It's just a reminder that the phrase "what does football expect" is so important in refereeing. The players, technical areas, stadium, tv viewers, and probably announcers.....would easily have accepted a whistle for offside. Rivas might be correct here but once the flag goes up it is a tough - tough sell to wave him down on something that really, only 2-3 people are going to catch live.
Yikes -- "what does football expect" should absolutely not be a factor in an offside decision. Might I occasionally fudge an offside call that nobody is going to understand in an amateur U-14 game, because I'm too lazy to deal with the fallout? Sure. But this is professional soccer. It's an awkward situation, but I think the crew handled it with perfection. Play to the whistle!
Your phrase better fits a pass back in the 2018 World Cup where Danny Makkelie looked the other way 5 minutes into the match (90% of fellow FIFA refs would have done the same). The opposing team had no issue. Here, it's expected that the AR will see that the play reset and if it's missed, the CR will overrule. If you don't and the Red Bulls somehow come back and win the game and advance to the US Open Cup Final since the referee looked the other way, do you justify it with a comment such as "This is what Football expects"?
Yeah, I have to clarify my own comment here..... I watched the play originally and had some doubt about the actual movement of the ball and therefore the impact of the player returning from an offside decision. If Rivas is 100% that there was no touch - the laws are clear and the flag should be waved down. If he wasn't 100%, no one would question if he just called the offside.
I believe in 2022 with the comm system to see an AR going up with the flag, all defenders stop and the CR waive him down it's embarrassing and this shows once more how Referees in North America are so bad and low level compared to European ones and most in South America as well. It's 3:1 Home, 15 to go, could not be the right decision, but if you call offside nobody is gonna argue and nobody is gonna even remember about this play, cause it is not even SPA at the moment that the AR raises the flag. It shows the poor game understanding that the refs have. I'm sure had this happened in England, Spain, Italy, Germany... CR would have called offside... end of the story. Take a look also how often CR is called by VAR in the MLS and he doesn't agree with what the VAR is suggesting him and most of the times the CR is wrong! This happens only in US Soccer.
Absolutely agree. Is the call that the game is expecting and no one would have said a word. IFK and play on... Unfortunately football understanding in the USA is as low as you can imagine. Amateur average European referees move to the USA and in 3 days they become "top" referees at their level. Football understanding IQ...
That's why you have the comm system. On a situation like this one AR should have said I have him off before raising the flag or CR "he touched it"... just some kind of communication before making the decision TOGETHER... what happened is just AMATEUR level.
So you're going to come onto the forum and make blanket statements about Americans not understanding football when we've seen referees all across Europe make the same (and worse) errors?
In the last few day's you've harped on about how getting Regional badge means jack squat and now this? Getting tired
It is just my opinion. And it's not about the mistakes, because those happen all over the world. But, the football understanding. If you are a PRO referee and you are unable to make a decision having the comm system, call that offside, it is not even a SPA and nobody is going to remember about that play. Game management. Now instead they are all talking about this play and how the crew looked bad.
I don't think we need lectures on how poorly American referees utilize VAR compared with the rest of the world. Would it have been better to not have the flag go up there... of course, but it happened. Are there radio mechanics that could have helped them to get it right... maybe - the timing was a factor in the thing. It happened quickly. Also, you should be careful to assume the radios were working at 100% given there had been a torrential downpour that ended just minutes before that, so it's possible there were technical issues. And to discuss football understanding and make the case that a referee between two first division teams playing in the national semi-final should just ignore an offside decision because the score was out of hand with little time left and everyone was expecting one thing, so why not give the people what they want. That sounds like a lack of courage to make the right call as opposed to football understanding. As it was, the video showed the decision to be correct. The replay would show that to the world. Is it better to be correct, or to take the path of least resistance even if you know the decision to be wrong? And what are you arguing anyway? That the AR shouldn't have raised the flag and was exhibiting poor mechanics and poor football understanding by raising the flag... but since he did, OH WELL gotta go with it now, the players saw the flag and stopped! Accuracy be damned... We want tidy uncontroversial football more than we want correct decisions to be made. Is that what I'm supposed to take from reading that?
I could agree with you if we are talking about a SPA, some promising play where with a shot or a pass you have an obvious goal scoring opportunity, so with a bad decision you are taking them away the chance to score a goal. But here we are talking about one offensive player who is back to the goal right after halfway when the AR raises his flag and literally all the defensive line stops. You call offside, end of the story. At the end of the game nobody will say a word, the referee observer will discuss the play with the crew and they will find out what went wrong and how to avoid it in the future. AR and/or CR will get - something on his game report and nothing is gonna happen. End of the story #2 Keep it simple when the game is not asking for anything different.
OK, just so we're clear you're suggesting the referee allow an incorrect decision knowingly just to avoid controversy. Yikes.
