You're just asking for a fantasy world that is not in tune with reality. Does every corporation send out a company wide email saying "employee X has been disciplined/reprimanded/punished for doing a report wrong?"
Now (of course, tee-hee!) I have to spoil things and say I'm the only one here who's not so sure this should be a red card for Serious Foul Play, but I'm not a ref and I'll go along with everyone and try to adjust my reactions in future. But I think it's worth mentioning at least one problem. Christina Unkel, former ref and now a TV expert and MLS commentator, made a point that the contact was direct and "not glancing". First, I have called this the Crash-Test Dummy Fallacy. What happens if the RBNY player, Omir Fernandez, reacted to Bronico's incoming challenge by starting to jerk his leg away, resulting in "glancing" contact? Is it then only a yellow, not because Bronico changed the nature of his tackle in any way, but because Fernandez didn't simply leave his leg out there like a Crash-Test Dummy so referees could measure and assess the full impact? I hope @Mikael_Referee can restore a video clip he posted on the CONCACAF sub-forum last year because it illustrates the problem exactly and is worth repeated watching to understand "modern refereeing" (It was a clip from an Atletico Madrid game, probably La Liga but possibly Champions League) Second, it's unrealistic to expect referees (on the pitch at any rate) to always accurately see the point of contact on a foul — and whether it's "glancing" or straight on. I don't remember so much talk HERE, ON THIS, THE REFEREE FORUM, about exact points of contact and "glancing" vs "direct contact" 8,9, 10 years ago. Maybe there always has been. Perhaps (to nobody's surprise) I was just slow on the uptake. And of course we always care about the distinction between, say, elbows to the head vs elbows to the midriff. But (naturally) I have to wonder if this precise assessment of contact only becomes a thing with VAR. I take it as axiomatic that good refereeing should be almost the same whether it's at the professional level, World Cup level, or USL, 2nd Division, or College. How do you ref like this, how can you possibly try to ref like this, all the time without VAR? *** This is an "easy red card" according to everyone whose opinion matters. OK, I can accept that. We can live with that even if it turns out to be not quite absolutely true. But we should know it's not a perfect answer, like when it happens in the 23rd minute of a playoff match or World Cup and we're expecting one side to go down to 10 men and suddenly the agreement isn't universal and the referees start looking for microscopic differences to justify not sending someone off — maybe it looks like it might be glancing from one angle, or maybe the play is fractionally slower and with less force, or maybe it's a Tuesday, or the moon is in Capricorn, or... something.
PRO has said on multiple occasions over the years that the best thing a referee can do when they have a sub-par game is go out and do another game. There are times when they may alter set assignments due to performance, but these are rare. Performance will always factor into future assignments, of course, and it's not difficult to glean who PRO thinks most highly of based on the sort of games they do most regularly (and how many they're assigned, barring absence for international duty or injury), but that's as much transparency as you're likely to get considering you're essentially talking about people's internal evaluations by an employer. And I don't think "discipline" is the right way to describe any of that to begin with. A game rife with moments of poor judgment doesn't indicate professional misconduct. PRO has also put themselves in a position where they don't have enough people to cover all the requisite slots each week so the chances of someone being flat out dropped on short notice are slimmer from that alone.
Christina Unkel tweeted this re referee discipline/assignments -> Yes; when there’s serious missed incidents referees will get taken off matches. Also similar to players who make mistakes, continued development & training occurs.— Christina Unkel (@ChristinaUnkel) March 30, 2023
Not really. They are one of the few companies which have the employees televised live. It is also an industry in which impartiality is of the utmost importance. It is also and industry which has had it's share of corruption. With the dollar amounts involved through betting, European play, and PRO/REL, I think that level of transparency is needed. It is only a fantasy because FIFA has a history of silence and distrust. They set the expectations bar very low.
Christ, so because a referee made a mistake and a VAR didn't think it was an obvious error we're going to make claims they are deliberately biased and corrupt? Wow. You're off your rocker, again. You're a regular on this board so you have to know the CBA between PSRA and PRO dictates some of this, especially regarding assessment scores, being fired at the end of the season, etc. It's no mystery Marcos is at the bottom of the barrel for PRO refs. How many playoff assignments has he had? I'm guessing none? As far as transparency, show me another league putting out the YouTube content PRO does and in detail, showing their officials making mistakes and what the correct outcome should have been. And they do it weekly. I'm a season ticket holder and league fan as well so my opinion comes from both sides. With the exception of Unkel being clueless in general and having no idea what a foul is, and Marcos being good for at least one mystery screw-up per game, PRO referee standards are very high and as a group, they are excellent at what they do.
I really try not to respond to you as you live in a world of pejoratives and ad hominem attacks. At absolutely no point did I claim anyone was biased or corrupt. Stop trying to mischaracterize my posts.
