Sorry. It sure as hell looked like he did. His body language was telling the player that the only reason he wasn’t getting a caution was the preceding foul. Chickenshit refereeing.
If you're going to call a yellow card, and a second yellow in a playoff game at that, for a foul that didn't even wind up being the reason play was stopped, that foul needs to be so severe that the caution can't be avoided. I didn't think the foul Bressan committed was THAT BAD. He got into the guy, but he wasn't flying in with a great deal of force, he wasn't showing studs, he wasn't over the top of the ball -- it's a perfectly acceptable decision to just warn him.
I think ref just got it right, wasn't quite hard enough to endanger the opponent. The commentary was wrong obviously. He could have given it if wanted to.
Live I thought he came in with more force and thought it deserved yellow. Replays showed it wasn't as hard of contact as I initially thought. I am ok with no yellow there.
If you’re going to commit a foul in the late stages of a playoff game when you’re sitting on a yellow you better make damn sure that said foul isn’t wreckless. Oh...the ref ruined the game by sending someone off? No....the player ruined the game by getting himself sent off. And this ref clearly was telling Bressan that he wasn’t getting a caution because of the precious foul. That’s just flat out bullshit. Bush league refereeing by this guy.
Again, doesn't mean it's not a foul, but did Bressan get a touch on the ball there? I think the referee may have been going for it until the AR said something? Because here's the thing, if Bressan has committed a foul, that's where the free kick should be because of advantage. But if you decide there's no foul, then you have a case of advantage not materializing, and you pull it back to the first one. Is that what happened? I wouldn't agree with the call, but it would at least make logical sense.
Looking one more time, I don't think there's any ball before the man, but the sequence really only makes sense if they decided there was no foul by Bressan, right or wrong.
I listened to a brief post game interview with Schmetzer. In this era of coaches with massive egos he comes across as refreshingly modest and even tempered. He gave Luchi a lot of credit. It sounds like he's very reflective and also asks his players and coaches for self-examination. He's quite different from most other coaches.
Agree. Agree even more. Sorry, but you're just flat-out wrong here. Even if the first foul hadn't happened, there's still more than enough cause to say that the foul was deserving of a verbal warning and not a caution. We see it all the time. The foul wasn't severe enough that it landed in "automatic caution" territory, and it certainly wasn't in "automatic SECOND caution" territory. And since the first foul DID happen, it does change things, whether you like it or not. If the first foul is the reason for the stoppage, the "stopping an attack" or "tactical foul" element for an unsporting behavior caution are no longer in play. It's strictly about was this foul severe enough to warrant the caution. Now, if your opinion is that it WAS serious enough, I don't have a problem with that. He absolutely could have cautioned him and sent him off, and it would not have been out of line. But it was not anywhere near "bush league bullshit."
I dunno. I can think of and/or imagine examples where the second incident was a bit doubtful or trifling so you punish the first one that was certain, but by Law if there are two definite fouls by the same team in quick succession, it should come down to which provides the offended team with the more advantageous restart. If Bressan's tackle had occurred in the penalty area, for example, and was determined to be a foul, you're not going to give a free kick for the first foul instead. It would have to be a penalty. Similarly, there's no reason to pull the ball 10–15 yards back upfield unless you've decided there was no foul by Bressan.
You're right about the free-kick-becomes-penalty scenario, but I've seen situations like this one handled both ways. I've seen it interpreted as foul-advantage-foul, punish the second foul, and I've seen it interpreted as foul-advantage-foul-advantage didn't materialize, punish first foul. I think the fact that the first foul was cautioned and the second "foul" wasn't makes it easier to sell. He's punishing not only the first foul, but the more serious foul. It also makes it easier to swallow why he's not cautioning the second one. I've got no issue with anything he did. It's all judgement. And as I said, if he HAD decided to toss Bressan, it would have been harsh, but I wouldn't have really had a problem with that either.
So if the second foul wasn’t severe enough to warrant a caution....wtf was so “well handled” by the referee? That’s pretty routine. Isn’t even controversial. Certainly doesn’t warrant a comment about it. You commented to compliment the referee for not giving the second caution because he was cautioning the first. Not giving a yellow isn’t controversial. Not giving a yellow you clearly think the foul deserves because you’re concerned that this is a big game and you’re about to send someone off is. And it’s bad refereeing....and shouldn’t be complimented. and the play hadn’t stopped. He played advantage on the first foul. edit: didn’t hit send last night. I assure you I didn’t stew over this all night!
It's NER's turn on the rack.. 2 players have tested positive for COVID. The rest of the team has tested negative, but they'll continue to test (obviously) and may know by Friday if it is contained. Multiple sources tell ESPN that another #NERevs player (not Alex Buttner, which @TaylorTwellman reported previously) has tested positive for #COVID19. The latest positive was reported to team last Sun/Mon. Revs think cases are contained, but they will know more on Friday.— Jeff Carlisle (@JeffreyCarlisle) December 2, 2020
I don't know if I'm ready to live in a world where Taylor Twellman's reporting is factually inaccurate. Next you'll tell me the Earth is round and vaccines work.
While I can't stand TT's commentary (corporate schill), I must admit he has had some good reporting scoops in the last couple years. And his comtacts on all things Revs have to be his strong suit. Also admire his earnest work on concussions.
FWIW, our local intrepid Crew reporter tweeted that coach Porter said 2 of our players who tested positive last week will be cleared to train this week. One tomorrow and one Saturday. With more possible early next week. Would not say whom.
tonight's 𝐗𝐈 down here in Kansas City...— Minnesota United FC (@MNUFC) December 4, 2020 And Dotson is in fact on the bench.
Go Minnesota. I would like to apologize in advance to all MNU fans for jinxing your team and guaranteeing an SKC win.