Together with my fellow denizens of the world of BigSoccer WoSo, I want to continue pursuing an experimental method of analyzing and assessing the performance of referees based on certain characteristics or themes of good refereeing. One thing hindering this approach is that it involves looking at plays which are usually too ordinary or mundane to be included in highlight videos. So it's a bit of luck that one of the plays I thought important to the analysis of Portland vs BayFC last Friday made it to the highlight video One of the key characteristics or themes of good refereeing (I believe) is allowing a reasonable amount of normal physical play. In the 34th minute, Shawn Tehini, the referee, called a foul when Jessie Fleming went down just outside the penalty area while Bay FC's Dorian Bailey was stalking her approach. Potentially, this is the kind of play where a referee is wise, I believe, to not call a foul for the slightest of contacts. While it seemed odd for Fleming to go down without being fouled, I thought initially that Fleming might have stepped on the ball , putting her off-balance just enough that she went down with only slight contact. It turns out I was probably wrong. At 6'49 of the highlights (with multiple camera angles!) This play illustrates many things, among them how easily (and often) I can be wrong. But it's a good example of the kind of play that we need to look at to properly appreciate good refereeing, even though it's not something which typically shows up in a highlight video. They're frequently not deemed a KMI (Key Match Incident) or CMI (Critical Match Incident). This also happens to be one of those decision where even if the referee gets it right, different players on different teams will have a different perspective — and one team is going to feel sure she got it wrong Look at Emily Menges' reaction. She was the defender in the box facing up to Fleming. She had the play unfold right before her and she clearly thought there was no foul. Even if one camera angle seemed to show Bailey's foot come down on Fleming's, it looks like Fleming placed her foot suddenly to the side of the ball — an effort to shield it? or to cut it back to her right? — while Bailey kept a straight path, never reaching in with her foot. Fortunately, not all calls are as inherently difficult to assess as this. And even if Tehini got it wrong, we're not expecting perfection from a referee, or shouldn't be. It's not like I was going to flunk her over this one decision, just that it was potentially problematic and that you hope a referee establishes that they're not going to bail out an attacker every time they lose balance on their own or on trifling contact.
Portland Thorns/ Bay FC replay from last Friday is now available on Amazon Prime. I'm going to look at few characteristics or themes of good refereeing that I've identified and see how they were handled in the match, focusing particularly on an early stretch of the match from around the 8th minute (after Bay FC's first goal, Abby Dahlkemper's first with her new team) to around the 24th minute, by which time Bay FC had extended their lead to 2-0 despite Portland having a few chances of their own. Several plays in this section of the game made it to the highlights including long diagonal pass to Portland's Alex Spaanstra which leads to Portland playing the ball across the face of the 18-yard box and a shot by Sam Coffey chance by Sophia Smith with a saving tackle by Emily Menges against her old teammate Bay FC's 2nd goal created by Racheal Kundananji breaking through on the left side and sending a perfect ball to the far side met by Rachel Hill another great opportunity originating with Kundananji on the left, with Oshaola dummying the ball in the box for a Tess Boade shot Segment begins at 3'13 of the YouTube video I don't expect most people will be all that interested in comparing notes with me on any particular game and that's fine. It may only interest those who already saw the game and thought it was pretty entertaining, attractive, well-played game and don't mind taking a second look at it. Guess what? Those are, generally speaking, the kind of games I'm going to select for review!. Who's going to want to waste time looking at a crap game just to compare notes with me?! Nobody, that's who! In this phase of the game, I mainly focused on a) the theme of allowing reasonable physical play, b) the Aesthetic Test (did the refereeing allow or contribute to an attractive, well-played game?), and c) Playing the Advantage Center Referee: Shawn Tehini Notes From Dawn to Noon on the Sea, that is, about the 8th minute (the restart after Abby Dahlkemper's goal) to about the 24th minute : As for the physical play, there were numerous good, clean, physical battles for the ball, attempts to establish position, attempts to shield, which sometimes led to players losing balance where the referee, Tehini, was wise (I believe) to let play go on The play was flowing with the players able to show a lot of quality. Tactically, it was interesting Portland has a problem the US had a few years ago, 4 good midfielders to fit 3 midfield spots. So what did Portland do here? They simply played all 4 of them (Coffey, Fleming, Sugita, Moultrie) Bay FC was able to make surprisingly deep penetrating balls into midfield (close to the center line), from which it then built its attack. Example at about 10'30 In addition, of course, Bay FC made use of getting the ball to Kundananji on the left wing. Kundananji is an especially fun player to watch for Bay FC, as Sophia Smith is for Portland The point isn't whether these tactical observations are the most astute. The point is that it's an attractive, well-played game where it's more interesting to think about the quality of the players and the tactics than micro-analyzing the refereeing. As it should be. Some possibly debatable calls, minor in nature, I believe (times approximate) 10'40 Kundananji called for foul while on the attack in Portland's penalty area. It looks at least debatable that it's a fair shoulder-to-shoulder challenge and Kundananji indicates she thinks it is. But it's probably expected that defenders get the benefit of the doubt in the penalty area(?) 12'30 If that was a foul on Kundananji at 10'40, then what about Portland's two-handed shove in the penalty area? True, the Bay FC attacker had overrun the ball, but the shove made sure she couldn't come back for it. Perhaps again a case where the benefit of the doubt goes to the defender in their own area 12'45 (?) Smith gets pinched in between two defenders and goes down after completing a pass forward. The referee isn't in the frame so I can't be sure if she signaled advantage or not but I doubt it. But rather than being fouled it looks more likely that Smith is simply making that last extra effort to shove the ball forward before the defenders can get to it, rather than being fouled 15'40 Sophia Smith gets a chance in towards goal and her former teammate, Emily Menges, makes a last-ditch tackle. Replays show Menges got her foot out in front of Smith's legs and got the ball Playing the advantage — once, earlier in the game, and once, after this segment, Tehini played the advantage The second one, around 33'20, was routine The earlier one, around 2'35, was a bit more interesting. After Sugita got knocked down, Portland was able to keep possession for a couple passes just outside the 18-yard box. Tehini signaled the advantage but nothing came of it. It's arguable that there was no advantage greater than a free kick from the spot of the foul but it's important at least that Tehini signaled she was playing the advantage and not just ignoring the foul on Sugita. One of the more fascinating things about paying attention to referees the last year are these subtleties around their playing the advantage. I may start talking about decisions like this one in a separate thread *** Which takes us to the, perhaps, more debatable call that I brought up previously around 33'40 a little later in the 1st half (which is also included in the highlight video), when Jessie Fleming goes down just outside the area and Tehini calls a foul. No doubt many (including referees) would be indignant at the suggestion that there's anything debatable here — and they may well be right — but the point is also that it's at the very least a plausible call and that at this point, the 34th minute, Tehini has established that she's allowing reasonable physical play and isn't calling fouls left and right for insignificant contact — a sign, a characteristic, of a good referee Practical Rook Endgames is a classic book on chess by the Latvian-American grandmaster, Edmar Mednis. In it, Grandmaster Mednis uses games which illustrate what he says is not perfect but good, professional grandmaster endgame play. We shouldn't be concerned with perfect refereeing. It's too hard. What we should want, as fans, is to get practice at recognizing good, professional refereeing.
Nice analysis, kolabear. I was at the game and did not see anything from the ref that I thought was out of line.