US Open Cup 2022

Discussion in 'Referee' started by gaolin, Mar 22, 2022.

  1. gaolin

    gaolin Member+

    Apr 21, 2019
    Right. I saw that immediately-- the point. What's the foul? Can he not stand his ground while a GK tries to get above? I'm genuinely curious of the call.
     
  2. soccerref69420

    soccerref69420 Member+

    President of the Antonio Miguel Mateu Lahoz fan cub
    Mar 14, 2020
    Nat'l Team:
    Korea DPR
    https://www.mlssoccer.com/video/#penalty-foul-abdoulaye-cissoko-seattle-sounders-9th-minute

    Huh.

    I see the attacker not only getting into the GK's jumping path but also extends his arms out and back into the keeper as well. Basically like the "closeout" foul in the NBA when a defender runs underneath a jumping player's fair landing spot I would call it.
     
  3. seattlebeach

    seattlebeach Member

    AFC Richmond
    May 11, 2015
    Not Seattle, Not Beach
    If we're going to pick a stunner from the Seattle-SJ game, this non-call on the Seattle defender will probably do it - https://streamable.com/vxtrho.

    I mean, maybe the ref is shielded by the player just above him... but...
     
    SoccerMan94043 and MassachusettsRef repped this.
  4. MassachusettsRef

    MassachusettsRef Moderator
    Staff Member

    Apr 30, 2001
    Washington, DC
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    By the way the Nashville call is, more than likely, an egregiously missed offside call. It seems like an aspiring AR had noticed the rash of "interfering with an opponent" calls the past two weeks in MLS and jumped the gun here. The simple fact is the player who "interfered" with was probably onside by at least two yards. You can't spin that any other way. It's a bad miss.

    Now, that said, in this case the physical contact is so blatant and deliberate that it more than qualifies as a foul on its own and, in fact, has been something that has also been stressed at the top levels for referees to be aware of. So while the offside decision was wrong, a foul call is not only supportable but would be required per instruction. I'd guess there's a decent chance VAR would step in here at the MLS level if the goal initially stood, though I might be wrong.

    All that is a long way of saying, as an MLS AR told me last night, that karma prevailed here. It shouldn't be a goal. It got ruled out. For the wrong reason. Oh well.

    And yes, without seeing the restart there's a minute chance that the AR called a foul here and not offside. But it seems infinitely small. For one, the defenders are pointing to the flag, so it seems like it went up quickly. Also, if an AR was helping with a foul call here, best practice would be to do it over comms and not flag it yourself from that distance. So I am very confident this was a "bad" offside flag that effectively acted as a good foul call. Would actually love to see how it got scored/written up on an assessment.
     
    Beau Dure, JasonMa and MetroFever repped this.
  5. SoccerRefNova

    SoccerRefNova Member

    DC United
    Mexico
    Mar 27, 2018
    So he gets to the spot before the keeper leaves the ground. He doesn't undercut the keeper as they run towards the spot (attacker starts inside the 6 and then stops on the line) and then he stands still. He sticks his arm out yes, but is it to protect himself or to foul the keeper?

    I have to ask, what's the foul here?
     
  6. MassachusettsRef

    MassachusettsRef Moderator
    Staff Member

    Apr 30, 2001
    Washington, DC
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    If you have to ask if/why that's a foul or think the attacker is "protecting himself," I genuinely think that's a problem.

    Just from an optical perspective, the attacker runs at least 5 yards laterally to a spot where he knows the goalkeeper is going and has no intention to contest the ball. None. Look at player reactions. Other than him, the guilty party, and the potential goal scorer, no one says a word. The body language from every other teammate knows this is a foul. They would demand the foul is called on the other end. You just can't do that to a goalkeeper and get away with it. It's turning a simple punch into a goal without any attempt to play soccer.

    If you need to get technical, look at where the ball is when contact is first made. It's not within playing distance as it is probably 18-20 feet in the air. You have a number of fouls to pick from. The attacker has "held" the goalkeeper off. Maybe he's carelessly challenged him. But perhaps the cleanest answer is that he's "impeded the goalkeeper with contact."

    If the attacker was running over to challenge for a header, maybe there's a different discussion here. But that's not what happened. An attacker ran over to physically contact the goalkeeper and prevent him from making a routine punch. That's a foul. And everyone on the field knows it so the referee better know it.
     
  7. SoccerRefNova

    SoccerRefNova Member

    DC United
    Mexico
    Mar 27, 2018
    Fair enough. I still don't agree with the call, but that's likely a reason why I don't work these games.

    Thanks for the explanation.
     
