I watch the replays of every game, watch Instant Replay when that comes out later and read most of what MLS writers post on mlssoccer.com. But it's clear as day that all of their staff tiptoe around certain issues: referring being one of them, but I've also seen poor play chopped out of replays, there are fewer negative comments about poor player performance that there should be, we almost never hear why a player is traded or released - we just don't get a good balance of reporting from the people who should know best. And then I saw this in The Guardian about the recent lack of information about Messi's comments on the refereeing (and what is really about Miami's bad defense.) https://www.theguardian.com/footbal...y-for-mls-so-why-is-the-league-editing-it-out I agree with the main point of this article: MLS is hurting itself by overly controlling the message. Other perspectives?
This paragraph gets to the heart of the issue: "But in the moment, it seemed that MLS is trying to create the impression of sober proceduralism, of good clean games where winners win, losers lose, everyone has fun and nobody gets too mad. In fact, it is the chaos of the league that is its easiest and most enticing entry point, with referee controversy working just as well to drum up attention here as it does everywhere else in the world." - Alexander Abnos, The Guardian 2025-05-20
Except the missing play, which really wasn't that controversial a call anyway, was front and center in Instant Replay this week. This really reads like "MLS should pander more to Messi" which, no. There is a debate to have on if MLS controls the message too much, but this isn't the issue to start that debate on.
Good point. Maybe I should have raised the point using a non-Messi example. It's just been bugging me a while. A better example might be Gressel switching teams all the time. I've seen lots of articles on mlssoccer.com about it, and I've not seen why teams keep trading him away. He seems like a decent player. Just as a non-Messi example.
I'd also like to know why Gressel is seen as an island of misfit toys type of player. But I do have to ask: You're a DC fan and you think the MLS site is pollyanna? I do think they avoid criticism. As an SKC fan, it has been disappointing that they went years without substantive pieces on what was wrong with SKC. But I think the MLS site staff is small enough that they don't really have the ability to pay that much attention to the clubs who aren't, well, particualrly interesting. I don't think it's avoiding for cause, I think its seen as a low bang for the buck type of thing. I don't think they're alone. The Athletic and Givemesport do the same sort of thing. The local blogs and remaining newspaper/website coverage is left to pick up that slack. Sometimes that's quite good. I think SKC coverage is good. Sometimes not so. Is that the case with DC coverage?