10/26/21 Los Angeles FC vs Seattle Sounders Banc of California Stadium (10:30PM ET) REF: Kevin Stott AR1: Kathryn Nesbitt AR2: Eduardo Mariscal 4TH: Michael Radchuk VAR: Jair Marrufo AVAR: Fabio Tovar
Miami has fouled Barco 12 times ... most of them muggings. ... and that's only the ones that have been called. Miami is clearly targeting him and being allowed to get away with it. And I'm being entirely objective here.
Well, one of them that was called and earned Gonzalez Pirez a yellow card was a play where Barco went down without any contact.
No, the replay showed that G-P came down on Barco"s foot. That's as gentle as you'll get from G-P, a thug who's leading the league in yellow cards, in fact maybe on track to set a league record in that unsavory category. I think they had fouled Barco five times in the first five minutes. If that's not team PI I don't know what is. Does that ever get called in MLS?
I think the only one I've ever seen called is the Gantar one where he 'halo'd the playing being fouled repeatedly as if to say "this guy? stop fouling him".
Just because the commentator says he stepped on his foot does not mean it happened. Look at the first replay. Clear daylight between their feet and no other contact. Is G-P a thug? Yes. Was he actually guilty this time? No. Was Miami targeting Barco? Yes. Did the referee attempt to deal with it? Also yes. At least 3 of the cautions were for fouls on Barco.
I don't know what the commentator said. I too thought it was a dive based on the first two replay angles. But look at the third replay. Nope, G-P came down hard on his foot. If the ref "attempted to deal with it," I didn't see any evidence of it, as the yellows he did give were individually warranted in their own right. And he certainly didn't deal with it effectively, as by the 70th minute Barco had twelve called fouls perpetrated on him. I lost count after that.
Miami with 25 fouls and 5 cards Atlanta with 13 fouls and 3 cards Since I'm an Atlanta fan, I'm clearly partisan and there's no question part of Barco's game is purposefully drawing fouls. But Atlanta's weakness in scoring on direct kicks lets teams get away with a LOT of fouls against offensive players - not just Barco. It feels like diving, time wasting and concacaf shit housery has grown tremendously this year. Miami and Philly both played the same way and Stott did not seem to be prepared to deal with it. Instead of giving cards for frequent fouls, at some point in the 2nd half, he seemed to lower his bar so that Miami was picking up fouls for pretty light contact in the 2nd half. The result seemed fair and I think the game was pretty enjoyable for neutrals based on the reddit game thread. And once Atlanta took the lead, we turned up the concacaf ourselves - 2 of Atlanta's YCs were in stoppage time, Guzan for time wasting and Cubo for a very concacafy shithouse foul.
Not justifying it, but I got the sense Cubo's foul was more retaliation for a pretty hard foul on Barco less than a minute earlier that wasn't even called, rather than Concacaf-style shithousery. But perhaps it was some of both.
Let's face it a team poyellow is a pretty easy one for a referee to avoid at the pro level. Because if you gave a second yellow for a team po offense, all of the fans and pundits who say but they want referees to enforce it would be saying that that referee ruined the game with a soft second yellow. Personally I think PO and SPA should be cracked down on at the pro level more because in the end it will lead to a better game instead of one where you have 40 fouls committed and good attack stopped before they can start. But more yellows means more reds and then we've ruined the game in the name of making it better.
There was actually one match I can recall from several years ago when Michael Oliver appeared to do this. It was the club you support, Chelsea against a Mourinho-coached Manchester United. A few different United players had kicked Hazard and after it happened again, Oliver made one of those pointing to different parts of the pitch gestures as if ticking off the number of times it had happened. A few minutes later, Hazard was fouled again---pretty sure it was Herrera---and Oliver gave him a yellow, which turned out to be his second yellow and thus a sending off, even though the foul wasn't particularly dangerous or cynical. It just seemed like Oliver had enough of the rotational fouling on Hazard and said the next player who kicks him is getting booked regardless.
