I don't know about this. The American defender's left hand appears to literally be on the ground as contact seems to be occurring between his right arm and the Canadian attacker's left leg (with the left foot being on the line). We never get the perfect angle, but I think it seems pretty likely that foul contact occurs on the line or just inside it. Of course, if there is no video evidence to clearly show that it was in the penalty area, the VAR can't act. So I'd be okay saying the VAR didn't have enough evidence if that's true. But I would stop short of saying it was likely outside the area. Ultimately, I think penalty would be a fair call here live. But, having not given it live, the VAR team has a few hurdles to get over to get to recommending an OFR for a penalty. And it seems those were insourmountable. Agreed.
I'm definitely not a Manuel Escobar fan, but I don't want to bash him when he wasn't working the USA-Canada game. Escobedo from Mexico was in the middle (fully realizing you might have an auto-correct issue here ).
How is it not? Looks like a simple push off of ball without even going for the ball? Sorry if its a stupid question
The slight contact on the upper arm is way down the "trifling" scale for me. And the Canadian attacker doesn't do himself any favors by throwing himself to his left when he feels that contact. Note that even he goes down, looks back that the ref with arms out yelling "hey!", sees that the ruse didn't work, and just gets up to rejoin play. Not that that tells us everything, but it's a clue.
I thought the same during live play - but once I rewatched it and realized that the attacker is embellishing it a lot, I have doubts that the attacker wanted to stay on his feet. There is contact, and the defender is taking a big risk having his arms there, but ultimately it isn't a clear enough push to convince me without a doubt that the attacker has fallen because of it.
My thoughts watching it live is that there was probably some flash lag involved, and he thought the ball was touched forward to where the goalkeeper would win it first. Otherwise, it looked very straightforward.
Insofar as the remaining assignments for the first round go, Radix and Fischer are the only two officials listed as "referees" who have not had whistles. Got to think Radix goes on the meaningless Suriname-Guadeloupe game. Canada faces the winner of Group C, so that means Fischer should get a Group D match if he's going to be used on-field. Honduras v Qatar is obviously the more prestigous match, so he would probably hope to land there. Ramos or Barton would make sense on Jamaica-Costa Rica, since their nations face a Group D team. That just leaves Panama v Grenada, which is not irrelevant. Panama needs to run up the score and have Qatar lose, which isn't a crazy combination of results. If Fischer is on the "better" game in Group D, I wonder who gets this.
The two RCs for DOGSO issued by Ismael Cornejo in the Martinique vs. Haiti match: 56' [after OFR; YC original call] https://streamable.com/2faoay 78' https://streamable.com/1hwgq2
Looks like Radix and Fischer aren't getting used. Odd. And it also helps me get everything wrong. Suriname : Guadeloupe - GUERRERO (MEX) Costa Rica : Jamaica - ESCOBAR (GUA) Honduras : Qatar - MARRUFO (USA) Panama : Grenada - RAMOS (MEX) Fischer is the 4th on the Panama match, which seems extra baffling (since it can't be said he's being used exclusively as a VAR). Ramos on a match that could determine whether or not Mexico faces Panama seems far from ideal, particularly when you can swap him with Escobar and there are no conflicts, but it's CONCACAF so par for the course I guess.
Also, I suppose this now means Marrufo gets the Canada QF as his knockout match? He can't do the US match. He likely wouldn't repeat the Group D Winner match (which also would be, potentially, to face the US). And he's been kept away from high-level Mexico matches in the past. So that's theoretically his only QF. Either that, or Hall knows he can't use Marrufo in the knockout stages unless the US and/or Mexico fall, so this is his reward?
“If you don’t say it at home, why would you say it in the stadium? What’s wrong is wrong.” Si no lo dices en tu casa, ¿por qué lo dirías en el estadio? 🤔#WhatsWrongIsWrong pic.twitter.com/OcDu0qcR7h— W Gold Cup (@GoldCup) July 20, 2021
Fischer refereed a match in the Preliminary Round (which I guess counts as a part of Gold Cup this year) where he had some KMIs. Barton is already in Tokyo for the Olympic Tournament.
From the first half of Suriname vs Guadeloupe. Irep was given a straight 🟥 for this foul against Suriname 😬 pic.twitter.com/O4MJl628DL— FOX Soccer (@FOXSoccer) July 20, 2021
It's unfortunate, but when you challenge the opponent from behind and have pretty much no opportunity to play the ball and end up putting the studs down the Achilles, then it's hard to argue the red.
Mass con at the end of Guadaloupe-Suriname. Players leaving the bench. Really could (should?) have been a send off for the first tackle, and then kicking the ball twice against the player has to be a send-off. Probably should have seen two more reds to end this one 11 v 8.
Interesting. I remember we watched the potential SFP + PK combination. Honestly, I'd be surprised if Fischer was "punished" for a poor perceived poor performance there, but I've been surprised quite often before. Of course. My fault.
Well, the OFR was initially for that tackle. Seems like Guerrerro disagreed with the recommendation there. I find that surprising given he accepted the SFP recommendation in the first half. Not exactly sure how he picks out two cautions for substitutes--one of who just happens to be already on a yellow--out of all that. And only picks that. In addition to the tackle itself, what about the Guadeloupe player who kicked the ball into the fallen opponent twice to start the whole melee? The whole thing reeked of wanting to get out of there as quickly as possible. This was also a good theoretical test of the mandate to punish all misconduct discerned at an OFR. The practical restraints of not wanting to dish out 12-15 illegal entering cards clearly ruled the day. Still, even if you're going to ignore all the illegal entry, there has to be more there.
The VC for kicking the ball against a player twice has to be a send off. That was probably the biggest example of, "I just want to get the heck out of here." Truth be told, at that point in the game, an abandonment for the benches clearing shouldn't have been out of the question. I know we've all been there where we just try to do something that we hope gets us out of that environment in one piece, but it didn't seem like he picked the right things there.
And now we get to resume Costa Rica-Jamaica and see if Escobar can continue his run of cardless minutes . . .