The job of the crew on a game is to be consistent, to have the crucial calls right and avoid any unnecessary problem. If you call offside you avoid a problem and you are making a call that the game is asking since the AR raised his flag. Either you are able to prevent and avoid what happened, but since this didn’t happen at the time the AR raised the flag all Florida is expecting IFK. As said before, would have been this another situation, another part of the field.. probably it would be a different story, not on this case. The same foul(Management) that you call at midfield you might not call it inside the penalty area. Here you call offside, you avoid any problem and every single person inside the stadium is fine with you.
Unless you are able to prevent it, for sure. I’m sure PRO would rather go with offside in that situation after the AR raised the flag, and nobody would say a word and talk about it, then NY club, coaching staff, players, fans complaining to them for what happened.
I respect the work ethic of people who get the regionals, but the amount of mediocre regionals I've seen and worked with has really eliminated my previous "wow it's an honor to work with them, I need to learn as much as I can from them" belief.
This is a horrible attitude. I’ve learned as much from “mediocre” referees as I have from FIFAs. Everyone has a unique perspective and understanding those will make you a better official. You shouldn’t respect them because they’re regional. You should respect them because they’re a fellow official and you never know what you can learn by watching and listening.
Not agreeing with someone doesn't make them a troll. I don't agree with him, but blocking someone completely puts yourself in a bubble where you start to believe everyone thinks exactly the same as you. Different opinions are needed for a real discussion. Of course, maybe he is 100% trolling and I'm missing it.
First, +1. I've learned more from referees that I think are bad than I've learned from referees who I think are excellent. Heck, my entire refereeing "style" tracks back to trying to not be the kind of referee that I hated so much when I played in high school and college. There are many ways for excellent referees to manage players and situations. You have to be yourself on the pitch, so tools in one referee's toolbox may not be tools that will fit in your toolbox. If you work with an excellent referee, you may pick up a few nuggets on how they move and how they manage restarts/injuries/subs. If you have comms, you may pick up some phrases you can use yourself in games. For example, I worked with Chico Grajeda back when he was more active on the college scene. He was great, but there was no way I could use his same style of management (especially handling disrepute and mass confrontations). I didn't personally get that much for myself from working with him, despite his obvious quality. It was still fun, though. If you work with a bad referee, you'll have a front row seat into what doesn't work, and why. Much more beneficial for learning IMHO because you won't make their mistakes. Second, I think @TheBookIsFlexible raises an interesting philosophical referee issue here in terms of how Rivas handled the offside call. Is the goal of the referee to get the crucial decisions right but stay as invisible as possible, letting the players decide the match? Is the goal of the referee to get as many decisions correct as possible, even if that objective can occasionally reduce credibility during a match? What style is better for the good of the game of football? You're going to need to draw the line somewhere between calling every 6-second violation (and booking every instance of FRD or DR), and ignoring clear penalties. I personally tend to see @TheBookIsFlexible's opinion reflected more from referees in the college ranks than the USSF ranks. Everyone is free to draw their own conclusions on the credibility/basis for @TheBookIsFlexible's opinion. Personally, I support Rivas' choice here. If there is a clearly, objectively, correct decision...I would rather get the decision right, but look bad, every single time as opposed to getting a decision wrong and looking good. At a certain level, being justified on camera/replay is more important than passing the eye test live. It's part of my pregame. I don't think the answer has anything to do with being American vs. European, or whatever. I believe that a referee who establishes credibility among the players, over time, that they will do everything in their power to get the decision right (even if it means overturning your AR, or taking a while to communicate) will help them facilitate matches better long-term as opposed to a short-term goal of not upsetting people live, but reducing credibility long term once people can see replays. David Beckham wrote in his book that he felt secure going into one of his biggest matches of his career (world cup, or champs league, or something) because he knew Collina was the referee and would be honest and fair. I strive for that reputation with players. Third, I hate the concept of "football understanding" as applied to refereeing. I agree that football understanding is crucial for determining what to call and what not to call. But it's an ambiguous buzzword that can be used in a "jazz hands" kind of manner to explain away decisions.
As I told someone on Sunday when they were upset with a penalty call I made, "I am not paid to make the popular decision. I'm paid to make the correct decision."
He/she doesn't raise any interesting philosophical issues. Ignoring objectively correct calls for the sake of credibility or "avoiding problems" is not interesting, it's not philosophical, it's wrong. It's a cop out and I don't understand why referees feel it's acceptable to operate outside of the legal framework because they're afraid or because they feel they know better. This sort of situation is different from managing trifling situations, some of which you gave examples of. We as referees operate in the gray and we to have to be flexible. This is not an appropriate case/example of that. If you're so concerned that making a call like Rivas did will cause you issues with the players, maybe you should engage in better player management and rapport building beforehand. Football understanding is a legitimate tool, but it can't be used as clutch to not do our jobs correctly. We're supposed to defend the integrity of the game. This is hard to do when you're making things up or not following the law.