I've seen this very rarely. Admittedly, I don't remember the game you mention (and it was before Pulisic joined Chelsea, which is why I follow them now). Oliver would be one of the few referees I could imagine identifying this and making a point that the rotational fouling had to stop. I've had to call this a few times in the youth games I've worked. One time I called this, I pointed to the girl who was being fouled and told the other team, "She's getting fouled all the time. Knock it off." Five minutes later, she was fouled again and I gave a caution for it.
I have given team PO against one player a few times but to be honest I'm apprehensive to doing it because I'm not sure what the protocol is of announcing you're at your limit, and then what to do after the first caution I give for it. If a player has been fouled 3-4 times within a relatively small time frame, do you publicly announce the potential team PO caution, or pull the captain aside if they are on the field and let him tell his team? The few times I've given it, I just tell whoever the last fouling player was "I've had enough of the fouls on [number], a caution may be coming next" And after you give a caution for it, do you then give every subsequent foul against that player a caution as well, or do you "reset" your PO threshold?
These are all YHTBT moments, but I think you publicly admonish the player on the "last one" loudly enough for others to hear it. You want the players to know that the fouling has to stop. After the caution, I think the next card depends on what happens with the player. If the next foul is a simple foul 40 minutes later, you don't need to card that. If the next foul is a hard challenge two minutes later, by all means I'm cautioning that player as well and probably saying something to the effect of (but in a more professional manner) "you aren't getting the message, and the cards will continue until you do." Admittedly, this is a sore spot for me. My son's an attacking mid/forward, and over the years the teams he has played a lot have targeted him. It's gotten to the point where I've confronted one of the coaches of the biggest offender (who I really don't like anyway because he questioned my integrity in front of an assignor) and told him I've let the entire officials association know about his tactics.
That works. Just be careful about language you use about future consequences. A foul in the next couple of minutes is asking for the caution. A rough or deliberate but not reckless foul 10 minutes later has earned it. But a minor "honest" foul or a foul 30 minutes later may not. I think this is pretty much the same as for an individual. It depends. Is it another hard or deliberate foul 2 minutes after the caution? Well, they aren't learning, here's another one. Did the caution change behavior and it's 30 minutes later before there is another foul? Probably don't need that caution.
All these stipulations are what I use when cautioning an individual for PO. And I never say "next one is a caution" like I hear others say. I just have seen it given so rarely, and rarely have given myself, for a team PO that I wonder if the procedure was different but sounds like it follows the same general idea.
A little late, but for posterity's sake... 10/27/21 New England Revolution vs Colorado Rapids Gillette Stadium (7PM ET) REF: Victor Rivas AR1: Kyle Atkins AR2: Ian McKay 4TH: JC Griggs VAR: Jorge Gonzalez AVAR: Tom Supple Atlanta United vs Inter Miami CF Mercedes-Benz Stadium (7:30PM ET) REF: Guido Gonzales Jr AR1: Nick Uranga AR2: CJ Morgante 4TH: Marcos DeOliveira VAR: Younes Marrakchi AVAR: Chantal Boudreau FC Cincinnati vs Nashville TQL Stadium (7:30PM ET) REF: Ramy Touchan AR1: Claudiu Badea AR2: Corey Rockwell 4TH: Tim Ford VAR: Chico Grajeda AVAR: Cory Richardson Columbus Crew vs Orlando City Lower.com Field (7:30PM ET) REF: Joe Dickerson AR1: Andrew Bigelow AR2: Diego Blas 4TH: Matt Thompson VAR: Geoff Gamble AVAR: Eric Weisbrod D.C. United vs New York Red Bulls Audi Field (7:30PM ET) REF: Rubiel Vazquez AR1: Adam Garner AR2: Peter Balciunas 4TH: Joshua Encarnacion VAR: Jose Carlos Rivero AVAR: Jeff Muschik New York City FC vs Chicago Fire Yankee Stadium (7:30PM ET) REF: Fotis Bazakos AR1: Brian Poeschel AR2: Brian Dunn 4TH: Chris Penso VAR: Robert Sibiga AVAR: Gjovalin Bori Toronto FC vs Philadelphia Union BMO Field (7:30PM ET) REF: Silviu Petrescu AR1: Gianni Facchini AR2: Lyes Arfa 4TH: David Barrie VAR: Alejandro Mariscal AVAR: Robert Schaap FC Dallas vs Real Salt Lake Toyota Stadium (8PM ET) REF: Ismail Elfath AR1: Jeremy Kieso AR2: Chris Elliott 4TH: Chris Ruska VAR: Daniel Radford AVAR: Mike Kampmeinert Sporting Kansas City vs LA Galaxy Children’s Mercy Park (8:30PM ET) REF: Alan Kelly AR1: Matthew Nelson AR2: Jose Da Silva 4TH: Jon Freemon VAR: Kevin Terry Jr AVAR: Jonathan Johnson Portland Timbers vs San Jose Earthquakes Providence Park (10PM ET) REF: Alex Chilowicz AR1: Ryan Graves AR2: Jeffrey Swartzel 4TH: Mark Allatin VAR: Edvin Jurisevic AVAR: Joshua Patlak Vancouver Whitecaps vs Minnesota United BC Place (10PM ET) REF: Nima Saghafi AR1: Mike Rottersman AR2: Jeff Hosking 4TH: Alain Ruch VAR: Drew Fischer AVAR: Rene Parra
We are in the part of the season where dead-rubber matches often feature trialists. Any chance those are coming soon?
