Seattle @ Montreal

Discussion in 'Referee' started by asoc, Jun 16, 2012.

  1. asoc

    asoc Member+

    Sep 28, 2007
    Tacoma
    Questionable red
    http://www.mlssoccer.com/matchcenter/2012-06-16-mtl-v-sea/highlights?videoID=188855
    http://www.mlssoccer.com/matchcenter/2012-06-16-mtl-v-sea/highlights?videoID=188857

    And seeing that being a red, what about this?
    http://www.mlssoccer.com/matchcenter/2012-06-16-mtl-v-sea/highlights?videoID=188897

    I am fine with that being a yellow. But he did lunge in studs up with a straight leg from behind, even though he missed, and swept his leg through. Dangerous tackle and worse than the red card shown earlier?

    Other than the red card. I didn't notice anything bad from the ref. I think it was Geiger?

    While I think the Sounders could have come back from 2-0 down, I don't think the red card changed the result. So not blaming the ref for the result at all.
     
  2. SimpleGame6

    SimpleGame6 Member

    Apr 16, 2012
    Club:
    Aberdeen FC
  3. asoc

    asoc Member+

    Sep 28, 2007
    Tacoma
    I think it is questionable because he doesn't lunge in with studs up. He kicks at the ball as it is bouncing high in front of the Montreal player.

    The kick is in front of the player, not into the player. He doesn't actually kick the player. He trips him up.
     
  4. Hararea

    Hararea Member+

    Jan 21, 2005
    It's a very different play from the one earlier, but for me, Rivas' tackle is 100% red.
     
  5. SimpleGame6

    SimpleGame6 Member

    Apr 16, 2012
    Club:
    Aberdeen FC
    Ok you're just not using your eyes. His cleats are into the player, at the height of his hip. If you can't see that, I don't know what to say to you, it's excessive force and Serious Foul Play. Not gonna argue this with you though, goodnight.
     
    Oobers repped this.
  6. JasonMa

    JasonMa Member+

    Mar 20, 2000
    Arvada, CO
    Club:
    Colorado Rapids
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    They both look red to me.
     
  7. asoc

    asoc Member+

    Sep 28, 2007
    Tacoma
    Where were his cleats into the player? His foot was in front of the Montreal players knee?

    You can clearly see the leg and foot in front of the Montreal player and the Montreal player run through the leg.

    I know pictures don't tell the whole story, but let me get this screen capture uploaded somewhere. I think it captures the moment pretty clearly. It happens at 11 seconds in the 2nd video I linked in my first post(I edited in after seeing the 2nd replay posted on the MLS highlights).
     
  8. SimpleGame6

    SimpleGame6 Member

    Apr 16, 2012
    Club:
    Aberdeen FC
    In a real league they would be. In the MLS 1 out of 2 ain't bad. MLS quality reffing is just as good as it's players and coaches. This ref however does awesome internationally, so it's funny to hear the MLS whining about him when they can't seem the grasp this game at all.
     
  9. asoc

    asoc Member+

    Sep 28, 2007
    Tacoma
    [​IMG]

    This was before contact. Foot is clearly in front of the player at that point. He did not go studs up into the player. He made a kicking motion in front of the player and when his leg was fully outstretched it was in front of the player and not into the player.

    Thanks for telling me I can't use my eyes though. At least I don't have to worry about you arguing with me though since you already ran off to bed. :rolleyes:
     
  10. SimpleGame6

    SimpleGame6 Member

    Apr 16, 2012
    Club:
    Aberdeen FC
    This is a flat out lie, if the video his cleats are INTO the player, you can see his foot connect and move to the side and go past him. Everyone watch the VIDEO because this is BS.
     
    PeanutFlush repped this.
  11. Oobers

    Oobers Member+

    Oct 17, 2011
    Boise
    Club:
    Sporting Kansas City
    That screenshot doesn't really show the whole picture. It's hard to tell on the replay, but his foot looked like it scraped over the Impact's before you took the screenshot.

    edit: Or what SimpleGame6 said. Showing a still picture of the video is a bad way to look at this.
     
  12. La Rikardo

    La Rikardo Moderator

    May 9, 2011
    nj
    He challenged high and late and his cleats went into the opponent's thigh. This is serious foul play. If your avatar is a team's logo, you shouldn't be commenting on any referee decisions in that team's game.
     
    Oobers and SimpleGame6 repped this.
  13. asoc

    asoc Member+

    Sep 28, 2007
    Tacoma
    His cleats were NEVER into the players thight.

    And do not call me a ********ing liar.

    Just because a person is a fan of a team does not mean they can't argue with what they are seeing.

    I like to think I can be fair when looking at plays after the fact and looking at the evidence.

    Again, this is what I am seeing and the video and looking at it frame by frame backs me up.

    Hurtado and the Montreal player are both running at a ball in front of them.

    They both reach out with their legs to make contact with the ball.
    [​IMG]

    Montreal player clearly getting their first. But look at Hurtado's foot. It is low, his knee bent. He is not lunging in with a straight leg.

    [​IMG]

    Hurtado's foot level with the Montreal players at this point.

