09/03/22 Minnesota United vs FC Dallas Allianz Field (3:30PM ET) REF: Ismail Elfath AR1: Corey Parker AR2: Felisha Mariscal 4TH: Matthew Corrigan VAR: Chris Penso AVAR: Jonathan Johnson Columbus Crew vs Chicago Fire Lower.com Field (5:30PM ET) REF: Ismir Pekmic AR1: Chantal Boudreau AR2: Walt Heatherly 4TH: Sergii Demianchuk VAR: Jair Marrufo AVAR: Fabio Tovar New York Red Bulls vs Philadelphia Union Red Bull Arena (7PM ET) REF: Timothy Ford AR1: Brian Dunn AR2: Gianni Facchini 4TH: Luis Arroyo VAR: Kevin Stott AVAR: Mike Kampmeinert FC Cincinnati vs Charlotte FC TQL Stadium (7:30PM ET) REF: Michael Radchuk AR1: Brian Poeschel AR2: Gjovalin Bori 4TH: Calin Radosav VAR: Carol Anne Chenard AVAR: Tom Supple Nashville vs Austin FC GEODIS Park (8:30PM ET) REF: Nima Saghafi AR1: Jason White AR2: Kevin Lock 4TH: Elton Garcia VAR: Drew Fischer AVAR: Craig Lowry 09/04/22 Portland Timbers vs Atlanta United Providence Park (5:30PM ET) on FOX REF: Jon Freemon AR1: Adam Garner AR2: Jeffrey Greeson 4TH: Victor Rivas VAR: Chris Penso AVAR: Jonathan Johnson D.C. United vs Colorado Rapids Audi Field (7:30PM ET) REF: Tori Penso AR1: Matthew Nelson AR2: Tyler Wyrostek 4TH: Luis Arroyo VAR: Fotis Bazakos AVAR: Tom Supple Toronto FC vs CF Montréal BMO Field (7:30PM ET) REF: Allen Chapman AR1: Micheal Barwegen AR2: Logan Brown 4TH: Marcos DeOliveira VAR: Jair Marrufo AVAR: Fabio Tovar LA Galaxy vs Sporting Kansas City Dignity Health Sports Park (8PM ET) REF: Ramy Touchan AR1: Kevin Klinger AR2: Ian McKay 4TH: Greg Dopka VAR: Carol Anne Chenard AVAR: Craig Lowry New England Revolution vs New York City FC Gillette Stadium (8PM ET) REF: Guido Gonzales Jr AR1: CJ Morgante AR2: Brooke Mayo 4TH: Matthew Conger VAR: Drew Fischer AVAR: Rene Parra Seattle Sounders FC vs Houston Dynamo Lumen Field (9PM ET) REF: Silviu Petrescu AR1: Frank Anderson AR2: Diego Blas 4TH: Ricardo Fierro VAR: Kevin Stott AVAR: Mike Kampmeinert San Jose Earthquakes vs Vancouver Whitecaps PayPal Park (9:30PM ET) REF: Rosendo Mendoza AR1: Jeff Hosking AR2: Jeremy Hanson 4TH: Alex Chilowicz VAR: Edvin Jurisevic AVAR: TJ Zablocki Los Angeles FC vs Real Salt Lake Banc of California Stadium (10:30PM ET) REF: Lukasz Szpala AR1: Jose Da Silva AR2: Kali Smith 4TH: Adam Kilpatrick VAR: Ted Unkel AVAR: Claudiu Badea
RBNY player kicks the ball in frustration and it goes into the crowd and hits a child. He then goes into the stands to apologize to the kid. Ref shows him two yellows when he comes back.
that did seem rather odd. I saw him with the yellow in his hand but they didn't show him issuing two cautions on TV. That's gotta be direct red for VC, right? That's what the MLS website showed - but that's been known to be inaccurate
I was thinking red for VC too, but it’s a pretty novel situation that seems pretty open to interpretation at this point. The only comparable incident in recent times was Kaku, but I wouldn’t necessarily paint an equivalence between the two offenses, mostly because Kaku was a lot more deliberate in his actions. Unusually situation, and I’m curious to know if anyone hears anything internally from PRO about this (assuming they don’t state anything publicly) Also, it’s funny that both the red cards tonight were both double yellows in quick succession! This is something that I don’t think we see enough of; players shouldn’t get a free pass to commit additional cautionable misconduct just because they recently committed some within a very short time span.
Anyone know if these assumptions are correct? 1. Kick was judged not to be VC 2. 2nd caution was for leaving w/o permission I get you don't want pro players in the stands, but in a situation where a kid was hit with the ball, I'm not opposed to the ref waving a home player off (once he sees him leave). But on the other hand, if it was a situation like "I don't think I can run him for the kick, but he should probably go anyway" then the guy gives you a golden opportunity by leaving the field, then I get why Ford would just take the opportunity and send him. Plus it was in injury time of a 2-0 loss. So may as well be done with it.
What an ass. According to the match report on mlssoccer.com, it was two cautions - foul + dissent. I'm not sure how it is not a straight red for VC. Can they even add games when it is listed as two cautions? I love the "asshole" chant from the crowd.
