee who hasn't had a match who will definitely get one. It gets tricky after that, I think. I think it's unclear if Kelly is going to get a playoff match--I've heard different theories on that. Elfath and Marrufo will work again. One of them might work twice, though what happened to Chapman this weekend shows the risk of attempting that. Maybe Stott gets another match, as a safe pair of hands in a year where both Penso and Chapman are unavailable? That could be the six matches: Marrufo, Elfath, Stott, Fischer, Vazquez and then a repeat of Marrufo/Elfath. If there's no repeat, I wonder who that sixth referee is (stipulating, of course, that I am probably wrong to some extent on the first five). Kelly if he's available, for sure. But if he's not?
It would be out of the ordinary to assign Kelly a whistle with all the time he missed, even if it is a really weird season. Speaking of Kelly, what do we think about the decision not to recommend a review for VC there?
not a surprise, but definitely an error as far as I am concerned. Maybe Sibiga told him he saw it clearly?
A little more information: I didn't hear anything of the sort on FS1, but supposedly the TSN broadcast got word that there was not enough extension of Osorio's leg to make the lack of a red card a clear and obvious error. I suppose that would get into the force consideration. It's clearly red in my eyes, but it's the playoffs and all. Kind of a fresh competition so perhaps they raised that bar a little bit.