Post-match: Sir Nancelot Raids Swamp Castle - Crew @ Orlando - Match 14 - 5/25/24 7:30 PM

Post #211 (my post) on this thread has a blurry photo of the shoes from the TV feed.

https://www.bigsoccer.com/threads/2...week-14-may-25-r.2130649/page-9#post-42240504

 

If the center ref said he saw it clearly he doesn’t have to look at VAR but I’m saying he shouldn’t have a choice. I’m going by what I’ve heard them say on tv. So your telling me the center ref is overruled by VAR and doesn’t have a choice? If so that’s great

 

Finally watched the game. I think it was a pretty good game plan from the crew, and I think everyone played a really good game.

It was Nancy's most aggressive set up in a while with both Cheba and Moreira wide and upfield with Camacho often as the only defender. That opened us up to counters, but Orlando couldn't capitalize so the risk paid off. Matan was often in the midfield, creating 3 there, with a Moreira stepping in as well. I thought Rowe did well mixing and pulling guys. He only had 2 giveaways, and on one he was fouled with no call given. While Orlando had better chances, the crew's plan was creating half chances with diagonals to Arfsten behind Torres or balls in behind to him.

The ref could have called a penalty when Matan was shoved down in the 20' and when Cheba tackled that guy cutting into the box. When the ref made the Orlando PK decision, I think the 4th Official told Pereja right away that the Crew may have a penalty because he was furious. When the ref issued the yellow and made the VAR call, Orlando's keeper went crazy on Araujo to the point the ref told him to take it easy on him. Maybe Araujo has a tendency to tug. The tug lasted the entire time Morris was in the box; it wasn't a quick grab. Then Araujo should have been sent off in the 49' for an intentional foul.

Thought we could have played a little better in the 20 minutes just after the goal. Team probably wasn't used to the amount of subs that early. They held on and Schulte had a great night, boosting his FBef numbers.

 

Here's a summary of the VAR process.

1. The play happens on the field, and the officiating crew makes an on-field ruling.
2. VAR reviews the play. If the VAR believes there is a "clear and obvious error" or if the VAR identifies an incident that the on-field crew acknowledges they might have missed (such as a punch behind the play - just one example), the VAR will recommend that the referee conduct an onfield review at the monitor.
3. The referee then reviews the play at the monitor. The referee ultimately has the final say on any changes to the initial onfield ruling. Once the referee goes to the monitor, he/she can adjust rulings on other things - including things that the VAR may not have recommended to review.

While I guess it's theoretically possible that a referee COULD say "No, I saw it, and I'm not going to review the play at the monitor" upon receiving a recommendation, that type of decision would very likely be a career-limiting decision for a referee. Back in the 2018 World Cup, German referee Felix Brych did exactly this. He did not work another game in the tournament after that happened. In other words, if the VAR recommends that the referee review the play at the monitor, the referee is going to do it.

 

I thought yellow cards couldn't be given based on VAR? But Araujo got one for jersey tugging Morris.

 

Once the referee goes to the screen, he or she can address anything seen on the review. It's not just the specific item under question. In that case, Marrufo felt the foul was a clear and obvious error for both the foul/penalty kick AND for issuing a caution.

If I'm the referee and I go to the screen to rule on an offside situation and I see a reckless tackle that should be a caution, I can issue the caution. I fully realize that is not the protocol on how video review/VAR is used in other sports like the NFL or NBA, but that's the protocal issued by IFAB. (Whether I agree or not with that protocol is a different discussion, so I won't dive into that here.)

 

Still confirms that I’m right in what I said, I also think they should change the language as I propose and automatically look and blow the play dead. I swear I’ve seen games where the ref refuses to even let a play be reviewed. Which is just wrong because nobody is perfect. Plus the ref can’t see everything at once the pitch is just too big and has 22 players on it.

 

Sounds like you don’t know how it works

 

Araujo was just off a suspension for YC accumulation (last week vs. Chicago) after getting cautions in FIVE straight matches. So he gets a pretty blatant one which gave Columbus the game winner and, frankly, as noted above, he deserved another.

I'd say the guy needs to be taught some self control.

 

Gallese, Orlando’s GK, was absolutely loosing it on Araujo after the penalty call.

 

The written rules say he doesn’t have to look, so I’m right. What part don’t you understand? I said they need to change the language.

It should be mandatory that they look , I also think they should change it and blow the whistle. I fully understand the rule I just want it changed because it’s not a good rule nor is it well written. The ref made the correct ruling in the game vrs Orlando he did his job exactly as he should according to the rules as they currently stand. My issue is with the rules.


So what part do you think I don’t understand ???

 

Wonder if he got the yellow for the foul or harassment of the ref.

 

I’m sure the answer is ‘yes’, but the four or so minutes that ended up not even counting due to the stoppage and the review, do those minutes get added on to stoppage time?

 

They should be, I would think. But that depends on the ref. Some are realistic. We went to see Fiorentina vs Sassulo last month in Serie A. There was zero time added. Zero. Both halves. The first half didn't need it, and the second half was 5-1 at the end. So the ref added no time, even though there had been some goal celebrations and subs on both sides. I thought it was common sense to do so--and nice to see after some of those 10+ min added times last year in some of the tournaments.

 

Yes - in theory, all time needed for reviews are added to stoppage time. Whether the full amount is always added is another topic . . .

 

Well the first has happened and the second is merely my opinion and im not only on that. Don’t care if the majority agree or disagree. It makes absolutely no sense to keep playing if a potential goal scoring play happens blow it dead. One of these days someone is going to be seriously injured for no reason. The game can simply be restarted. Blow the whistle when someone on defense gets the ball , no point in allowing a counter and going on for countless minutes.


So your going to argue that the center ref has never waved off VAR ? Guess you don’t pay attention.

 

As a long-time official, I cannot tell you how many times I've seen non-officials grab onto something that just is not true about officiating and cling to it no matter what. I don't really understand it, but it happens a lot.

And here I was only complimenting Wilfried Nancy on his clothing choices Saturday night and trying to learn what shoes he was wearing in the event I went clothes shopping after getting my referee coaching/mentoring money in a couple of weeks.

 

Missed the game last night as I was at the Spuds game taking pics.

Glad to see we won and Rossi may be bringing his CCC form to the league!

 

Sour crème and chives please.

 

Who’s the crew fan you can see in the replays celebrating right behind the goal when Rossi scores that chip? Because that guy was living his best life!

 

It was a pretty day for a ballgame.



https://sampsonphotography83.pixieset.com/spudsbaseball2024/spudsvssasquatch52624/