The penalty was disallowed because of an offside call. You can see this play out in the way the VAR decision went down. Ref calls handball (which I would call harsh but consistent with the way hand balls are called today). VAR checks and says no obvious error. Teams line up for penalty. Ref says hold on. At this point I believe VAR noticed the possible offside. Ref listens some more and then goes to the video. When the cross was first played, Benteke and another player (I think it's Hines-Ike but not positive) appear to be offside although it's not 100% clear because there's a Atlanta player at the back of the pack. Benteke goes toward the middle so he's not really involved but Hines-Ike (or whichever DC player it is) goes for the header. Pines (who was clearly onside) also goes for the header and he is the one who wins the header. The ball is deflected, drops to a DC player who rips a shot, hits the Atlanta player in the arm as he turns away, goes to Ku-di who shoots wide. So as best I can tell they disallowed the PK because Hines-Ike or whoever was offside and "involved in the play." This is a subjective call (which is partially why it took so long), and while I'm obviously bias for DCU, it seems like a bad one. As far as I know if Pines had simply headed the ball directly into the goal it would have been fine. Cross comes in. Two players go for it - one offside and one onside but it's the onside guy who gets it and heads it in. I'm pretty sure that stands as a goal. Why take away the PK when the offside guy wasn't the one who played it? In any event, after coming away from the video and indicating no penalty the ref raises his hand to indicate its an offside call and you can also get that from where he indicated the kick should be taken... All in all, I think the PK should have stood. Not sure Benteke would have made it though...
So some player who we can't identify and wasn't involved in the play was maybe marginally offside in the run up to the play and that's why the penalty was disallowed? It's simpler and makes more sense if you just say that a shadowy cabal in MLSHQ doesn't want unfashionable DC United in the playoffs.
Clear and obvious is the rule. If it takes ten minutes to get the call correct, it’s not clear and obvious to overturn. So at minimum, the refs aren’t reffing by the rules. They should look once or twice, if they have to squint or look at it three more times, call on the field stands. So really VAR doesn’t get a chance to work efficiently when the rules MLS set up for it aren’t applied.
I just watched it again and I really think it's a terrible call. Hines-Ike goes for it but never touches it and has no impact on the Atlanta player's ability to play the ball which Pines (who was onside) wins. Also, looking to see if PRO had made any comment, I came across this Twitter feed which apparently provides an auto-generated explanation for every VAR decision in MLS. They confirm it was due to an offside on Hines-Ike. https://x.com/MLSVAR/status/1704663713511559456?s=20
Also, with regard to this game, why did Rooney have Benteke playing out on the left wing? Put him in numerous positions where he was asked to beat someone 1v1. Let's just say that's not his strength and playing him there was, well, odd...
Trying to post him up on Lennon who he could physically dominate, which he did. Provides a good outlet but they weren’t using it until Benteke started yelling at Canouse to look up.
I think Pirani's best feature is that he's a legit 10. I'm tired of watching us trying to shove dildo-shaped blocks into the giant round hole in our midfield. He's not a superstar 10 teams would line up to overpay for, but IMO, he's good enough to support a strong cast, and that's better than we've had up to now.
I generally agree with this. If this was a 20 year old who had come up through our academy we'd be raving about him. The only reason he's available to us is that the final ball is not there (whether the final pass or the shot). It's possible that that could get better, which it would need to do for him to stick around for more than a year or so. Either way, he should not be wearing the #10 jersey right now. That's just an embarassment....
Seemed to me that it took him largely out of the game. Benteke is basically two aspects to his game. He can win and keep long balls and get on the end of crosses in the box. When you put him out on the wing, you lose one of those two. And instead of Benteke taking the shot in the box or the skying for the header, you have Fajardo...
Someone has to wear it. Better him than Durkin or Pines or Santos or Ruan or Benteke or Bono. Although Bono would be funny with the #10. Miller, you could maybe justify it...
Actually, no, someone doesn't have to wear it. We didn't have a #10 on the roster before he arrived. That jersey is earned. It's why Chelsea fans were so pissed off when it was giving to Pulisic for no reason other than marketing shirts to America. For DCU to just hand it to some 20 year old prospect is embarrassing...
Kid has to have some balls to grab the number ten, I like it. It’s funny the number ten still holds certain expectations. It’s interesting to me.
Fajado scored 20+ goals in for his last (or thereabouts) so he can do it. I wouldn't give up quite yet.
It could have been a foul, but it really looked like the defender was just soft and easily dispossessed. It's easy to see he has something. He has a history of scoring. I want to believe he just had a horrible night. Unfortunately for him, he doesn't have long to impress if he wants to stay on this team.
I just don't think we're doing much with this roster until we can offload our dead wood and there's a lot signed though 2024. This team needs a plan in the worst way and get DPs that support that plan He has scored goals in quantity for sure, but the bulk of them were in Panamanian & Peruvian leagues. He might just be the Panamanian Messi. Now we just need that strong cast ...
I'll betcha the guy in that pic, with the cast on, is better than some of the players on our roster right now.