Analysis: USA-SVN - Coulibaly (MLI)

I thought of this as I finished screaming at my TV after the replay .

But you know what? Esse's decision was the only contact on his play. The Mexican photographer who caught the shirt pull vindicated him.

Yes, it is entirely possible an American player was guilty of something similar on that play. But the replay showed at least two American players being fouled egregiously at the same time. I'm not saying 2-to-1, call the PK or advantage. But what I am saying is that the defense is guilty of cynical challenges too, why pray tell do you call the foul against the attacking team?

This was a cowardly decision. Coulibaly had called a similar foul earlier in the match on the play where Dempsey (?) sprayed the ball across the mouth of the goal, and on that play a US player was also being wrestled to the ground. This was tunnel vision at its worst, which leads me to my next comment...

I have a sneaking suspicion that the public comments on Stark's mistake were precisely the reason Coulibaly made these calls. I think he made a knee-jerk reaction to the calling out of Stark, and decided that FIFA wanted to crack down on attackers in wrestling matches in the PA. Which is really quite sad, because it means he cannot think on the level needed to adjust to these kinds of games (if... a BIG IF... I am right).

I have one other scathing remark, to show that even though I am writing this through red, white, and blue goggles, I still see justice. Dempsey should have been carded for his elbow 15 seconds into the match. Red or yellow, I'm just not sure, but the failure to card him set a tone that physical play would be tolerated.

This was the MOT, and Coulibaly failed it miserably, because he didn't have the guts to go to one of his pockets early. All of the shirt grabbing and cynical play in this game could be traced back to this failure, in the same way that Valentin Ivanov's 16 cautions in 2006 could be traced back to a failure to pull red on Khalid Boulhaorouz.

Dempsey never took his eyes off the ball on this one, so I don't think he was headhunting. But his elbow was leading, and it could be argued that it was a "weapon" in the USSF "tool vs weapon" argument. Due to my bias, I hesitate to say what color it should have been, but I would have had a hard time arguing against a red had one been drawn. Danielle De Rossi wasn't looking at Brian McBride's head either in 2006.

A truly shameful display for this tournament. The players and the world deserve better.

 

Coulibaly pointed upfield, not straight up, with his arm.

Foul.

Where he saw a foul committed by the attacking team is absolutely beyond me.

 

If you were to pick one they'd talk about in public, that'd have to be high on the list.

 

There may or may not be specific cases in which I disagree, I dunno; but in general, I completely agree. Last year, DCU missed out on the MLS playoffs by fewer points than were decided by goals that were allowed or waved off by referee decisions that Paul Tamberino specifically singled out for criticism later in the week. And yet, when the calls were singled out in the WiR, all I could think of was "man, I wouldn't want to be a referee if I'm going to get flogged in public like this when I make a big mistake."

 

I agree a public flogging is not needed but this being the World Cup I think we fans and refs deserve a reason for the call. IMHO

 

I found this video:

http://g.sports.yahoo.com/soccer/wo...S-win-can-t-stifle-massive-com?urn=sow,249575

Look at the last couple of seconds before Bocanegra is taken down. That's the "foul" from what I am reading.

He should have let the play "play out" then make a decision to allow or not allow. It was tick-tacky at best. Bocanegra was on the ground after a headlock and there were at least 4 other fouls against US players. He was bound and determined to blow the play dead against the attacking team, i.e., the US.

 

He should simply be quietly dropped from any further participation in this tournament and never invited back for a game of any international importance.

 

Actually, I think we deserve an explanation for all the box calls where fouls were called on the USA when no foul by the USA happened yet fouls by Slovenia did. This was a pattern, not an isolated mistake.

Also, I'm not getting what FIFA would do discipline him that would actually make a hill of beans worth of difference now. I think they'll do a CYA and try to say Bocanegra or Bradley or Altidore or Dempsey committed the foul even though 3 of them were being fouled. The defender grabbing Bradley literally clasps his hands around Bradley's waist and the AR is staring right at it. And no will bring up the 3 or 4 or 5--I lost count--other incidences of this except perhaps the Findley phantom handball.

 

I agree... I think the public lynching of Stark may have created some of the calls in this match. FIFA should keep its assessment of referee decisions that are judgment calls to themselves. We can yelp about them all we want on these boards, but I would rather have FIFA just discuss these sorts of things behind closed doors.

Ivanov is an interesting case, because I agree that every card he handed out in that match was justified. His failure on his MOT is a game management judgment, and while generally accepted by officials everywhere as an error in judgment, is not something that has been discussed in a public forum with a FIFA representative. Nor should it be.

Ivanov was wrongly thrown to the dogs because the players chose to play like hungry carnivores. He did have an opportunity to control that game and missed it, but that concept is far beyond the analysis level of the average sports fan, and not suitable for a media release.

 

How do other sports handle situations like this one? I think the NFL makes one official available to a press pool if requested.

 

Ivanov is an interesting case, because I agree that every card he handed out in that match was justified. His failure on his MOT is a game management judgment, and while generally accepted by officials everywhere as an error in judgment, is not something that has been discussed in a public forum with a FIFA representative. Nor should it be.

Ivanov was wrongly thrown to the dogs because the players chose to play like hungry carnivores. He did have an opportunity to control that game and missed it, but that concept is far beyond the analysis level of the average sports fan, and not suitable for a media release.[/QUOTE]

If this is the Portugal match from 2006, this is not true as the first cautin he gave should have been a red, Ronaldo was spiked in the quad by a straight-legged challenge. The ref had the chance right there to show this would not be acceptable in that game and failed to do so. The game went completely downhill from that point.

