Was it Kevin Stott reffing the game tonight? Whoever it was, get a new job, and maybe a better prescription for eyewear, cuz you apparently wre not watching this game. It was bad enough he missed men being thrown on the ground and then accepted a linesman's no-call on a push, to the linesman!?!?!? What made me angry was how he yelled at a ball girl, because Adin Brown the keeper got the ball instead of her throwing it to him. This poor girl crying and our section did a little cheer to help her smile. Give me a break. The reffing has been appalling, and tonight, a game which actually should have had cards dealt ( as opposed to some questionable previous calls), I think the Refs lost their prioroties (and also their cards). idiots. you're not in the game to make people cry. You're in the game to call a fair and objective match. DO IT. And once again, I say....GO REVS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
MLS changes the laws of the game He had to be told not to card anyone unless it was a blatent Red card offense. I think his frustration got the better of him because the players knew he wouldn't card, and he couldn't control the game. He let it out on the ball girl. What an ass. I guess that referee letter that has been circulating was correct in its accusation that MLS is telling the Refs what to call and what not to.
I didn't think he was awful. Certainly better than the refs in our earlier playoff games. You can't expect mastery from MLS refs, so that's enough for me.
I was apalled at his yelling at the ball girl. Aside from that, I seriously think he simply forgot his cards somewhere else. Edit: However, at least he was bad for both teams. We blatantly committed some fouls that weren't called, and they did the same. Consistency wasn't a problem, at least.
Re: MLS changes the laws of the game I had this funny feeling when Hernandez was talking to Stott after the second brutal mugging of Kamler, that Stott was replying: "If I hold on cards for them then it ultimately works to your advantage." The Revs in fact were not carded, though I didn't see an instance when we really got away with one.
Heh, I still say I should've thrown that bottle at the ref for the bickering he did at the little girls. That's some obvious blindness. Someone had mentioned it previously regarding referees that they were given orders to not give out as many cards for players committing fouls. Why? Who knows. We still beat Columbus, regardless of that 'child-abusing' twerp who had a complete surge of power-abuse. Forget him, forget what he's done, and be more-than-thankful we most likely won't be seeing him against LA. Speaking of which, what kinds of chants are we going to do now for LA? I'm interested to hear this one. And I STILL laugh at a yellow football team! Oh, one more thing... did I get his name right, Busch?
Refereeing was a disgrace. Any tackle from behind should be an automatic yellow because a player can¡¯t protect himself. They let Taylor get injured and yesterday they let Wolde get hacked time after time. Do they want more attacking, interesting soccer and attract more fans? Protect the forwards.
First was the "Child Abuser" chant. Followed by a hearty round of "We love the ball girls." The kids were having a good giggle over that. Fred should have a picture of the kids.
Calls were missed on BOTH sides. A couple of Crew players deserved yellow, and some really rough fouls from the Revs were uncalled. Doesn't matter when the Crew's weakness is exposed TWICE in the deciding game, and the Crew wasn't able to beat a hot GK in Adin Brown.
Re: MLS changes the laws of the game And what is really sad is that Stott's lack of cards might not have equaled up to Brian Hall's pre-World Cup performance in Game 1.
I was chanting "child abuser" and "we love the ball girls" with the best of them BUT Stott was faced with a problem that comes up in every MLS game; the ball kids often don't really understand their job. Up until a few years ago matches were played with one ball and it was the players job to fetch it when it went out of play. I believe that the idea of multiple balls and kids to throw them back to the players started in South America in the 80's and spread around the world during the 90's. It certainly has helped to speed up the game and kill off time-wasting and that is where Stott comes in. Most teams have their junior players or apprentices as ball kids. This means that they really understand what is going on and are watching carefully. Certainly they try to kill time for the home team but, generally, they are a lot more "with it" than our lime-colored kids. So Stott was making certain that these folks were on the job and while his approach was dictatorial and high-handed, he was well within his rights, given the situation. Sorry to be a ref apologist on this one. JIM DOW
I was watching a game on tv last year (I think South American). The goalie on the visiting team, whose team was ahead, was given a yellow card for time wasting. The next time the ball went out for a goal kick, the goalie went to retrieve it. The ball boy picked it up, tried to avoid giving it to the goalie for a few seconds, and then tried to knock it out of the goalie's hands.
Normally, I would agree with you, but Adin jogged immediately past the ballgirls and went to retrieve the original ball. What was the ballgirl to do, throw a second ball on the field when the keeper wasn't looking? If anything, the ref should have warned (but not cautioned) Brown for ignoring the ballgirls and wasting time. Now, if Adin had looked to the ballgirls for a replacement and time was lost because the girls weren't paying attention, then I could see the ref's point. This was not the case.
For those of you who haven't seen this, a link to the likely reason the officiating was crap for all three matches: http://soccer-ref.quietfire.com/BobEvansPaper.html
nevermind some of the tackles that could have been likely calls from stott....but how 'bout mccarty shoving the linesman to try and get at franchino during their little tussle? this wasn't...linesjudge stepping into the middle of something and taking a quick one by accident. this was linesman stepping in, mccarty stepping back like he was cooling off, then taking a step forward and pushing the ref. i don't see the point of llamosa getting an extra suspension for pushing a ref's arm/hand away who was initiating contact with him apparently. then, mccarty intentionally stepping up to the ref and shoving him with absolutely no recourse. i hope somebody high up is taking that bob evans paper to heart somehow.
I just watched the tape again, and I'm not as upset about the officiating as I was when I was at the match. That McCarty shove on the AR was blatant, though.
Maybe someone who knows a past or present ball-child can clear this up, but from watching the kids over the years they seem to be deathly afraid of stepping inside the boards. I think they are instructed not to provide a ball if there is already one inside the boards. This instruction is designed to counteract the other mentioned scenario where two balls are in the playing area at the same time, causing an unnecessary disruption. Now, if I'm not mistaken, this is a one-time gig for the kids so they won't be well trained for all possible scenarios and thus the simplified instructions. The ref's beef should have been with Adin, not the ball-girl. But Adin is much bigger and scarier than a little girl.