Listening to Joe Dickerson telling Jordi Alba to go away because he has other things to do is the best thing I’ve heard all day 😂 He has amazing game management skills!
It may be just me but I feel like there was no possibility of the attacker getting to the ball in the last clip. I understand why the VAR recommended the review, and I understand why they gave the red, but if it was me I would have probably just given a yellow and a DFK after seeing the clip. Maybe a red could be given for Violent Conduct? But I think that's also hard to judge.
Yeah, I think if the original call had been foul and caution there wouldn't have been sufficient evidence for the VAR to say that's an error, even if he thought it should be a send off for DOGSO. But since they both have to analyze it de novo, it has to be left to referee opinion.
Then that’s a misapplication. It’s funny that the ref initially noted the pace on the ball and the attacker not being able to get to it. In a sense, the VAR wore him down. This isn’t supposed to be a tag team or a meeting of the minds. They aren’t reffing the match together. VAR isn’t meant to re-referee the match. I think this review took about FOUR minutes. That’s a PROBLEM.
Yeah I love that you can hear the referee getting it right and explaining his thinking - there's almost no way the attacker would have been able to get to the ball. For me if he had awarded the DOGSO originally, I wouldn't have expected VAR to overturn that, but for it to have been ruled as no foul in the moment and then var just wearing him down until he awarded the DOGSO just makes the whole VAR system feel wrong.
If there's a possibility that he wouldn't have gotten to the ball, it's not supposed to be DOGSO. VAR is supposed to fix “clear and obvious” errors. It's not supposed to re-referee the game. A clear and obvious error would be someone getting violently elbowed in the head. What happened to the check on that? That was a miss. When Brad comes out to head the ball, he has no way of knowing that it is going to deflect off the LAFC player's face. Also, the amount of body control needed to stick your leg out while still in the air to trip someone is Matrix-like. I guess the match was played on a movie set that night and Brad has the ability to slow down time. Parts of me likes the idea of VAR, but it has been grossly misapplied SEVERAL times over the years. Also, It seems like the VAR’s are starting to overstep their role and call for matches to be stopped immediately. That’s not supposed to happen. I don’t want to hear the VAR arguing with the ref either. This is supposed to be the refs call. That first ref sounds really unprofessional as well. There’s no need for all that hollering and swearing from a match official. Can you imagine an NBA or NFL ref sounding like that? How does he sound when there’s no mic? It makes sense why a lot of his matches are chaotic as this is how he rolls. You know you are on a microphone.
The following must be considered for DOGSO: * distance between the offence and the goal ✅✅ * general direction of the play 🤷 * likelihood of keeping or gaining control of the ball ❌❌❌ * location and number of defenders 🤷 If the LAFC player had gotten to the ball before it careened out of bounds he would have had a tough angle to shoot from. He would also had to deal with defenders contending with him by the time he’d gotten to the ball. Above all, the ball went out of bounds immediately. He wasn’t getting to it and this should not have been called DOGSO as it wasn’t an obvious scoring opportunity.
"Likelihood of keeping or gaining control of the ball" is not really the same as "possibility that he wouldn't have gotten to the ball". The first allows for a wide range of judgments, while the latter focuses on only one end of the possible outcomes. While my judgment is that it's unlikely he would have gained control (and thus I wouldn't recommend a review), I can't rule it out, and I can't say the VAR, and ultimately the Referee, were wrong. OTOH, I've seen LOTS of potential DOGSOs where there's a "possibility" that the player wouldn't get to it, but has a high probability of doing so - in those cases I'd punish the DOGSO. (And FWIW, I've seen even more situations for which DOGSO didn't apply where I judged that the player had no possibility of getting to the ball and was wrong).
are you seriously offended that the referee said "if these two create shit theyre gone"? That's offensive to you? He didn't swear at anyone and idk what you mean by "hollering", when you're surrounded by 20 people in a loud stadium you need to raise your voice for people to hear and listen to you.
Look at that PRO making up a justification not supported by the Law of the Game to uphold a wrong DOGSO decision vs coming out and admitting the VAR had no business getting involved as it 1- was not clear and obvious 2- was not even DOGSO as the ball went out of bounds too fast after coming off the attacker’s head to get to the ball after the trip.
if you slow it down and look frame by frame, you can see the ball went off the player's hand before hitting his face. Its hard to see but if you watch the normal game camera angle, you will see it does.
If I was Orlando I would be LIVID... That shirt tug was super minor and the Columbus player went down solely to try to draw the penalty. The shirt tug didn't directly pull him to the ground and he didn't even have the ball. A super questionable call in my opinion, not anything that is clear and obvious enough to overturn if it wasn't called on the field. But then play continues and an obvious, strong foul is committed against an Orlando player with the ball while in the penalty box, which was correctly awarded a PK. Deciding to award a questionable penalty kick on one end of the field that negates what would have been an obvious penalty kick on the other end of the field? Madness.
lol, it's a penalty 100% of the time. The tug was not super minor. Even the Orlando keeper agreed with it after seeing it on the screen. Every single player will go down with any contact in the box to draw a penalty. It's part of the game. Don't commit a foul if you don't want to give up a pk. But I am sure some random person on the internet knows much more than a professional referee. VAR thought it was a PK, the center ref thought it was a PK, MLS employees on instant replay thought it was a PK, Pro thought it was a PK, and even an Orlando player thought it was a PK. But hey, this dude on youtube doesn't, so it must not have been a PK.