I did not mention the Dempsey challenge in the first minute of the match. That could easily have been a red card as it was used more as a weapon than a tool and the referee would have shown great courage to send him off, justifiably. To do nothing but call a foul showed what type of match we were in for today.

 

there is no slamming needed, but FIFA needs to come out say EXACTLY what justification the ref made for disallowing that goal. this is the BIGGEST stage for soccer in the world and when a call like that is made, that is so obviously wrong, there has to be a public comment from the governing body. FIFA better realize that they need to save face here, they are going to get reamed over this. honestly, i hope FIFA has already printed a plane ticket for the ref to go home, he is a disgrace and showed it today with his calls. FIFA is gonna have so splanin' to do over this one, their selected ref dropped the ball and cost the US 3 points they should have had (notice i said had, not necessarily deserved).

this is going to sound arrogant, but you dont have something like this happen to the largest country in the world cup who is investing huge dollars and promoting the hell out of it via espn and expect it to be forgotten overnight. ESPN (and other media outlets) have a large vested interest in selling thoughts and opinions to the american public, this has been a very visible world cup in the states and now the largest sports provider is going to try and make some money by publicizing this. they want more viewers of the world cup in the US, what better way to get more eyes than to rile up the masses over the US team getting bent over and rammed up the ass by a crap ref.

 

I was terrified that Dempsey would get a red. When he didn't even get a yellow, it was freakin' weird.

On That Play, he literally could have called a penalty on THREE different Slovs. One of the epically bad calls of alltime.

That guy just pussed out. It was like watching a 17 year old trainee taking a game-settling PK in an FA Cup final or something. His body language was horrendous...I NEVER got the sense he had any confidence.

That guy better be sent home. In particular, it's a freakin' miracle 4 goals were scored given his bias against the offense. What percentage of US crosses into the box on free kicks or corner kicks resulted in fouls on the US???

 

He couldn't, the game was filmed.

 

Personally, I think the disallowed goal was a makeup call for no card on Dempsey.

 

This was the worst to me. People are focusing on the Edu incident but consistently on corners / FKs US players were being hauled down in the box without recourse or even worse with calls going against the US in dubious situations.

Coulibaly was a coward, its as easy as that. Ombak effectively communicated that this was not about a single call - but about a mindset coming into the game regarding play in the box where the defensive side could do no wrong and the attacking side could do not right.

He would not ref a single game in either first or second division in a big European league with that mindset and it likely was only allowed to fester as long in his game due to his presence in an absolutley insignificant league in Mali.

His international career is over, as well it should be.

 

I'll believe it when I see it. Or when I don't see him, as the case may be...

 

Several have said the foul call was probably on Bocanegra, and I agree. The best view of the play is probably the aerial one shown on ESPN at 89:50. As Bocanegra was being pushed down, he wrapped his arm around Nejc Pecnik, the same player who would later be unfortunately injured by Clint Dempsey, and brought him down with him. Bocanegra was in the vicinity of where the ball landed, so this is mostly likely where the referee would look for a foul (Bradley was fouled much worse but not near the path of the ball).

Should it have been called as a foul against Bocanegra? Probably not, but had that been the only contact I think some people might understand why the call went against him.

There really weren't many bad decisions by the referee. The US really didn't have a strong attack until very late in the game. Some of the "bad decisions" were repeated during the game, so in some ways Coulibaly was consistent.

At 73:50 there was a mystery foul against the USA on a throw-in into the Slovenia penalty area. Altidore might have been called for a foul but it certainly wasn't clear on who or why there was a foul. A prequel to the denied goal.

At 80:55 Cherundolo took a hard elbow to the face on a header attempt by Slovenia. Only a foul was called. It was the Slovenian version of the Dempsey elbow.

Some are saying the foul called against Slovenia on Altidore that set up Donovan's free kick for the potential winner was a bad call at 84:16. I think the referee got it right. Clearly Altidore was pushed.

At 85:41 Gomez was clearly pushed in the back outside the PA. No call.

I only took a good look at the second half. I don't think the first half was all that controversial (except for the US' poor play), but I will take a look at it later.

 

If this is the Portugal match from 2006, this is not true as the first cautin he gave should have been a red, Ronaldo was spiked in the quad by a straight-legged challenge. The ref had the chance right there to show this would not be acceptable in that game and failed to do so. The game went completely downhill from that point.

I did not mention the Dempsey challenge in the first minute of the match. That could easily have been a red card as it was used more as a weapon than a tool and the referee would have shown great courage to send him off, justifiably. To do nothing but call a foul showed what type of match we were in for today.[/QUOTE]

Comparing Ivanov to Coulibaly is misguided. Ivanov's cards, as you point out, were justified. Ivanov was qualified to referee the match. Coulibaly was not meant to referee this match. He proved the "Peter Principle" to be correct.

The Dempsey challenge was not worthy of a red card. It was not a weapon. I've seen worse go unpunished or get a yellow. Dempsey was looking at the ball and not the player.

 

You are correct, I misspoke. The other 15 cards, though, were well justified (Deco's scything after the dropped ball perhaps excluded... that could have been a straight red).

 

The Dempsey challenge was not worthy of a red card. It was not a weapon. I've seen worse go unpunished or get a yellow. Dempsey was looking at the ball and not the player.[/QUOTE]

Don't care that he wqs looking for the ball, he led with the elbow and there was excessive force. If the red had come out, it would have been justified and supported. In fact, as I said before, the referee would have been hailed as courageous. This challenge could easily be seen as an act of brutality.

 

Rumor has it that Coulilaby is still in his dressing room watching the replay for the 163rd time and looking for anything that looks like a US foul on the Edu goal.

 

Agreed. Red would be widely described as "harsh", but supported by the laws. Yellow would not be a talking point with any legs. No misconduct equates to a moment of truth which was failed.