2 minutes for sure for the SKC goal. Someone else broken down the time and it added up, but how much is normal and how much is delay becomes the question. I thought at most it was 3 more minutes (total 7). The goal was at 96:50. The highlights don't show it, but I wonder how much of it wasn't a decision to go to 96 or maybe even 96:30 only to have SJ in attack with no great place to call it.
Saw this on Reddit. Matt Doyle: "FYI, to those complaining about the 7 minutes of stoppage: Busio scored at 90:34 and the game did not kick off again until 92:48. Then at 95:27, the ball went out for a goal kick. Took Melia 40 seconds (lol) to put it back into play. 2 minutes, 14 seconds of celebration & 40 seconds of time-wasting = 2 minutes, 54 seconds beyond the original four minutes. Wondo's header hit the back of the net 2 minutes, 48 seconds in."
Lots of talk about Saghafi and Chapman, but anyone have anything to say about the performances of Chilowicz, Unkel, or Villarreal? Personally, I didn’t think any of those three games were even particularly challenging, despite being playoff games. The only notable decision was a possible second yellow in Villarreal’s game. Good performances in easy matches from all three.
In my pregame instructions to my ARs, I specifically instruct my ARs to NEVER raise the flag on a keeper off the line situation. Regardless of whether I'm using headsets or not, the signal for letting me know the keeper moved off the line is a step up the field with the flag moved from the right hand to the left hand. If we are using headsets, then the AR will also inform me of identified keeper movement verbally. That way, we never get into a situation where the AR has raised the flag for movement, but I either don't think there was movement or "the movement did not clearly impact the kicker" (quoted from Law 14), then I can proceed with the match without having to explain why I didn't call keeper movement because of the raised flag. Bottom line is that the post to which Socal responded is completely off base saying that the AR missed the call or didn't have the courage to make the call because the flag did not go up.
Just to be clear, the law says, "if the ball misses the goal or rebounds from the crossbar or goalpost(s)..." In this case, the keeper saved the ball so I would assume there is no judgment call involved. (And, yeah, I get your original context that there are other signals the team uses to indicate this which can be less disruptive.)
Fully agree. I was going for an economy of words in that. case. Plus, I'd automatically assume (even if it wasn't in the Laws) that if the keeper saved a penalty that he/she gained an advantage from the illegal movement.
Not picking on you, because as you see below I think you're right about what happened in the MLS match, but I have never understood this. My instructions have always been almost the polar opposite. The AR is standing on the line watching encroachment. It's his job. It's a massively consequential and (at least until the advent of VAR) rare call. So, because we are so worried about the call, our solution is to... act like the person who is specifically tasked with the call is actually not making the call? I get the need to make sure everyone is on the same page. I get the slight delay. But if you want to sell this call (outside VAR matches), the flag has to come up in my mind. Otherwise, the AR is a human pylon. "He told me on the mics he was off the line." Great, why didn't he raise the flag? "He stepped onto the field with a discrete signal." Huh? "It's my call and my decision." Then why is he standing right there? If the flag doesn't go up, the pretext for dissent increases at least tenfold. So recognizing all the worries about a rogue AR making a borderline call that a referee can't or doesn't want to support, after explaining the standard I want enforced I've always said something like "If you have encroachment, make eye contact and we will visually (or verbally with mics) confirm we both have it and then the flag goes up and I whistle." Doing it this way is a built-in mechanism against the expected dissent. The flag demonstrates that the AR saw the infraction and made the call and that the referee agrees and confirms it. It's a united front. The lack of a flag given the division of responsibilities and the visual appearances is just so much harder to explain away. I see from your post that your main worry is about explaining why you didn't call a raised flag. At some lower levels, I can see why that would be a concern and if I was working with new or dubious ARs, I might adjust. But at any high level and certainly a non-VAR professional level (in my opinion), the attitude needs to shift to getting the call right and trusting your AR. You can build insurance in for yourself by instructing the visual and/or verbal confirmation. But I still think you--and everyone--should be empowering ARs to visually make the call that they are there to make. All that said above, I agree here. The lack of an OFR means the call came from on-field and there obviously was no flag. So it's possible I'm a hopeless minority with my attitude on all this.
It is perhaps worth noting that the magic book changed this year. For 2020, it said AR must raise flag; for 2021, it says Penalty kick If the goalkeeper blatantly moves off the goal line before the ball is kicked and prevents a goal from being scored, the AR should indicate the encroachment according to the pre-match instructions from the referee. Of course, it has always been implicit that the R can change instructions to ARs, anyway, but IFAB recognized this. For me, my instructions vary on who my ARs are (though both get the same instruction). If I have ARs I really trust, I ask them to just raise the flag--I'm not going to be watching the GK in that case, and it makes it clear the call is being seen by the person in the best position to do so. With other ARs, I ask for the old USSF fig leaf. (Relatively subtle--I know many like the step on, but I'm not as confident that those less experienced ARs will do it in a way that I will see it.) Interestingly, especially given the micro analysis by VAR, the instruction still includes the word "blatantly," which doesn't really seem to apply any more (or is the out-of-position-to-see-that referee the one who is supposed to call it if if it isn't blatant? ).
@MassachusettsRef , I won't quote your full post. I'll just say that everything you wrote makes sense and I do need to adjust my instructions. Admittedly, I referee such a wide variety of ages and skill levels because of my life situation that I tend to "dumb down" my instructions to the "lowest common denominator". For example, since I am the dad of a U13 player, it's not unheard of for me to be working U11 or U12 games one day of the weekend (since I'll be working around his games) and then work a college doubleheader on Sunday. So not only am I working with multiple sets of rules, etc., I'm also working with ARs of wildly different age and experience. So I just try to get by with one set of pregame instructions. That needs to change for me. I appreciate you pointing that out.
