La Galaxy-FC Dallas (Stott) [R]

I was wondering the same too.

 

Red...Red, red red...Do these guys ever get fried for this stuff? From behind....nobody but the keeper to beat...heading straight for the goal...

 

And the guy that should have been sent off scores the deciding 2nd goal. How apt?

It's actually quite worrying how a decision that should really be automatic by now doesn't get made. There was one in a SKC v Union game that didn't even get yellow for DOGSO, probably because we were already 2-0 up and had a penalty.

 

Jayhonk, prepare to share your spot in the MN hall of fame with CKRef22.

Without WIR, what else do we have?

 

I imagine Stott had a reason. But since ProDiv refs are under gag rules we can never talk with them and find out what that reason was. Only thing I could think of was distance to goal but the same distance in 2011 (2010 maybe?) season opening where SEA Goal Keeper Keller was sent off for DOGSO-H was written up in the WIR. Unfortunately the new "public friendly" WIR is largely unhelpful to referees.

Ya know, we oughtta be able to get detailed WIRs for our SRAs.... and USSF referees at all levels should get to ask for clarifications on things we see before WIRs get produced. Frankly, I understand the public needs to learn stuff but this is my job and I'd rather have some direction so I don't screw up... egh... whatever.

 

Only explanation I got is that Stott didn't want to "spoil" the game by sending off a guy so early or he didn't want to deal with LA's bitching and moaning throughout and after the match.

Even by going as strictly as possible with the 4Ds I don't know how you do not produce a red card here. Just a poor decision and pretty obvious he didn't want to send the guy off.

I'm not surprised by anything I see anymore from MLS refs...

 

Two things to POSSIBLY not pull red:
- attacker never had possession of the ball, didn't even touch it
- not clear he would have gotten possession before keeper, that ball was moving.

With USSF and "strict" 4Ds, you have the above wiggle room. Rest of the world, well, not so much.

 

Don't know how you get there. Outside the 4 Ds, referees have more discretion to use their judgment. And among the I&G's criteria we find the directive that the referee consider "the likelihood of keeping or gaining control of the ball."

I don't see where a refree's opinion that the ball might be too far away for the goalscoring opportunity to be obvious to be different in any material way between the I&G and the 4 Ds.

 

Yeah, except that the ball was RIGHT THERE to him, and there was no way that the keeper would have gotten there first. Stott screwed the pooch, plain and simple.

 

Look, I think we all accept that it should have been a red, now we're just trying to figure out what his reasoning was, and how we can avoid making the same mistake.
Look at where Stott is when the ball is played. He's almost flat footed, and at least 30 yards behind where the foul occurs. From his angle, it's entirely possible that he thought the ball was farther away from the players than it was. I don't see this as Stott's fault...it's just one of those quick, long passes that a referee can't help but being out of position for.
The AR should have had a great view of the play however...with ref mics, it's impossible to know if Stott and the AR discussed the play or not, but that's the question I have. What did the AR see? What did he tell Stott if anything? And how did Stott react to the info?
All questions that will never be answered.

 

This is the most likely explanation. There usually is one when you look for it.

 

Sorry , but that simply does not wash. The A.R's at this level know a clear DOGSO when they see it. If you notice how quickly Stott pulled his yellow, it was obvious that his mind was made up.
NOW,if the A.R. gave him bogus advise, then shame on him, but laying out a "bad angle of view" defense lays the ref team open to poor judgement-the very thing they are constantly accused of by MLS.
As an aside, I had the fortune to work with one of our FIFA officials last year , and when queried on the USSF, the reply was -QUOTE- " The USSF doesn't give a F#*&% about anything but MLS."
One does not have to be a genius to realize that the upper levels of refereeing in America, if not sleeping with, are at the least ,holding hands with professional soccer , the better to float their boat. And this is neither a unique or unethical position. Both NEED each other to get bigger and better.
However, the LOTG are to my piss ant eyes a thing of elegance and not to be screwed with for the sake of "THE SHOW". I'll take courage to make the unpopular call, thank you.