A little late here, but relative to the question @socal lurker asked in the EPL thread about the Norwich penalty and whether the handball for a shot at goal should have been red or yellow... there was a very interesting situation in Columbus. A shot at goal was deflected out for a corner kick. In real-time, no one really knew what it had hit. There may have been some light reactionary appeals, but I think it's very fair to say that absolutely no one on-field was expecting a penalty kick; indeed, Orlando was ready to take the corner kick and had to be stopped from doing so. Of course, it ended up being an obvious handball situation. The defender's arm was quite literally well above his head and the ball struck it. It struck it ever slow slightly, but replay definitely proved it. So, OFR and penalty. But here's the interesting question... Shot was at goal (I keep using that word deliberately) but seemed relatively clear that it was going to go over the crossbar on its own. The added wrinkle? Player in question was already on a yellow card. So, what's the correct outcome and what are the considerations? Dickerson opted for no misconduct, reasoning the shot was definitely over the bar. I'm not sure other referees would have reached the same conclusion.
PRO has only so many trialist spots--at each position--relative to the CBA. So the days of them using them deliberately late in the year might have passed us. I say that while only being partially informed, though, because I haven't kept track of exactly how many spots have been used so far. I know Szpala has been trialed in the middle and it's possible Freemon's middles counted before he was hired. But I will add that assignments have to be made about three weeks out and it's pretty hard to plan for dead-rubber matches in the final week when there are so many playoff spots available. Nothing gets adjusted for next week based on what happens this weekend or last weekend, so you would have had to know a few weeks ago that a match was going to be irrelevant. Besides San Jose v Dallas, it doesn't look like any match would fit neatly into that category (even New England v Miami could have mattered for Supporters' Shield or setting the points record and, well, giving a newbie Miami as an intro on the last game of the season wouldn't really be fair anyway).
Interesting, and I don't get it. In the second replay in that very link you can see G-P's foot coming down on top of Barco's toe. I wonder if the committee only looked at the first one? Mind you, I can see possibly overturning the yellow, because aside from the PO, the foul itself maybe didn't warrant the caution as reckless (although it was at least arguably supportable as cynical) -- but fine Barco? WTF? Maybe getting fouled too much is a fineable offense now? Wasn't getting fouled 12 times a tie of the MLS record or something like that? So they took away G-P's tie of the record for yellows, and took away Barco's tie of the record for getting fouled, all in one foul swoop. Nice.
I can understand being fooled in real time on the field. I can understand being fooled by the second replay angle. I don't understand seeing the first replay angle, which clearly shows how far LGP was from actually stepping on Barco, and still being convinced there was a foul here. Second angle is just a simple illusion created by forced perspective.
Sorry friend but I think that second image lacks the depth perception to see what happened. This is pretty clearly no contact and embellishment. Why are you ignoring such clear evidence? You can see the moment in both replays where the outstretched led hits the ground. How do you explain the first angle?