Everyone knows that in those games VARs is taking a final look. That makes me wonder if the instruction is not to flag in VAR games as, de facto, it's only preliminary? But I agree with the importance of the signal on higher level games without VAR.
At the risk of going sideways here (and not to bash @RefIADad) . . . this is one of my pet peeves. I think it is important for all of us to be thoughtful about pregames and use the pregame as how we get ready for this game. Reminding the nervous newbie to stick with the 2LD may make sense, but I've been amazed at how many times I've been told that as a very experienced referee. Far too many refs have their shtick that they use for every single game of any type. Tailoring to both the particular game and the particular ARs is the only reason doing a pregame is valuable--if not, we aren't taking advantage of the team aspect of refereeing, which is for me what make it fun (and what I miss most about not being on the field for the last 8 months). (In teaching the AYSO Intermediate or Advanced class, I will sometimes ask someone to give a pregame without telling him anything about the game or the ARs--and then talk about why it was an unfair ask.)
I get this whole idea, but I don't know that I heard a single announcer, read a single tweet, or even read anything on reddit that said "The AR didn't even raise his flag". I'm sure there are people who thought that, but out of the 3 groups most likely to complain about anything even remotely perceived as incorrect, I have not seen a single instance of someone complaining that the AR's flag didn't go up. So while there may be other good reasons to do it, "people will be confused why the AR didn't raise the flag and that will lead to dissent" doesn't seem like it's one of them.
Exactly. I was responding to @RefIADad talking about his pre-game instructions in his matches (and applying that to others and their matches....99.9% of which probably don't have VAR).
First off, no offense taken at all. This has been a pretty valuable discussion for me, and I'm always willing to put my lessons out there so others don't have to learn things the hard way. One thing (right or wrong) that I've done the last few years is send my pregame to my crew(s) a few days ahead of time in typed form. Of course, this means it's much more of a canned pregame. However, I specifically mention various items like working with a fourth official or with communication systems that I obviously don't always use. If nothing else, this gives my crew members time to read the key points so they at least have a high-level understanding of how we will approach the match. For high school matches, upper-level club matches where I have some familiarity with the teams/coaches, etc., I'll then mention these items to my crews ahead of time or I will ask them to get to the field earlier so we can go over them. If I know we have a heated rivalry or we have a game with conference championship implications, I definitely want them to know that. I also want them to know who some of the troublemakers or key creative players are if I know them (and I usually do when it comes to high school or club matches since I work with these teams and clubs enough). Right or wrong, I realize that work or life circumstances arise where I may not get an ideal, on-site pregame with my crew. Over the years, I do have various versions of my pregame in different lengths. For example if it's a tournament and my two ARs are racing from other fields, I'll give them my 90-120 second pregame with my 4-5 non-negotiable key points I want them to know. I also have a longer, 5-8 minute pregame as well as my full pregame, which can take 15-20 minutes for high school matches and even longer when going over a college or really high-level match.
Pedantic, but somewhat important (because I admit to being confused by all this at times, as I wrote above)... This would have been MLS adopting the 2019 dispensation to not issue any cautions to goalkeepers during KFTM for encroachment unless the behavior rose to the level of PI. The idea of adopting the 2020-21 Law changes that would both erase cautions heading into KFTM and require the warn then caution standard is different and, in theory, not something MLS could have adopted mid-season. Whether they could have done it without repercussions from FIFA, as suggested above, is a different question. I genuinely wonder if PRO forgot about the 2019 dispensation option while they were (almost certainly) stressing to referees that the 2019-2020 Laws were operative rather than the 2020-2021 ones. We'll probably never know the answer to that.
@ManiacalClown pointed out elsewhere that leagues coming back from COVID shutdown after the new rules were in effect were apparently told by FIFA they could go ahead and adopt the new rules if they wanted even though their seasons had already started. So I was wrong on that one. That said, I think blaming MLS for not doing that is ridiculous. Not changing the rules midgame (or midseason) is a general sporting principle and sticking with it without an extraordinary reason is probably something that leagues should do. The odds of what happened actually happening were so low as to be not worth the hassle. Just bad luck that it worked out the way it did.
True, but at the same time thei first possible KFTM situation was always going to be in November (aside from the Orlando tournament). And people saw exactly what happened with the 2019 WWC and knew why the 2020-2021 Laws were amended. So it's not like there were these rash of KFTM situations that were going to be happening all year and then there was to be a playoff change. The only applicable situations were going to be in the playoffs or at the knockout stage in Orlando. Long way of saying that, if people had remembered that 2019 dispensation and realized it was still operative, I bet they would have taken that escape hatch instead of enduring what happened this weekend even IF it had all gone smoothly.
True, but also at the same time how many MLS playoff games go to KFTM. I haven't run the numbers but it feels like 3 in one post season is on the high side, much less 3 in one weekend. What were the odds of a keeper having a yellow, and going to KFM, and coming off the line?
They were thought to be high enough in the WWC to get FIFA to write the special dispensation in order to avoid it!
Just wanted to post one last wrap-up about the game. This guy is Jomboy he usually does baseball videos, I do not like baseball, but I watch every single one of this guys videos. He breaks down the kicks from the mark Orlando vs NYCFC and it's pretty good.
I was expecting that Orlando would appeal the red card, and I saw in the Orlando Sentinel that they are. I imagine it will be overturned, which I'm 100% fine with, whatever reason they give. There is a time to be a stickler for the rules - and, I think it's safe to argue, during the game is one of those times - and there is a time when I'm much more comfortable with more flexibility.