09/21/2024 New York City FC vs Inter Miami Yankee Stadium (2PM ET) REF: Jon Freemon AR1: Corey Rockwell AR2: Mike Nickerson 4TH: Elvis Osmanovic VAR: Kevin Stott AVAR: Mike Kampmeinert Charlotte FC vs New England Revolution Bank of America Stadium (4PM ET) REF: Mark Allatin AR1: Adam Wienckowski AR2: Walt Heatherly 4TH: Ted Unkel VAR: Greg Dopka AVAR: TJ Zablocki Columbus Crew vs Orlando City Lower.com Field (7:30PM ET) REF: Sergii Boiko AR1: Corey Parker AR2: Zach McWhorter 4TH: Fotis Bazakos VAR: Kevin Stott AVAR: Fabio Tovar CF Montréal vs Chicago Fire Stade Saputo (7:30PM ET) REF: Lukasz Szpala AR1: Jason White AR2: Gerard-Kader Lebuis 4TH: Marcos DeOliveira II VAR: Ismail Elfath AVAR: Tom Supple New York Red Bulls vs Atlanta United Red Bull Arena (7:30PM ET) REF: Chris Penso AR1: Jeffrey Swartzel AR2: Brian Dunn 4TH: Guido Gonzales Jr VAR: Carol Anne Chenard AVAR: Mike Kampmeinert Austin FC vs Houston Dynamo Q2 Stadium (8:30PM ET) REF: Victor Rivas AR1: Andrew Bigelow AR2: Stephen McGonagle 4TH: Timothy Ford VAR: Younes Marrakchi AVAR: Jeff Muschik FC Dallas vs Los Angeles FC Toyota Stadium (8:30PM ET) REF: Alexis Da Silva AR1: Cameron Blanchard AR2: Adam Garner 4TH: Rubiel Vazquez VAR: Edvin Jurisevic AVAR: Robert Schaap Sporting Kansas City vs Minnesota United Children’s Mercy Park (8:30PM ET) REF: Ismir Pekmic AR1: Logan Brown AR2: Tyler Wyrostek 4TH: Rosendo Mendoza VAR: Greg Dopka AVAR: Claudiu Badea Nashville vs FC Cincinnati GEODIS Park (8:30PM ET) REF: Pierre-Luc Lauziere AR1: Kyle Atkins AR2: Ben Pilgrim 4TH: Sergii Demianchuk VAR: Jorge Gonzalez AVAR: TJ Zablocki Colorado Rapids vs Toronto FC Dick’s Sporting Goods Park (9:30PM ET) REF: Rosendo Mendoza AR1: Chris Elliott AR2: Felisha Mariscal 4TH: Matt Thompson VAR: Kevin Terry Jr AVAR: Jozef Batko Real Salt Lake vs Portland Timbers America First Field (9:30PM ET) REF: Tori Penso AR1: Brooke Mayo AR2: Kathryn Nesbitt 4TH: Drew Fischer VAR: David Barrie AVAR: Joshua Patlak LA Galaxy vs Vancouver Whitecaps Dignity Health Sports Park (10:30PM ET) REF: Jair Marrufo AR1: Chris Wattam AR2: Eduardo Jeff 4TH: Ramy Touchan VAR: Sorin Stoica AVAR: Fabio Tovar San Jose Earthquakes vs St Louis CITY PayPal Park (10:30PM ET) REF: Ricardo Montero Araya AR1: Jeremy Kieso AR2: Nick Uranga 4TH: Allen Chapman VAR: Carol Anne Chenard AVAR: Tom Supple 09/22/2024 Philadelphia Union vs D.C. United Subaru Park (6:15PM ET) REF: Filip Dujic AR1: Cory Richardson AR2: Eric Weisbrod 4TH: Lorenzo Hernandez VAR: Younes Marrakchi AVAR: Joshua Patlak
So Mendoza will be a 4th in Kansas City at 8:30 ET and then leave at half-time and somehow get to Denver by kick-off at 9:30 ET for a whistle? Or there are two Rosendo Mendoza's or this is, obviously, an error.
70' CLT - NE Borrero cautioned and then sent off within 30 seconds Looks like the second caution was for dissent - I can see that maybe the challenge was a foul but I have a hard time seeing how that was a caution. New England bench looks perplexed more than mad and I can't really blame them
I think Unkel gives the dissent card, too. He points at him and tells him to turn around. Second card is coming before he has a chance to say anything to Allatin. There is a chance this is double dissent because there was a visual initial reaction. But yeah I think it was for the tackle. Without seeing the match it’s a bit hard to say if it’s warranted or not. But if it’s a foul, he does appear to trap the right leg as he comes through. I can understand reckless but, on first look, it doesn’t scream reckless.
