R16 Analysis: USA-GHA - Kassai (HUN)

I'm pretty sure the Ghanian knocked the ball a bit away, then made contact with the American. Anyway, for argument's sake, let's say the Ghanian touches the ball first, then makes contact with the American. What's the official rule according to FIFA? Any ideas?

 

Yeah, that's what I'm thinking. It must have something to do with the fact that the ball was still playable. I wonder what the official wording on that rule is?

 

The official ruling is tripping...he tripped him. Anyone wanna quote the book for him though I'm not home.

 

Getting into passing lanes was the only thing I would add. Players were gassed on both sides and I don't think the Ghanans were too bad about it. The better team won, and the ref made no mistakes that affected the outcome. He passed his assessment and he can now upgrade to a 7.

 

Players may challenge for the ball provided it is not careless, reckless, or using excessive force. When a player makes a clean slide tackle with one leg out and traps the ball with his ankle, this is fair.

When a player slides in on his ass with studs up, even if he makes first contact with the ball, his challenge can still be dangerous.

I didn't see a touch by the ghanaian defender. Even if he did tap the ball, that still isn't enough to completely swing through with both legs and clean out dempsey. To challenge and play the ball, or knock out of play would have been legal. To simply (and maybe) clip the ball with your foot and clean out an attacker is still a foul

 

The Altidore non-penalty was a good non-call IMO. If anything, Altidore fouled the defender. I thought the yellow card to Ayew was a little harsh. He definitely clipped Altidore's heel, but it was accidental and wasn't a dangerous or reckless challenge.

Once Ghana scored their 2nd goal, Kassai let Ghana get away with far too much blatant timewasting. I know it can be difficult to judge whether a player is actually injured or not, but when a team takes the lead and suddenly its players start dropping like flies and staying down for extended periods of time, there has to be some sort of penalty for it, and Kassai didn't do anything to put a stop to it.

 

He added the proper amount of time...some people think referees should be out there to be card machines...I don't think so.

I think the yellow card to Ayew was because of tactical reasons...he was stopping a chance for a counter attack. Remember these are professional players they know how to get away with fouls and if we don't punish things like this then players will start running there legs over the back of other players legs and arguing it was accidental. In other words, he could've avoided it, he didn't, it might have cost them an advantage.

 

Just adding back time doesn't really help much. Letting them get away with it allows for resting and worse even it means the game can have no flow. Even if they actually added back as much time as was wasted, which they never do, it's not the same quality of time. We know they don't want to have to give cards, but sometimes something meaningful has to be done. But I'm also totally fine with just letting injury fakers alone, playing on, and they'll get up or lay there and hurt their teams by doing it.

And injury faking is something fans hate. It's a biggie when it comes to what's wrong with the game.

 

So you want to tell a referee who's in the World Cup to try and yellow card everyone who wastes a bit of time? I don't agree, maybe we need to change the timing system but telling referees they need to start carding more will just get them bounced out of future games.

Again we're not doctors..."Injury Fakers" aren't our judgement if they're acting like they might actually be hurt.

 

I agree with this. At the risk of sounding like a homer, the extra time period after Ghana scored was unwatchable (I can't imagine how boring it was for neutral fans). It was like the last minute of an NBA game. I think a yellow card early on for one of the more egregious time-wasting offenses would have allowed the game to flow more freely.

 

No, I said, leave them lay there. Betcha they'll get up.

Cop out.

 

And when another player has a heart attack and doesn't get CPR right away and dies...will that change your mind?

 

In the case of simulated injuries, "after the fact" ought to be no later than the next stoppage in play. It only takes a few seconds to confirm that it wasn't a heart attack or a serious injury.

By the way, is it only the USSF where a keeper running out of the box to shout at the referee is a caution?

 

No. If someone has a fatal cardiac arrhythmia, they won't be conscious....and it won't just happen to do it in extra time either. Any moron can recognize conscious vs unconscious, it doesn't take a doctor.

 

I'ts not required that the referee caution the keeper...but it's a part of our instruction as a situation where it's time to take control.

Example I had a game where a keeper didn't leave the box but screamed at me across the field about a decision I made. I promptly yellow carded him for dissent, he didn't leave his box but he made his dissent very vocal. In the World Cup the referees are more about man management and will try to keep dissent cards to a minimum, they should be really earned.

 

Any moron...or the Referee who's looking back over his shoulder as he runs up the pitch to keep up with play. Referees are busy people.

 

A referee...or anyone, even with a lot less sense than your average referee. Or the ARs, players, bench personnel, etc. The chances no one notices the player is unconscious is so close to zero, it's not worth worrying about.

 

Ok I just don't agree that is the way to handle the situation of time wasting I guess. You seem dead set on wanting to blame this referee and say he did a bad job, I think he did a fine job.

 

... fatal cardiac arrhythmia?

Regardless, nobody is asking the officials to play amateur doctor--just add on the right amount of time for excessive stoppages. Did the Ghanaians really spend <4 minutes taking stretcher rides during OT? No way. I know that the precedent is not to add more than a minute to each OT period, but that's my point. The whole way that officials add on injury time is completely illogical. It's basically "pick an arbitrary number between 0 and 1 and add that many minutes to the first half", "pick an arbitrary number between 2 and 5 and add that many minutes to the second half", and "add 1 minute to each OT period".

When players on the team that's in front know that not all wasted time is going to be added back on, it (shock) encourages them to waste time. Time for refs to be less gutless on this issue.

 

You don't know the system referees use to determine the amount of injury time to add on so you make up one that makes them look bad?

What basis do you have for your assumptions is what I should be asking.

 

He was excellent in some respects and not in others. My comments on how to deal with injury fakers apply to the problem generally, not just in this game.

 

Twenty years of empirical observation. You?

 

Ok that has to do with Refereeing as a whole and we could argue how best to deal with that in the Referee forums. This referee was following his training and how FIFA wants him to deal with injuries, so this argument doesn't belong in this thread.