Ah. Thanks. I didn't realize that, though I suppose it is sorta obvious once you think about it. Are official observers on the audio feed for these games, or is it just the 4 game officials? (Though even if it is just the 4 officials it would be a pretty big step for all 4 to be willing to blatantly lie about what they discussed in overturning the goal.)
there are times where official observers are in stadium with access to live audio. As you can imagine, feedback regarding specific communication is pretty highly valued. With only 3 ref coaches at the moment and just one AR coach shared with the MLS, the vast majority of games have no in stadium observer.
9' - Reckless tackle - No replay but looked like studs onto foot/ankle. No problems with this one. 21' - Reckless tackle - Looked softer but was nowhere near the ball and led to an awkward collision between three players. 26' - Reckless charge - Softest of the three so far. Card maybe not needed at USL-C level. 28' - Dissent - Looks like a missed corner kick call and the player says something. Nothing really public or extended. More players frustrated with this yellow. Seemed harsh unless the language was really bad. 31' - PK given and player cautioned for a pull I guess from a corner. Could get away without the SPA caution I think. 33' - Ball kicked into opponents head/back after a foul just after kickoff on the PK. Probably one of those that was intentional but looks accidental. Yellow for sure but not far from VC territory. 38' - Jumping/Charging foul into back. Possible forearm into back of head but we don't get a good replay. Feels like the SA players know they can draw cards on their opponent. 41' - Disgraceful simulation by SA player. Halftime 47' - 100% SPA (1st caution for the player who will be sent off) 58' - 2nd caution for SA #14. Goes for a lose ball near GK. Looks worse then what really happened and the GK probably sells the 2nd yellow. 72' - Reckless/SPA. Easy 82' - GK caution for delaying after subs. Can live with it. 86' - Frustration/retaliation foul. Easy yellow. 90+3' - Late foul. Studs on foot. SPAish. Easy. Post match - I guess there was a dissent yellow. There was four or five players around the crew talking. Just seems like normal post game talking for a team that was frustrated. Ref was standing there with his yellow out. Feed cuts out.
The Miami FC vs. Pittsburgh Riverhounds Match to be Replayed on Oct. 27, Starting from 67th Minute Wow.
Just to cite a source on the above. The game will start at kickoff after the goal that was disallowed is correctly awarded to Pittsburgh, giving them a 1-0 lead. The Miami FC vs. Pittsburgh Riverhounds Match to be Replayed on Oct. 27, Starting from 67th Minutehttps://t.co/fFwKxt3e7Q— USL Championship (@USLChampionship) October 22, 2021
I can't say I'm surprised. Now we will get to see a bunch of fans wanting games replayed for bad PK calls!
And by "removed from their next assignment" they mean we won't see these guys for the forseeable future.
I am surprised. Based on what was said, this was a mistake of fact, not an error of Law. Decisions of fact by match officials are supposed to be final under the Laws. I don’t see any basis for a justifiable appeal based on the error that happened, that is a huge can of worms to open.
I don’t see this being a can of worms at all. This is an EXTREME outlier, something you might never see again. This can’t be ignored, and if you have to bend the rules a bit to fix it, then that’s what you do.
It cracked open the bottle. The LOTG are black and white: facts of the game are what the ref says they are. Period. This ignored that very clear line. Once you say that you can overturn based on facts, why is another game different? It’s blatant and awful, sure, but there are things that can be clear with video evidence. I think it is a horrible mistake to have granted the appeal.
What happened way back when that goal was scored in Germany through a hole in the net? And Atwell’s ghost goal? I genuinely don’t remember but I think Atwell’s stood but the German one didn’t? Regardless, in the VAR era I think we just have to accept that portion of Law 5 is no longer ironclad. You can’t live in a world where offside is overturned by centimeters and this can’t be fixed when everyone knows it’s wrong and it’s consequential. I mean, you could. But owners with lawyers aren’t going to allow it. Also, the announcement said PRO conceded this was a misapplication of the law, so that’s the entry point here. It’s a balancing act, but I would argue Webb and co. deliberately chose that route to allow for the common sense remedy while not completely undermining the plain text in Law 5 about “whether or not a goal is scored and the result of the match.”
Sometimes, common sense has to trump everything else. How ridiculous would a call have to be before you would accept that it should be fixed?
Also it seems that “misapplication of the law” has always been the one thing we all concede a protest could be successfully based upon. But what exactly does that phrase mean and why is it so magical? It still undermines the relevant section of Law 5 about goals being scored and the result of the match. You can misapply the Law have it lead directly to a goal and goal is still a “fact connected with play.” So yeah, in sum, if protests can ever be successful, this one almost had to be successful here.
I'm sorry but I can't agree that this is "going to open a can of worms". Protests in all sports have an infinitesimally small success rate. I think it's fallacy to assume that just because this one was allowed that this is setting some precedent where suddenly lots of protests will be filed and successfully granted. Allowing a FK to be in play, kicked into own goal, and granting a CK is such a blatant objective error of both the facts on the field and the law they think they are applying correctly that getting lost in the weeds of the semantics of "misapplication of the rules vs. the facts of play" is just a waste of time. I'm happy to see that PRO wasn't so arrogant as to say all ref decisions are final and acknowledged this egregious error. If they didn't, this would bring the integrity of the league into question. I just desperately wish we could hear the POV of whichever referee called this
Believing PRO had any real critical role in the ordering of this replay is pretty naive. This was a league decision. Made under the threat of legal action. PRO just provided the language that made the press release sound as good as possible and the decision as lawful as possible in FIFA’s eyes. Also, PRO acknowledges referee errors all the time—some, in fact, that I and others don’t even believe are errors. So the idea they wouldn’t acknowledge this is pretty far-fetched. Why? That seems like a weird thing to be desperate about. I’m not seeing who gets served by that. There’s no answer that makes this better and there’s nothing that appears to be learnable from it.
I didn’t see that from PRO. What was the misapplication of Law? Or is that just window dressing to pretend they are following the Laws?
https://triblive.com/sports/riverhounds-game-to-be-partially-replayed-due-to-officiating-error/ Excerpts: The USL, Professional Referees Organization and International Football Association Board conducted an investigation of the play and ruled that “an egregious error and misapplication of the FIFA Laws of the Game occurred.” … “In this instance, the match officials applied a law that unequivocally did not match the events on the field, and the ruling on the field exceeded the reasonable degree of human error that is inherently part of the game,” USL President Jake Edwards said in a statement.
The buy-in from IFAB is noteworthy and probably Webb’s doing. So I’m that regard, it is another area where PRO was likely helpful in establishing a narrow precedent. But the idea that the USL wouldn’t have done this anyway seems like a nonstarter to me.
A bit of clever language to mask over that this is a reversal that is not technically supported by the LOTG. I Have no heartburn from this particular result, as it is the most egregious referee error of fact that I can recall. (Well, I can come up with a couple that are at least as bad in rec games, but nothing remotely close in a professional or other high level game.) if this is truly the once-in-a-lifetime, I’m persuaded that it’s the only fair thing to do here. But if it is the thin edge of the wedge when the next bad (but not so mind blowing egregious) error of fact occurs, I think it is really bad for the Game.