Ford is going to the pocket before he kicks the ball so it seems like foul + dissent is the answer to what actually happened. Ford basically allows/encourages him to leave the field to try to make amends so the second caution isn’t for that. The question is whether or not there’s clear evidence for VC. That’s a complicated question. Both around intent and what available evidence Stott had. I’ll be interested to learn how that goes down. Can the DisCo suspend more than 1 game? Yes. They need to believe and PRO must concur that it was a clear red card and worthy of more than a 1 match ban. Truly, I am not sure you get there based on LOTG and how MLS has treated VC to date. But you might get there based on public pressure and other factors.
I think as a general rule you need to discourage players from blasting the ball into the stands out of frustration
Agreed. But can it always be a red card or is it results-based? In theory we are only supposed to punish the act. So is the act always VC or does it depend who the ball hits? It will look really strange when a blasted ball that hits an empty seat gets a red, but that is how it should go if we are saying that act is violence against fans.
I think you can get there under the laws. Excessive force against a spectator. Also, since they added "action(s)" to offensive behavior, I think you could go that route.
Oh of course you can get there. But there are knock-on ramifications if you aren’t doing this as a stand-alone results-based decision. I’m being way too detailed on this, I know. The league will want him suspended for this and people will accept it. That’s how this will go, I imagine. But if he did the exact same thing and no one got hit? Or if it went 20 rows higher and hit a 40 year old man? When punishment comes down I think we just all need to realize it is based off the specific result here rather than the act.
I think from a PR standpoint, the league is going to be annoyed this wasn't VC, but that's speculation on my part. Crying children amongst home fans because one of their players blasted the ball in frustration and it hit them/near them? Bad look for the league. Note that last time there was a similar incident, the struck spectator required facial surgery.
Admittedly, I haven’t watched the full incident. But couldn’t you have a fully accurate and truthful match report saying 2CT for dissent with an additional report basically saying “had he not already been sent off for the 2CT, I would have sent him off for VC”? I had something like that in a game I did except the additional report was for OFFINABUS instead of VC. The 2CT was for dissent.
Count me in the camp of “this should just be VC”. How many times a game is a player allowed to hit a fan with the ball before being sent off? What you say is technically correct but since the dissent was kicking the ball away after the whistle (dissent by action ) which is the same action that caused the violent conduct, you have an inconsistency. Imagine a player yelling F - - - you and you arguing that it was only since F- - - was said first it was only dissent and when he added “you” then it was also offensive language. It’s one event…should be handled as such I think
NBA has a rule that I think would suit soccer as well. Automatic ejection if you cause the ball to go into the crowd with force.
From what I see, this is his 4th and 5th caution of the season. The 5th caries a suspension. Does MLS enforce this as a 2 game suspension with one for the red and one for the accumulation?
I don’t think so(?). I believe you’re going to get the one game for the 2CT and then 2 games for “egregious” VC or however it’s termed by the DisCo when they go that route.
In MLS (and I think elsewhere?), getting your "yellow card accumulation suspension" card as a second yellow doesn't trigger the suspension for accumulation, since it already triggers a suspension for the red card. So his next yellow will suspend him for accumulation.
I find this interesting as there are a lot of possibilities. Is it 'games with a YC'? In that case if it were his first and second, then it would only count as 1 towards the accumulation. Or is it only a special case when you go over a suspension line? How about if he was sitting on 4 meaning this is 5 & 6? I assume the same would apply as you stated where there wasn't an additional suspension but his next one, 7, would trigger it. There's also a suspension for 8 though so assuming that doesn't get pushed out then just one more would be another suspension. Sorry, I don't think we actually know here, but I would hope this has been thought out b/c every situation which can occur we know will.
I think a second yellow card in a match is simply just not a yellow card for accumulation purposes. It is, in the eyes of the league (for disciplinary purposes) simply a red card. So if you go into a match 1 yellow card away from accumulation suspension and you get a 2CT, you get a two game suspension (one for accumulation and one for the red card). If you go into a match 2 yellow cards away from accumulation suspension and get a 2CT, you get a 1 match suspension (for the 2CT) and are now 1 yellow away from accumulation suspension. Does that sound right @JasonMa?
Yes, essentially the 2nd YC in a match is no counted towards accumulation, as it already comes with its own penalty.
No matter what happens with this suspension, it’s going to make me feel weird. In isolation, I think 3 games is probably about right for the offense, but giving this offense an equal or harsher punishment than what Kaku got for a much worse version of the same kind of offense just feels wrong.
Missed this. It's worth pointing out that Ford doesn't need to show the dissent caution and, consequently, the second yellow. With hindsight, this is probably the right sequence of events.... 1) Foul occurs, Ford recognizes/decides it's cautionable. 2) Ball blasted into stands. Ford recognizes it as both dissent and VC, given the result or even just the direction and speed of the kick. 3) Ford shows the first yellow, followed by a red. Writes it up as UB/PO + VC. I still haven't seen video of the actual administration of the cards. Based on what I've heard and read, it was yellow+yellow+red. But--again with hindsight--it probably should have been simply yellow+red. If you then want to note that the VC was also dissent by action in your supplemental report, sure, knock yourself out, as a comprehensive report probably should include that detail. But I wouldn't go the other route of punishing the dissent and noting the VC. And, for the third time, I write all this with hindsight.