 

So he allowed a foul to spoil a wonderful scoring opportunity for Dallas in the first 12 minutes, I would say that for the Dallas fans the match is spoiled right there, if justice isn't going to be administered for depriving them of that.
What about dealing with the bitching and moaning that should rightly have come his way from Dallas since they should be playing a man up and have a great chance to improve their position in the table and perhaps get into the playoffs.
Unfortunately, LA ends up winning this match.

 

Does it bug the hell out of anyone else that DeLaGarza is immediately pleading "He got the ball!"? Maybe it's just a pet peeve of mine, but this is the same deception as a forward taking a dive.

 

There was a lot of passive gesticulating as in throwing up their arms and walk away disgusted from the players. Dallas has had a rough season with refs and they are probably de-sensitized at this point.

 

I'm not understanding how having a bad angle of view would be poor judgement? If he was right on top of it and missed it, that to me would be bad judgement. I think everyone here agrees this is DOGSO, so the valuable discussion in my eyes is why did Stott miss the call? The angle of view argument certainly holds water and it provides referees a good example of why you need to take a few quick steps angling right or left when a breakaway like this happens.

I've missed a DOGSO like this and learned two things:

• Realize when you have a terrible angle like this and do what you can to get in a better position quickly
• Clearly this needs some input from the AR, so ask for it

Finally, the overhead view was fantastic for making this decision. Wish we had that during the game!

 

You say yourself you've learned how to deal with this kind of scenario. We shouldn't expect Stott to do the same?

 

Sure and I'm disappointed that he missed it. Just like I'm sure he is. Also, just because I've learned a lesson doesn't mean I'm immune from making that same mistake again.

So... what do you want?

 

One thing that might be a factor is not the distance to the ball, but the distance to the call. Stott was 14 yards behind at the start of the play, just over the half, and ~20 yards behind from the time and spot of the foul. He started to accelerate to follow the play, but after the foul slowed down to a jog and then came waltzing in, never truly reaching the spot of the foul. Might be a tough call to sell with the distance. I don't disagree with the DOGSO consensus, just a thought that positioning (or rather, lack of it) may have been a factor.

 

I agree. And I also think the question of whether the attacker was going to be able to get the ball can be hard to answer from different angles -- the angle of the ball is ab it toward the corner, not at the same angle the attacker was going and has some pace; I can see where the R could have trouble from his angle being sure that the ball was within the range the attacker could get. (Frankly, I'm having trouble twisting my brain around to imagine what it would look like from the AR's line of sight (keeping in mind that he's going to be at a dead sprint at this moment) and how well he could be expected to make that determination. (Once the attacker is knocked off the ball, it looks like he wasn't going to get there; subtracting out the knock sideways, it seems pretty clear to me (with the benefit of the top down view) that he was.) All a long-winded way of saying that I can understand why neither of them might have been sure about the call, and we don't expect reds to be thrown when refs aren't sure. (And once again, I would love to have been able to hear the post game discussion amongst the referee team and the assessor on why the red was not given. Also makes me glad my games aeren't being dissected on the internet . . . .)

 

Don't mean to start an argument. The earlier statement that Stott was not at fault somehow doesn't sit right with me. This was game critical. Even with the problem of getting caught out of position by the fast counter, I find it hard to understand how Stott couldn't see enough or learn enough from his AR to understand what happened. Fast counters which leave referees--and defensive lines--stretched are not uncommon. It's a scenario we have all encountered and need to be prepared for. I would expect a referee at this level, especially with 3 more pairs of official eyes available, to be able to handle this. And the early time in the game leaves me suspicious that this may have added to the decision to go yellow.

 

Ok, makes sense. Sorry if i came off as snippy (because I was, lol).

Let me make sure I'm clear -- I don't think "having a bad angle" exonerates Stott in this situation. To your point, he had ways to get this right and he didn't. If this were a case of handling where no one on the crew could see it without video replay, fine, that's excusable. But this wasn't and we agree there.

 

***Conspiracy Alert*** LA Galaxy, league flagship franchise, playing at home on national television***/conspiracy alert***

Dallas probably felt the same way, he chickened out so early in the match to make the correct, game-changing call.