    [​IMG]

    Next screen capture in the series. His leg is extended. Maybe there is a bit of contact with the Montreal players shin? But at this point the foot appears above the Montreal players leg. I do not think there was contact with the shin of the players leg although it was very close.

    Then the next screen capture is what i posted earlier.
    [​IMG]

    Foot appears in front of the Montreal players leg to me. This screen capture was BEFORE any contact with the knee. So don't call me a ********ing liar. And there was certainly NO contact with studs into the players thigh. That should be 100% obvious and to accuse me of bias and then say shit like that is pathetic and not looking at the evidence.

    [​IMG]

    And then the contact. Initial contact coming with the side of Hurtado's foot. You see a side profile of his foot and it appears bent compared to the previous screen capture with it straight out.

    Then his leg rides up on the Montreal players thigh as both of their paths carry across each other.

    I am not ********ing lieing and posting screen captures of events out of order as implied earlier.

    I acknowledge the play was bang bang. But the evidence to me is showing Hurtado's foot was in front of the Montreal players knee when contact was made.

    Seeing all this makes me understand WHY the call was made. But I do not see studs up contact to the Montreal player. Especially not his thigh. The contact is with the front of the knee and the side of Hurtado's foot.
     
  14. Oobers

    Oobers Member+

    Oct 17, 2011
    Boise
    Club:
    Sporting Kansas City
  15. La Rikardo

    La Rikardo Moderator

    May 9, 2011
    nj
    Dude. Chill. I'm just saying your judgment is clouded because you're a Sounders fan. I'm glad you admit you understand why the call was made, but no one on this thread but you has seen this as anything but SFP.
     
    Nestapele repped this.
  16. asoc

    asoc Member+

    Sep 28, 2007
    Tacoma
    If you watch the first clip of the replay video. The second I linked.

    You clearly see Hurtado's leg receiving impact and moving forward. You do NOT see the Montreal players leg moving to the side, as you would see with impact from Hurtado's studs coming in on him.

    You can say "chill dude" But I was just called a liar and biased while looking at the video evidence and you refusing to acknowledge what happened and clearly misstating where the contact was made and then attacking me to to lend credibility for yourself.

    I would argue this point with any foul I saw regardless of team.
     
  17. La Rikardo

    La Rikardo Moderator

    May 9, 2011
    nj
    See, I don't see it that way. And neither has anyone else so far on this thread but you. It's kinda hard to say that I'm "refusing to acknowledge what happened" when you're the only person so far who thinks that's what happened.
     
  18. asoc

    asoc Member+

    Sep 28, 2007
    Tacoma
    Acknowledge the points I made then rather than casting labels at someone in order to try to prove a point.

    Explain why Hurtado's leg goes forward after impact rather than pushing the Montreal' players leg to the side if Hurtado made contact with his studs into the player?

    The impact you are saying happened creates no movement from the Montreal player's leg. There is no evidence showing Hurtado's cleats were into the the Montreal player as you suggested. And definitely not into his thigh as you said earlier.

    I have posted screen shots of the sequence of events that clearly shows Hurtado's foot in front of the Montreal players knee before contact was made. I was called a liar so I posted more screen shots and even made note of how the players legs reacted to the impact.

    You can't refute what I am posting except to say I am a Seattle fan so clearly I must be wrong. Grow a pair and actually refute my evidence rather than try to discredit me with labels.
     
  19. SimpleGame6

    SimpleGame6 Member

    Apr 16, 2012
    Club:
    Aberdeen FC
  20. Oobers

    Oobers Member+

    Oct 17, 2011
    Boise
    Club:
    Sporting Kansas City
    Well completely ignoring contact it was still a late, cleats up, high dangerous play. I thought it looked pretty obvious.
     
  21. asoc

    asoc Member+

    Sep 28, 2007
    Tacoma
    His leg rides up onto his thigh. But the initial contact is with the knee and foot. Not studs to the thigh. His foot and leg rides up onto the players thigh, but there are no cleats into the thigh.

    Say his cleats caught the players knee. But if you keep trying to say his thigh then I question what you are seeing.

    If you want to argue that Hurtado's cleats caught the knee first as his foot was going in front. Fine. But don't give me this bs about the thigh, lol.

    If you want to say regardless of where contact was made and how that it is a red card then fine.

    I am just arguing the points of what actually happened.
     
  22. Justin Z

    Justin Z Member

    Jul 12, 2005
    Edinburgh, Scotland
    Club:
    Heart of Midlothian FC
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    Because Hurtado's heel studs come down into the top of Warner's thigh. 100% red.
     
    SimpleGame6 repped this.
  23. Oobers

    Oobers Member+

    Oct 17, 2011
    Boise
    Club:
    Sporting Kansas City
    There isn't that much difference between the knee and the thigh, and it makes no difference to the argument here. Knee or thigh doesn't change the premise. To me, I can see Hortado's foot jerk up as his heel passes over the leg (wherever that is), which is what tells me that the cleats made contact with the leg.
     
  24. MassachusettsRef

    MassachusettsRef Moderator
    Staff Member

    Apr 30, 2001
    Washington, DC
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    I think they look red and then orange. But when you've given one red against a team, and are presented with an orange situation for the other team, you are taught to err on the side of red.
     

Share This Page