Personally, as only a fan who has tried for a long time to understand the officiating side of the game, I think the idea of calling out the performance standards of refs on a week to week basis is a mistake that just plays into the pound wanting its pound of flesh. We don't expect coaches to tell the fans that they made the striker stay after practice to work on their finishing or they sat the left back down after a bad performance. The refs should be the same way. When their a specific issue that rises above "yeah, they missed that one" like a misapplications of laws (the moving free kick in Seattle-Colorado last year) or some true question about impartiality (the infamous shirt request) then its an appropriate for PRO/USSF to make a statement about what happened and the consequences. I will agree that towards the goal of transparency it wouldn't be the worst idea for PRO to do a very public presentation (maybe an article on MLSSoccer.com or something) about how refs are evaluated and in general what steps are taken when the evaluation finds the ref had a poor game. Something to do at the beginning of a season or something. Maybe even go so far as to explain that if a time comes when a ref is found to need some time off/at a lower level this is when it would happen, not necessarily the next week because of assignments but in a few weeks. That sort of thing. This wouldn't be reviewing any specific ref or incident, just a general "here's how these things work".
I think @JasonMa nails it. Referee mistakes are not the same thing as misconduct. Like players, referees who make mistakes are likely to get less playing time. But publishing specific consequences of mistakes would be, well, a mistake.
When a player or coach is suspended it's for a significant act of misconduct. A fan gets suspended they probably broke the law along with their actions. A refs mistake in this case is a mistake in judgement. It would be like a player getting publicly suspended for having a poor game. Instead it is dealt with behind the scenes and if a pattern develops they may begin to lose playing time (assignments) and eventually their job.
You always do this. You verbatim said, "It is also an industry in which impartiality is of the utmost importance. It is also and industry which has had it's share of corruption." You always subtley, slyly and carefully throw in these corruption innuendos. You then get upset when we call you innuendo. and then play dumb or do legal/mental gymnastics by saying "I never said anyone was corrupt." It's tiring.
Last response to this My exact statement was "Silence leads to an appearance or not doing anything, conspiracies of collusion, allegations of cheating. Silence hurts the game" However, Dog said "because a referee made a mistake and a VAR didn't think it was an obvious error we're going to make claims they are deliberately biased and corrupt?" I never ever made this assertion. Silence gives rise to speculation in any industry. It is worse for an organization that has the history FIFA does. It is worse for an industry that impartiality is crucial. But to assert that I claimed that missed calls = corruption is a blatant lie.
Just quoting you. So saying Is, at best, disingenuous. We probably wouldn't gang up on you if this weren't the 517th time you've done it.
Fellas it’s simple. Refereeing demands 100% accuracy from its human subjects. If you aren’t 100% accurate at all times, you are biased and corrupt
There are a couple of misconceptions I think people have at this moment. First, PRO does not work for the fans, they work for the league. In the past, there have been many “suspensions” for many reasons ranging from errors in match reporting to serious miscarriage of officiating. Almost never are these reported to the public because quite simply, fans wouldn’t be satisfied anyway and it’s none of their business. What is the threshold for number of misses before suspension is required? I’m pretty sure that isn’t for the public to determine. PRO tracks referee performance in many ways and these directly contribute to whether an official stays employed or not which is evaluated every year. If they believe an official is significantly below the standard or consistently below the standard then they’ll remove them. The fact that you haven’t seen these firings should tell you what they think of their group. the teams can certainly complain here. And for sure there are consequences. Maybe these officials need a break to recalibrate or maybe they can’t see those teams for a while. Whatever the answer, that’s why pro has a gm and they communicate regularly with clubs. I’d also recommend not taking the bait on ridiculous claims of corruption. Some posters regularly come here to trip and make outlandish claims with no basis in reality. Best to ignore trolling behavior because all they want is your reaction.
In Inside Video Review, on the LA Galaxy play that was escalated to a red card, I have two questions: 1) Why is Szapala asking Marrufo if it was the elbow or upper arm that made contact to the head? What is the relevancy as to what part of the arm it was because of the high speed of the impact, the disregard for the opponents safety and the fact that his body actions show he's not going for the ball? It's as if he's implying that if contact originated with the upper arm it would be acceptable to decapitate the guy. It's a clear red card when you see it only once on replay. 2) About a dozen years ago, the USSF kept harping to all of us (and pre-PRO) about the difference between using your elbow as a "weapon" or a "tool". I no longer hear this terminology being used. Did I miss something over the last few years?
PRO definitely still references the "tool vs weapon" consideration with some regularity, although they may not have used it on any public releases lately.
The new terminology around the elbow being used as "tool or weapon" is "Clear movement or 2nd Action". The latest (that I've seen) FIFA considerations can be seen in their USSF reformatted version here: https://cdn1.sportngin.com/attachments/document/be71-2848402/2022_FIFA_Considerations_condensed.pdf