I figure since there's one for NWSL perhaps we can do the same for USL Championship and to a lesser extent USL League One and USL League Two. --- Are USL teams allowed to speak against referees like this? Perhaps it wasn't reprimanded because it wasn't as public? 22' | Apparently being *literally* pushed down in the box isn't a penalty anymore. Cool.0-0 | #BHMvMEM— Birmingham Legion FC (@bhmlegion) July 11, 2021 Incident in question available on ESPN+ at 00:47:35 on video or 20:38 on game clock.
In their tweet, they conveniently left out that their guy went down like he got hit with a cannon ball. The defender has both arms on the forwards chest and does appear to give a slight push, but the forward quickly goes backwards and falls down. The social media sites are run by college interns at this level (who else types "cool"?), so it's not surprising to see.
But he still made contact with arms. Stopped him using his arms. I mean is this one of those where level of play and force need to match for it to be a foul?
I'm sure the rules against public criticism of officials apply to teams' social media just the same as they apply to individuals. Whether this is enough to trigger discipline, well...it's still up so probably not.
Quite a mess at the end of OT: nothing compares to the magic of the USL2 playoffs pic.twitter.com/q3oL3hZNYs— Jackson Popkin (@jackson_popkin) July 19, 2021
USL League One game player is sent off in 34th minute. Start at 1:37 to see red card. Is it because he stepped back onto player?
Two guesses. Both involve the 4th or AR communicating the red to the referee. Guess 1 is that she was informed that the player who committed the foul swung his arm at the back of the opponent's head (you see him go down and hold the back of his head). Guess 2 is it was for the swipe/slap/push on the shoulder of the standing opponent as he was backing away. Can't defend either by the looks of it. Tough.
32:40 game clock. Not sure it’s even a punch, looks like it could be the palm. But it’s not VC either way. To the head/neck/rib area sure, but not to the shoulder/arm.
Are you kidding? Not exactly a close up angle but thrown with enough force to move the other player's head, had to be closed fist. Throwing a punch isn't excusable just because of where it's aimed, it doesn't even need to connect. That's textbook VC. Edit: Are you guys looking at this clip on a small screen like a phone? Watch it full screen on a large screen.
This is like a Rorschach test for referees. I'd suggest that the lesson here is that one replay from a single broadcast angle doesn't always tell the whole story. If you see a "clocking... on the head" that is clearly VC there, you've got way better vision than me. At the same time, while I'm totally sympathetic to @Thug Mentality 's post about the swing to the arm not being VC because it's not at the head (that would be my default position, too), I also can see the force @threeputzzz is talking about and if it's a closed fist, VC for that is not an absurd decision (whether or not it's expected or necessary at this level are entirely different questions). Bottom line is I have no idea if the red card was justified or not. I would suggest, based on the reaction of the punched/pushed player, the mechanics of the referee and the timing of the award of the card that it was for that punch/push action. If it was for the initial contact with the head, she would have been intervening much earlier. I'm guessing like everyone else, but I'm pretty confident the 4th or AR gave her the red card for the punch/push.
I'm making a decision based on the level of play here, something Massref acknowledged as a factor for deciding if this is expected. I don't think it is. I highly doubt anyone on the pitch at this level wants a red for that. Look at the reactions after the contact. I wouldn't consider that minor head movement when judging force. It's the reason why the considerations ask where on the body is the contact made, not how much does the head sway. I'm judging the force based on where the contact happened. Are all punches/pushes/swipes created equal? If he had swung at the same area (shoulder/arm) but not connected, you would still give a red for that? I would hope not. It's not like he wound up and stepped into it. He was backing away. For that (moderate) swing: head/neck/torso area, yeah red, but not at the arm. It's a soft surface, hence less force. That makes a red doubtful, and I wouldn't give a red at this level unless it was 100% with no way around it. There's grey area here.
Honestly calling that a "push" or "handbags" is either because you are not looking at it on a big enough monitor or it's an excuse not to call it what it is. The player was provoked by an intentional shoulder to the chest and reacted with a swinging punch to his opponent's arm. When you have a chance view it full screen on a large monitor if you can't see that. Many (all?) of you don't think a punch in the am should constitute violent conduct in a USL game. I don't work pro level matches so I doubt my disagreement with that will ever be an issue.
During last night's USLC match Phoenix Rising vs Las Vegas Lights, there was a controversial yellow given for what many of the Phoenix players thought was a DOGSO. You can watch on EPSN+. Black VERY clearly pulls red down but the call is not ruled as a DOGSO as the referee, Luis Guardia, is pointing to the other players that were between him (red player) and the goal.
I wouldn't say it's that clear cut. Distance is a factor here, as is the fact that the other defenders are accelerating rapidly to intercept.
He's getting to the ball about one touch from the top of the penalty area. Both defenders who are behind play closest to the foul are just lightly jogging at the time of the foul. Only the defender closest to the AR is starting to sprint, but he's not even close to this. This is about as clear as DOGSO gets for something 30 yards from goal IMO. He just made the common error with DOGSO that most of us make when we don't have VAR. We need to get the foul and then the player committing the foul. Then by the time we look around, we start to wonder if the keeper could have made it to the ball and by then two defenders have ran back and we think "go safe its the 10th minute".
It really is, though. And it's because your prior assertion that the defenders are "accelerating" to catch-up just isn't true. The only player truly accelerating is the attacker who just intercepted the ball and is heading straight to goal with it, while not even breaking a stride. Everyone else on the field is more-or-less flat-footed as the ball changes possession and only just start to move as the foul takes place. None of them are catching him. It's not going to be close. This is one of the DOGSOiest DOGSOs to be missed that I've seen in awhile. Other than last night in CONCACAF, of course.