I actually think it’s two dissent cautions. There’s no initial reaction by Allatin after the foul. Simple point of direction, no reaching for a card, no sign that he’s getting input. It’s the player’s aggressive gesture towards Unkel that appears to precipitate the first yellow.
Well, there's a public and aggressive hand wave. Not sure that was at Unkel, as I don't think he made the call. But it was in his direction. It absolutely could be double dissent, but if it was, I think the first one is public that Allatin observed and the second one is personal that Unkel reported. Could be wrong, though.
Door #3 is that Allatin had no card for the tackle and Unkel told him to give a yellow for the tackle. That would then lead to the personal dissent. It seems a stretch, but it probably also should be considered as possible (because why else dissent personally at the fourth?).
41' CIN-NSH trying to find where the offside was. I mean, I assume it was interfering with an opponent but I'm still not sure how that's given
update OK, Cincy folks in my mentions ... here's my first #InstantReplay pass regarding why that Niko goal was called offside 👇👇👇Watch Yamil Asad (#27) come back from an offside position and cut across McKenzie Gaines (#29). That's the offense for "interfering with an opponent." pic.twitter.com/U0mPecwOij— Andrew Wiebe (@andrew_wiebe) September 22, 2024 ok, this has gone from completely befuddling to something that's kind of a stretch. Weibe says he sets a moving screen - sorry I don't see that Law says "preventing an opponent from playing or being able to play the ball by clearly obstructing an opponents line of vision" "challenging an opponent for the ball" "clearly attempting to play a ball which is close when this action impacts an opponent" "making an obvious action which clearly impacts on the ability of an opponent to play the ball" here we have the "clear and obvious" language and while I think you can make an argument for impacting the ability of an opponent to play the ball, I think clear and obvious is quite a stretch
Agreed. Which probably contradicts my initial take on the DC-NYC play last weekend. But I think saying this has impact is a stretch, it just doesn’t look like there’s much/any chance the defender gets to block the ball anyways. If it’s given as offside on the field, it should stay, but to call it clear and obvious offside is, as you said, a stretch.
Went back and watched the broadcast of this. The commentators reported that they received information from the VOR confirming it was two dissents.
Wasn’t it called on the field? This wasn’t a VAR decision. Clear and obvious isn’t the question. Well, it is. But the question is whether or not it’s clearly and obviously NOT offside. And I think this is offside (clearly, for what it’s worth). It is last week’s DCU call, but correctly done this time.
Colorado - TFC announcers just talked about "after VAR a penalty is given". Except the CR didn't go to the monitor. I'm guessing this was just them misunderstanding VAR and it was really "after VAR cleared the check, a penalty was given"?
it was called on the field I used clearly and obvious here because the law uses that phrasing (sort of). David Elleray has his own preferred way of speaking which keeps showing up again and again.
It's tough to tell from the wide angle, but I think there might even be slight contact which PRO has considered a *significant* consideration in the past.
I’ll say I don’t think it’s indefensible but I am really surprised it was made, given how much players in offside positions run in and around defenders without being called
Similarly Nashville had a goal disallowed in the 49th minute - here’s the pool question and referee response I have similar perspective on this incident; while technically defensible I think these are both a stretch and neither of the defensive teams were expecting an offside call in either situation - defenders turned to look at each other, goalkeepers shrugs and look frustrated, etc no one is acting like they were interfered with here. I think everyone was surprised and that’s not a good thing
I’m not saying you can’t ever use a players reaction to make your decision but the fact they don’t know they have been interfered with doesn’t mean it didn’t happen.
Law 11 also says: • a player moving from, or standing in, an offside position is in the way of an opponent and interferes with the movement of the opponent towards the ball, this is an offside offence if it impacts on the ability of the opponent to play or challenge for the ball; if the player moves into the way of an opponent and impedes the opponent’s progress (e.g. blocks the opponent), the offence should be penalised under Law 12
it’s not dispositive as the lawyers say, but it’s helpful, particularly here in both cases, no one appears to be looking for the call and the play was accepted as is. I don’t want to get into how much it matters if players react but I think it matters here
Opening kickoff of NYRB-Atlanta, AU plays it back to Guzan. A defender for ATL moves back and forth, screening the NYRB striker from taking a straight line path to pressuring the keeper. What is the dividing line here that would make that play obstruction?
I’ll add to that this isn’t a call made very often - it certainly happens and you don’t want to miss it when it does but the law makes a point of using the words “clear” and “obvious”. I don’t think this it’s a great decision when the match officials and people on this board are the only ones who have any clue something is “wrong”