  8. socal lurker

    socal lurker Member+

    May 30, 2009
    Pittsburgh Ref repped this.
  9. gaolin

    gaolin Member+

    Apr 21, 2019
    Watching LAG vs LAFC match with Brandon Stevis as the center referee. He started refereeing in late 2016. Very impressive... he's been doing well.
     
    IASocFan, Barciur and frankieboylampard repped this.
  10. MassachusettsRef

    MassachusettsRef Moderator
    Staff Member

    Apr 30, 2001
    Washington, DC
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    Matt Thompson had an interesting philosophical question last night at the end of the NY derby. 3:43 of video below.



    Foul occurs right at 95:00 in a half he put 5 minutes of added time on. Foul is called. Foul is pretty clearly DOGSO. But the game is over and the red card would be against the losing team (so any suspension is first match next year). No card given. I think there are two types of referees here, though most at Thompson's level would probably fall in the same camp that he did. I just wonder what happens if this occurs 15 seconds earlier.

    Separately, he had a good red card for a head butt earlier in the match. And two players were sent off after full-time, though I haven't seen video of that (and the possibility of such a confrontation might have also factored in to not giving an inflammatory DOGSO red with no time left, too). All in all, sounds and looks eventful.
     
    El Rayo Californiano repped this.
  11. socal lurker

    socal lurker Member+

    May 30, 2009
    Though, if he was going to call full time before the player could score, it wouldn't be DOGSO as there was time to score.

    While I understand the practical elements, if he was going to permit the attack to play out, then not sending off means the DOGSO was completely effective in saving a goal and went entirely unpunished--the team didn't even get the FK.
     
  12. MetroFever

    MetroFever Member+

    Jun 3, 2001
    Club:
    New York Red Bulls
    Nat'l Team:
    Croatia
    I watched the game last night. The two players who were red carded after the match went face-to-face in the 74th minute during an injury/substitution stoppage, so it had nothing to do with the lack of a clear DOGSO on the final play of the match. There was chirping going on from the opening whistle.

    With 39 fouls, 7 cautions and obviously a chippy game, he thought he'd be making a bad situation worse by producing a red card there in a 3-0 match where they're already down a man....not knowing what was to come 30 seconds later.

    At least it's nowhere as bad as Turpin ending the Champions League final in a one goal match right after a Liverpool player is clotheslined at midfield to stop a final attack and the RM player kicking the ball downfield.
     
    RedStar91 and MassachusettsRef repped this.
  13. MassachusettsRef

    MassachusettsRef Moderator
    Staff Member

    Apr 30, 2001
    Washington, DC
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    Oooh, that's an interesting argument.

    Now, I don't believe he actually would have ended it before completion of attack. But once you whistle there, your argument is an excellent one.

    The path of least resistance, of course, is to end the match at 94:52 once it looks like an OGSO that you don't want to happen might be materializing. But I'm sure a lot of people would have a problem with that. And hindsight is always 20/20.
     
  14. jayhonk

    jayhonk Member+

    Oct 9, 2007
    LOL
    It takes the AR 4 seconds before he finally concludes that,
    "Yep, I guess we're done here."
     
  15. MassachusettsRef

    MassachusettsRef Moderator
    Staff Member

    Apr 30, 2001
    Washington, DC
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    Allatin has 13 yellows in the 120-minute Orlando v Nashville QF last night. Anyone watch this?
     
  16. Beau Dure

    Beau Dure Member+

    May 31, 2000
    Vienna, VA
    Well NOW I will!
     
    voiceoflg and dadman repped this.
  17. RefIADad

    RefIADad Member+

    United States
    Aug 18, 2017
    Des Moines, IA
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    Orlando’s 4th vs NYRB with controversy. AR1 puts his flag up for an offside, and Victor Rivas waves the flag down (potential comeback offside, but it was off screen). After a lengthy discussion, the goal is awarded. No VAR in the game. This happened around the 73rd minute for those of you who want to go back if you have ESPN+

    The interesting thing is that since AR1 had the flag up, he was out of position to rule on the pass leading to the goal, which (at least according to the replay) appeared to be offside. Probably doesn’t make a difference in the match as Orlando was already up 3-1 and dominating, but I’d love to be a fly on the wall for the post-match assessing briefing.
     
    frankieboylampard repped this.
  18. Geko

    Geko Member

    Sacremento Geckos
    United States
    May 25, 2016
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    Any pundit saying that is baiting you

    upload_2022-7-27_21-43-42.png
     
    dadman, frankieboylampard and onefineesq repped this.
  19. RefIADad

    RefIADad Member+

    United States
    Aug 18, 2017
    Des Moines, IA
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    Admittedly, I was watching on my phone with the sound off. That still makes it look onside. At speed, it appeared off on first look.
     
