I was hoping we would see him at the start of the new season, but I guess we're just too stupid to hang out with.
I have noted your sub-optimal syntax and I am having an internal debate on whether you have ended your sentence with a preposition. Troll.
McDonald suspended. Cruz fined (but not suspended). Jair Benitez of FCD and Atiba Harris of Vancouver also suspended. Ladies and gentlemen, the MLS Disciplinary Committee!
Really MLS? Really? I'll take this more seriously when they start fining refs for being awful. But on the other hand, can we bring back Blanco because if they are going to be fining players for diving, he could fund MLSWorks for an entire year.
Not that I want Cruz suspended, by why is that not a stiffer punishment if they are serious about stamping out diving?
Seems fair on all three (I didn't see the Harris incident). Anything for the linesman who was standing right there when Cruz got the elbow? What about the guy who cleaned out McDonald? Overall I'm glad they are cracking down. Hopefully it'll have an actual effect by the end of the season. Good thing Davies wasn't here this year...
As I posted in the other thread, the league should not make retroactive calls overturning decisions made by the refs during the game (paraphrasing). It sets the wrong precedent.
Yup, thats why the premier league doesnt even review any calls or moments the ref has already seen or reported.
I agree, but given that they clearly plan on doing so, I think the calls are fair. The problem is that they'll always miss some that deserve penalty and they'll likely end up being a little easy on their marquee players. I'm interested to see what happens when Beckham does something that a ref misses that warrants a red card.
If our game at the HDC is any indication, we've already seen what they'll do if it's another LA star: Nothing
Well, looking at the video for McDonald's foul, I do think McDonald, as well as the rest of us, were all lucky he didn't see red at the time. But looking at that video of Donovan's foul, I think it's a typical yellow card offense to me. So I'm not sure what else the Disciplinary Committee should have done re: Donovan's foul. I agree with your overall point about consistency/favoritism, mind; I just don't think that particular foul of Donovan's is a good example. Beckham goes in studs-up twice a match; I wonder how many of those MLS makes available to watch on video. I have a guess.
Indeed. The ref saw the play and gave out the yellow. That should be the end of the story. I wonder how even this will be applied? How many LA Galaxy players will get this review? How many late and from behind David Beckham tackles will get reviewed? Why didn't Beckham get one of these video suspensions for his accosting of a match referee throughout the second half in the LA-Salt Lake match?
Reposting this from the refereeing thread: An official review of the situation at the highest levels confirms that the call should have been offside. In terms of the Galaxy and Beckham, while I didn't see the game in question, I don't get the impression the disciplinary committee is meant to give out retroactive cards for dissent. I certainly don't think that's what it should be for. It should be for things that Refs don't see, or don't see well enough, or make legit mistakes on in terms of just giving a foul when it should be a red.
The retro-active suspension for Beckham would not have been for dissent (not sure where you got that idea) but for a dangerous tackle- you know, a fairly typical DB tackle.
From the post I just read. Again, I didn't see the game, but was reacting to this post: "Why didn't Beckham get one of these video suspensions for his accosting of a match referee throughout the second half in the LA-Salt Lake match?"
ah, I did see that in one post, but most referring to DB were about the actually evil tackle he went in on a DC player on early in that game. ----------------------------------------- This does, on the face of it, seem like a good way to crack down on nasty fouls ... and possibly even some embellishment - but the problem is, video lies. We've all sworn stuff was true because we saw it on TV, plain as day - then turns out from a different angle it never happened at all. I'd hate for video to be the sole medium they're using, but I can't imagine what else there could be. The excuse "they" always use for not using video for calling goals on close shots is because not all venues can meet all the video requirements (at all levels of play) - but isn't that true for this as well, or does restricting it to just the 19 teams/21 venues they can control mitigate that? It could - but is every venue really able to provide all the necessary angles to actually make it equally reliable? I have my doubts.
Beckham went in studs really high on Saragosa's knee. Saragosa was lucky his leg wasn't planted. Even so he definitely felt a couple of cleets across his knee and was down for a couple of minutes, although he kept playing once he recovered. If MLS is doing this retroactive thing that could very well have been a red card, or at least a very dark orange if there was such a thing. Of course I don't even think the ref called a foul on that play.
The perfect shouldn't be the enemy of the good. Even if a few venues aren't quite as good with regard to video, I think this is a good thing to try for the league. I personally believe the league is too physical and this should hopefully help improve that a little bit at least. I'm ready to be proven wrong if MLS starts abusing this discipline, but hopefully overall it will be implemented relatively well.
I may agree with you - but you can't use an argument to stop one thing and to also not stop another was my only point But if you know San Jose has sloppier video and no extra suspensions are ever given from there because of that, it kinda puts the SJ players in more danger than everyone else, so maybe it matters a little bit. I am only for an imperfect system that puts NJ players in a more dangerous position.
I take it from your word choice of qualifiers you knew the knife edge you were talking on. Forgive me if I'm not so hopeful.