Taking the ball out the net mulitple times for Curacao and then giving a penalty there is very CONCACAFy. Marsch being suspended for being a PITA hurts Canada there? Canada cheating (drones anyone?) has probably put them on the naughty list even for CONCACAF. Curacao benefits. and that makes me smile.
Not to derail the thread, but, in hindisght, everything US Soccer/CONCACAF did with regards to who is US soccer's referee candidate at the 2006 and 2010 World Cup was just a disaster and set US international refereeing by several years that only until 2018 got corrected by Geiger. In hindsight, Hall should have been the candidate in 2006 and not Stott. I know it's probably been discussed ad nauseum (well before my time on this forum) why it was Stott and not Hall. Then it should have been Stott in 2010. If not Stott, it should have been Toledo. Marrufo was way too young and immature to be a World Cup referee at that point in his career. Then you go with Geiger and Marrufo for 2014 and see who wins out.
Geiger went to 2014, though. Remember FIFA took far fewer referees to 2006 than it did to any other tournament. In a normal year, Stott gets selected. He had done well at FIFA youth events. There were a lot of politics going on back then within both USSF and CONCACAF and I was too young to be privvy to all of them. I think it's wrong, given what we know now about Hall's personality and professional career, to presume he was the right choice for 2006, though, or that he was even an option. I genuinely don't konw. Stott was on the FIFA list starting in 1995, I think. Given how everything went, I also think it's impossible to believe Stott would have wanted to wait for a 2010 WC; it really felt like 2006 was either his time or not.
I know that, but his performance in 2018 cemented that 2014 wasn't a fluke/one-off where the stars aligned. Jamaica, at one time, had a World Cup referee for one World Cup. Elfath than cemented it that the US referee program is now a viable legitimate program that can produce legitimate World Cup referees that belong to be there.
I meant to post this after getting home last night post-Curacao/Canada, but listening to Dr. Joe this tournament is brutal. I realize that's nothing new but he seems to get worse with each passing tourney. Is this really the best FOX can do?
Mexico : Costa Rica - ESCOBAR (GUA) Dominican Republic : Suriname - CORNEJO (SLV) So my Dickerson speculation was off. In retrospect, I can see why; with this match always going to have a direct bearing on who the US would play. Also, Escobar certainly has seniority. Plus he can't go in Group C and he already had Canada in Group B. Oh, and Dickerson already had Costa Rica. Had I thought about it just a little, it would have been obvious. Dickerson seems like he's on Jamaica-Panama then. Or at least I'd hope, given the options (though Honduras v Curacao could be fun).
The header by the CR defender was not deemed a deliberate play. Which means it doesn't count for resetting offside. The Mx attacker was offside on the free kick. The entire broadcast crew including Dr Joe was baffled by this.
He jumped up and tried to head the ball, and he headed the ball. Not where he intended or as strong as he intended. But he was trying to do it. No?
IFAB decreed that you need a degree of control over where the ball is going. That you need time and space to control it. A header under pressure from the opposing team that you have to jump to complete is going to be deemed a deflection the majority of the time. ____ The following criteria should be used, as appropriate, as indicators that a player was in control of the ball and, as a result, can be considered to have ‘deliberately played’ the ball: The ball travelled from distance and the player had a clear view of it The ball was not moving quickly The direction of the ball was not unexpected The player had time to coordinate their body movement, i.e. it was not a case of instinctive stretching or jumping, or a movement that achieved limited contact/control A ball moving on the ground is easier to play than a ball in the air
A few years ago, that was enough and would have reset OS. As @Law6 describes, the interpretation changed to require a greater element of ability to control before OS is reset.
" I'm okay with the rule either way, but they need to come up with a different word with deliberate if they are not using the ordinary meaning of the word. The rules should be accessible by everybody without having to deep dive into the interpretations to find a contrary to plain language interpretation.
And this piece of the Laws is unique how? Many words in the Laws are terms of art that don’t carry a standard meaning—especially in areas where the Laws have been trying to find the right balance. (Within Law 11, “deliberate” isn”t close to the worst offender—gaining an advantage departed from any plausible semlence of what the words mean decades ago.) I’d also note there are two words that are relevant here as well. It isn’t just deliberate. But also “played.”
@Law6, great explanation. Very much appreciated. To any of you who watched the US - Haiti match, what did you think of the CR. Personally, I was very disappointed and thought she appeared to be over her head. Someone needs to remind her that cards are allowed to be used after the 3' mark.
The caution to Adams was a no brainer—but sadly one that some CONCACAF refs may have skipped because it was so early.So she gets points for that. While I thought there could have been a couple of other cautions, I don’t recall any that I was outraged by not being given—more that perhaps could have been, but we’ve seen a lot of those not given. (Perhaps pressure to avoid marginal cautions because of the easy to reach accumulation of 2?.) I thought she was generally OK in the actual calls, but just didn’t exude confidence or presence very well (though some of that could be what the video feed did and didn’t show—like the HB goal (which was 100% the right call) didn’t seem like she emphatically and clearly made the call, though that could be because they didn’t cut to her for a while,
I agree that I didn't see anything in the game where I thought it was mismanaged or a clearly bad call. The game stayed in hand as well. I'm not an assessor so don't know at everything to look at, but I thought she a good job. As for her confidence, the camera did catch her a couple times where some referees would have looked much more confident (aggressively confident?), but there again nothing that made me wonder if she didn't belong there or know what she was going. I did comment to my son on the handball goal that the feed was unfortunate making it look like she was influenced by Haiti to make the call, but I absolutely think that was just how they flipped between cameras and eventually got to her standing in front of 2+ Haiti players saying it hit the arm at the same time she was making the official call. I assume she had a quick discussion with her AR on headset or that she'd already made the call but cameras didn't show it initially.
I can't remember if it was live or on one of the subsequent replays but there was an angle showing she looked over to the AR before officially making the call. Whether the AR proactively made the call or if it was just the two of them confirming what they would do based off context clues (total lack of celebration) is anyone's guess. But I was fine with the way it was handled. And I agree--and have always agreed--on her (lack of) demonstration of confidence. It was evident in the Canada game in Nations League where she sent March off. She looks unnecessarily nervous a lot.
Panama : Jamaica - BROWN (HON) Guadeloupe : Guatemala - ORTIZ (MEX) Canada : El Salvador - DICKERSON (USA) Honduras : Curacao - NATION (JAM) Koroleva 4th to Dickerson with Chapman as VAR. Penso was VAR last night for Cornejo (DOGSO red on review) and Jurisevic was VAR in the Mexico match (offside call) so lot of action for PRO VARs last night. I don't get the Dickerson assignment. Well, I do to the extent that he's the newer guy on the block. But he's also the top American representative and could be going to the WC. You gave him a good game to start and I would argue you need to test him now. The Canada game isn't a nothing game on paper, but it could be in practice. But I guess all four matches tonight have their pluses and minuses. If I'm giving the assignors credit, avoiding the other matches means Dickerson is clean for either QF on the non-US side of the bracket (either Mexico v Saudi or Group C winner versus B runner up). So if he's slotted for a QF, then tonight's assignment makes sense. If not, it feels more like a disappointment.
Based on posts over in MLS: N&A sounds like near the end of half of Panama - Jamaica there was a very long review that somehow disallowed a goal and rescinded a red card?