    frankieboylampard and Geko repped this.
  20. ManiacalClown

    ManiacalClown Member+

    Jun 27, 2003
    South Jersey
    Club:
    Chicago Fire
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    So basically you had Attacker A play the ball forward while Attacker B was in an offside position, but before B became involved, Attacker C stretched out a leg and nicked the ball with his toe, at which moment B was no longer in an offside position so when he received the ball a moment later, there could be no offense. AR flagged B for offside, but the R having seen the touch by C waved the flag down and allowed play to continue.

    Luckily as shown above, the final pass was then onside because there's no way he could be in position at that point.

    *Assuming* Rivas was correct in spotting that intervening touch, and based on the video I think he probably was, that's the sort of call that saves the game in a tighter affair.
     
    dadman, GlennAA11 and Geko repped this.
  21. RefIADad

    RefIADad Member+

    United States
    Aug 18, 2017
    Des Moines, IA
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    And the sort of call that can shoot your stock way up to spot something like that, process it, and make the right call in the heat of the moment. I’ll have to watch this play on my TV to get the full picture (pardon the pun). If all of that happened as you stated, then it’s a pretty amazing call.
     
    dadman repped this.
  22. soccerref69420

    soccerref69420 Member+

    President of the Antonio Miguel Mateu Lahoz fan cub
    Mar 14, 2020
    Nat'l Team:
    Korea DPR
    #147 soccerref69420, Jul 27, 2022
    Last edited: Jul 27, 2022
    Why does it seem like Victor Rivas is always in some sort of controversy lol

    Also here is the full clip



    But I'm confused because why would the AR be putting the flag up that quickly? This seems like the exact reason why so many of us in pre-games tell the ARs to wait a second if necessary to call offside just to be absolutely sure that the offside player gets involved. Sure the AR may have not seen the jumping touch but it still seems way too early to flag it regardless. At least take a second or two to let Rivas give him a signal.

    I wonder if this AR will now always delay his flag call...
     
  23. USSF REF

    USSF REF Guest

    If the AR sees a player run from an obvious offside position and does not perceive a touch of the ball by his teammate there, what will waiting to raise the flag accomplish?

    Play it out in your mind. Let's say the AR never sees that touch and the referee sees the touch - it's unlikely the referee will be telling the AR to keep the flag down if the AR isn't giving affirmative offside information. So, the AR has a clear offside offense as the attacker who he perceived was offside has now played the ball. Then, with no additional information, do what? Wait two seconds for the attack to move toward the goal and then think, OK, I waited the two seconds to be sure the offside positioned player played the ball that I knew he played two seconds ago, now I'll raise the flag?

    I get asking an AR to wait for involvement in a developing play, but once you know they clearly have played it, a slow flag only reduces AR credibility and may add confusion for the referee.

    In an unusual situation, the AR did the right mechanic based on the information that he had and the referee had other information and correctly (assuming there is actually a touch by the teammate after the attacker returned to an onside position) waved the flag down and then it's just a game of catch up. Assuming Victor got this touch right, then that's some top-notch awareness.
     
  24. USSF REF

    USSF REF Guest

    Assuming there was an assessment ;)

    I say that tongue in cheek because in the lower rounds that isn't always the case.
     
    frankieboylampard repped this.
  25. MetroFever

    MetroFever Member+

    Jun 3, 2001
    Club:
    New York Red Bulls
    Nat'l Team:
    Croatia
    I watched again the Red Bulls/Orlando play on my Mac on a full screen, and you can see the ball slow down a slight bit after grazing the foot. I don't see the actual contact with the ball, but after viewing it a few times on anything but a phone, I think others will agree the ball does change direction (VERY slightly) and does slow down. Rivas is right there in perfect position to have seen it, so a great call.

    We don't see the AR with his flag up until well after the deflection, so it's impossible to say he lifted it too early. It's happened to all of us where we miss a deflection (admittedly it's usually on the far side of the field) and are waved down or where we've waved others down others since it was difficult or impossible for them to see the ball being played.

    Two other things I take from this:

    1) Interesting that Rivas gets the spray to get the players away from him and the AR but allows the camera crew to get right in his face, allowing us a Jomboy moment to read lips.

    2) About a minute before this play, Orlando's Araujo takes down Casseres in the attacking third and should have been cautioned (which would have been his second one). You see Rivas telling him "use your head".
     
    frankieboylampard repped this.

Share This Page