2026 MLS Match Day 13 and 14 Referee Discussion

Been watching MLS 360 in the background and have noticed at leas 2 yellows and 2 reds to technical staff personnel this Wednesday. I wonder if this was a recent point of emphasis from PRO?

 

Make it another red as Bruce Arena (who was already booked) or some other member of the Quakes staff gets sent off in added time. Great hot mic action too.

 

Looks like it was the assistant coach who was sent off, most likely for deliberately leaving the technical area to remonstrate with the fourth official.

 

The assistant was none other than coaching legend and previous USMNT interim coach Dave Sarachan, no doubt taking it for the team since Arena was already on a yellow. Also how many times do we tell coaches that it’s just a throw-in and calm down .

 

At least once more Seattle...

 

I'm guessing the referees going to the World Cup will be working MLS until MLS pauses next weekend or is this their last week working?

 

Has there been anyone quicker than Rodrigo? USYS Nationals in 2024, 2025 National badge and 2026 PRO2 and debut MLS whistle

 

My initial reaction was SPA as well, but I the more I look at it the more I think it is really DOGSO. The touch is not actually very heavy, and the defender would probably not be in a great position to block a potential shot. So the striker pretty much just has to slot it into an empty net (granted, at pace, at a tight angle, and quickly enough that the defender can't cover, so I can see the argument both ways.)

 

I think that's pretty much right on and a very helpful way to think of how "obvious" a goal-scoring opportunity is. I know you can get very into the weeds on xG but in simplest form it's "what are the odds a shot from that spot turns into a goal". for me, the answer is "not very high"

 

Another borderline DOGSO in San Jose. YC given, which Chris Penso retained after Stott recommended a review.

I don’t think YC was a clear error, though DOGSO may have the more convincing argument. There is another defender, but he isn’t between the attacker with the ball and the goal, and thus defender would have to choose between closing the ball and marking another forward for a pass.

 

And another red card to a member of the Quakes technical staff, after Sarachan was sent off midweek.

 

But the attacker only has to hurdle the keeper because he didn’t make a clean challenge for the ball — I don’t think he should get credit for the challenge when we are considering DOGSO. The keeper arrived to the spot late. If the keeper plays it cleanly, all his momentum is in the wrong direction and the attacker just dribbles past and I think as a professional at that level of play, even with the angle, that’s an obvious opportunity. If he missed the net on that, the commentators would say something like “it’s a tough angle but it’s an empty net and at this level, you really should be converting that.”

I also don’t think that “what would be given at the World Cup” is a fair barometer for what should be expected in a league game. We all know that for better or worse, the expectations are different for different competitions like tournaments and cup finals, etc.

 

That's not always true. I remember a SPA 2CT Toledo gave a while back - I think in some Portland vs Galaxy game circa 2017? - where the player who committed the foul didn't make any contact. And I believe in the pool reporter questions after the game, he said that he knew there was no contact but that the defender's actions did trip the attacker by requiring him to hurdle/avoid the defender's leg, which ultimately made the attacker lose his balance. That kind of logic is completely sound, and punishes the offender for the offense without punishing the attacker for trying to avoid the contact.

 

I'm confused by what you mean by "successful" hurdle.

As I'm understanding your hypothetical, the attacker has a harder time hurdling finishing the chance because he is slowed or affected in some way by hurdling the challenge. But if that were the case, the challenge could still be considered a foul.

So when evaluating a DOGSO, we should be considered what would have happened if the attacker wasn't impeded at all, not if he was impeded a little bit by a hypothetical, potentially-more-debatably legal, challenge that didn't happen.

 

The way I look at the DOGSO play, I think you need to treat it in a similar way to the old question of "what happens if a defender handles a ball on the goal line that would have hit him in the chest if he didn't handle it". And our standard approach to that situation is that it's still a red, because at that point you don't judge "what would happen if the defender hadn't handled it", you judge "what would happen if the defender wasn't there".

So I think the right way to evaluate this play is to ask "is this an OGSO if you remove the keeper from the play entirely", without considering the added difficulty of getting around him. And with that in mind -- my judgement would be that this is slightly more DOGSO than not, but definitely could see an argument against it based on the angle and direction.

 

I’m following you completely, I just think we should be looking at it from the perspective of “what if the goalkeeper either wasn’t there or pulled out of the challenge entirely”, not “what if the goalkeeper went in for the challenge but didn’t make contact and affected the striker in this specific way”.

 

I just wanted to say excellent spot by Szpala in the Charlotte v. Toronto game. Identifying the pick set by Toronto in the middle of the mass of players should be highlighted.

 

I agree with the arguments both ways part of this, and with the surprise the he gave it in MLS. You are right about that. But I completely disagree about the "I do not think he gives it at the WC" part. That is one of those plays that the soccer world kind of expects red on. For Elfath, especially at the WC, that play is going to be red. The keeper left his box, took out the attacker, everyone is expecting red. Hopefully a keeper at the WC doesn't do something that dumb and put the ref in that position, but the US keepers just might, and if they did, they'd get sent.

It really takes getting into the 4Ds to talk yourself out of it. And, yes, there is a way to talk yourself out of it for sure. Direction (away from goal), Distance (20+ yards), difficulty (!!!), plus number of defenders (what, are there like two back by then?). Any one, or all four, give the ref a way out, and honestly many MLS referees would take that way out.

But in the WC, I think its just more simple than that--keeper came out, made a huge mistake, people expect red under a "last man" kind of catagory, and it helps at the WC level to have referees who don't look to bail out a player, but to make the straight forward and expected call, even if that call could have been "talked out of."

Edit to add: I have a low view of Elfath's handle on the laws, and his ability to legally navigate tricky or unusual situations. But I have a high view of his ability to know what "the right" thing to do is. It honeslty wouldn't surprise me if he didn't even go through 4Ds in his head at all, but just stopped at "keeper came out and fouled guy on breakaway, no more thought needed, red." I think we misunderstand how he opperates if we picture him doing somethig more technical. Honestly he and Marrufo are the same that way, and its not for nothing they've had the most success at the intenrational levels.