2021 MLS Week 11 Referee Discussion

Having now seen it, in a lot of ways it's the polar opposite, right? Both are weird, which makes them challenging for a referee to an extent. But in one you have a very late challenge after the ball is played and in this you have him getting the ball almost "early" if that's a thing, and then having potentially foul contact after that.

Very tough for a referee to have those so close to each other. On the one hand, it had to be in Unkel's head that he missed an unusual PK very recently. On the other, this being the exact opposite of that sort of miss and not being a carbon copy would also give him pause.

With all that said, just noting that I am quoting this from the Week 10 thread and posting it in Week 11, so discussions can be merged. Closing Week 10 now.

 

I think there are similarities. It's weird though, because in the Sweden situation I think there is (mostly) an acceptance that you can't excuse studs into the knee. Here, the sport seems to have the opposite expectation in that if you clear the ball in the penalty area, a defender has a little more latitutde to make physical contact.

If the result of the tackle itself was worse--in other words, if you had an absolutely clear yellow or red card for the nature of the tackle alone--I think it becomes an obvious penalty. It's just a little more borderline here because there are elements that are or look bad (the legs coming up after, the contact coming with the ball so far away, the manner in which he launched himself) while there are also elements that are missing (mode of contact, straight leg, lack of height of contact).

I could go either way on this one, which I think results in Unkel probably saying it's not clear and obvious once it's not given. But yeah, this one is tough.

Two thoughts in addition to whether or not that's a VAR penalty...

1) Unkel held the Kolmanic yellow card until after the OFR. That suggests, to me, that he wasn't going to give it to him if he awarded Austin a penalty. I'm not sure that's right. I guess if it's an SPA card, in theory it is. But it's a pretty reckless foul, too. Also, from a procedural standpoint should that card be shown and then rescinded if it needs to be, versus being held until the OFR is completed? I'm not sure.

2) Another classic example of VAR rooting out dissent, huh?

 

I don't necessarily disagree with you. But this is that weird zone where VAR isn't only used to catch all "clear defensive fouls" in the penalty area--otherwise we'd have A LOT more penalties (think of the holds and careless strikes on corner kicks). There's this balance where VAR is calling the clear fouls that "football expects" to be penalties. Does this qualify? I genuinely don't know. Maybe the culture needs to shift so that it does. But how do you get there if these are only called via VAR? There's an element of chicken versus egg that everyone is dealing with.

 

Right, that makes sense and I know it's what's been going on.

I guess I'm just surprised Unkel was willing to eat that yellow card if he did give a pen. It was a bad foul and right in front of Savarese. I feel like giving the card and having it stand either way was the overall path of least resistance (and the most one correct) there.

 

Didn’t they show the handball C. Penso didn’t give last week?

At least there, there were considerations to go through and a debate to be had. If a VAR ends up being objectively wrong and a Referee has to catch him, I’m not sure there is much interest in broadcasting audio that shows a VAR to be factually incorrect, if that’s what happened.