@@bradleyklemetson375 good point. I didn't see that one as being "by the collar" until specifically looking for it, and I'm still not 100% sure it was (could conceivably be just "near the collar" but technically below it). But, a grab by the collar would be a much more serious offense, and a collar grab would be much more likely to bring the player to the ground from the choking/discomfort (vs. the actual force of the tug pulling him down). So, that would make more sense.
Listening to Joe Dickerson telling Jordi Alba to go away because he has other things to do is the best thing I’ve heard all day 😂 He has amazing game management skills!
It may be just me but I feel like there was no possibility of the attacker getting to the ball in the last clip. I understand why the VAR recommended the review, and I understand why they gave the red, but if it was me I would have probably just given a yellow and a DFK after seeing the clip. Maybe a red could be given for Violent Conduct? But I think that's also hard to judge.
Yeah, I think if the original call had been foul and caution there wouldn't have been sufficient evidence for the VAR to say that's an error, even if he thought it should be a send off for DOGSO. But since they both have to analyze it de novo, it has to be left to referee opinion.
Then that’s a misapplication. It’s funny that the ref initially noted the pace on the ball and the attacker not being able to get to it. In a sense, the VAR wore him down.
This isn’t supposed to be a tag team or a meeting of the minds. They aren’t reffing the match together.
VAR isn’t meant to re-referee the match.
I think this review took about FOUR minutes. That’s a PROBLEM.
didn't seem "clear and obvious" that he was going to get to the ball.
Yeah I love that you can hear the referee getting it right and explaining his thinking - there's almost no way the attacker would have been able to get to the ball. For me if he had awarded the DOGSO originally, I wouldn't have expected VAR to overturn that, but for it to have been ruled as no foul in the moment and then var just wearing him down until he awarded the DOGSO just makes the whole VAR system feel wrong.
Not DOGSO for me. Likelihood of control not clear and obvious.
If there's a possibility that he wouldn't have gotten to the ball, it's not supposed to be DOGSO.
VAR is supposed to fix “clear and obvious” errors. It's not supposed to re-referee the game. A clear and obvious error would be someone getting violently elbowed in the head. What happened to the check on that? That was a miss.
When Brad comes out to head the ball, he has no way of knowing that it is going to deflect off the LAFC player's face. Also, the amount of body control needed to stick your leg out while still in the air to trip someone is Matrix-like. I guess the match was played on a movie set that night and Brad has the ability to slow down time.
Parts of me likes the idea of VAR, but it has been grossly misapplied SEVERAL times over the years.
Also, It seems like the VAR’s are starting to overstep their role and call for matches to be stopped immediately. That’s not supposed to happen. I don’t want to hear the VAR arguing with the ref either. This is supposed to be the refs call.
That first ref sounds really unprofessional as well. There’s no need for all that hollering and swearing from a match official. Can you imagine an NBA or NFL ref sounding like that? How does he sound when there’s no mic? It makes sense why a lot of his matches are chaotic as this is how he rolls.
You know you are on a microphone.
The following must be considered for DOGSO:
* distance between the offence and the goal ✅✅
* general direction of the play 🤷
* likelihood of keeping or gaining control of the ball ❌❌❌
* location and number of defenders 🤷
If the LAFC player had gotten to the ball before it careened out of bounds he would have had a tough angle to shoot from. He would also had to deal with defenders contending with him by the time he’d gotten to the ball.
Above all, the ball went out of bounds immediately. He wasn’t getting to it and this should not have been called DOGSO as it wasn’t an obvious scoring opportunity.
"Likelihood of keeping or gaining control of the ball" is not really the same as "possibility that he wouldn't have gotten to the ball". The first allows for a wide range of judgments, while the latter focuses on only one end of the possible outcomes. While my judgment is that it's unlikely he would have gained control (and thus I wouldn't recommend a review), I can't rule it out, and I can't say the VAR, and ultimately the Referee, were wrong. OTOH, I've seen LOTS of potential DOGSOs where there's a "possibility" that the player wouldn't get to it, but has a high probability of doing so - in those cases I'd punish the DOGSO. (And FWIW, I've seen even more situations for which DOGSO didn't apply where I judged that the player had no possibility of getting to the ball and was wrong).
are you seriously offended that the referee said "if these two create shit theyre gone"? That's offensive to you? He didn't swear at anyone and idk what you mean by "hollering", when you're surrounded by 20 people in a loud stadium you need to raise your voice for people to hear and listen to you.
Usain Bolt is not stopping the ball from going out of bounds in the ATL-LAFC call.
Look at that PRO making up a justification not supported by the Law of the Game to uphold a wrong DOGSO decision vs coming out and admitting the VAR had no business getting involved as it 1- was not clear and obvious 2- was not even DOGSO as the ball went out of bounds too fast after coming off the attacker’s head to get to the ball after the trip.
if you slow it down and look frame by frame, you can see the ball went off the player's hand before hitting his face. Its hard to see but if you watch the normal game camera angle, you will see it does.
If I was Orlando I would be LIVID...
That shirt tug was super minor and the Columbus player went down solely to try to draw the penalty. The shirt tug didn't directly pull him to the ground and he didn't even have the ball. A super questionable call in my opinion, not anything that is clear and obvious enough to overturn if it wasn't called on the field.
But then play continues and an obvious, strong foul is committed against an Orlando player with the ball while in the penalty box, which was correctly awarded a PK.
Deciding to award a questionable penalty kick on one end of the field that negates what would have been an obvious penalty kick on the other end of the field? Madness.
I completely agree. It was called wrong. However, don't grab a player by the collar. No reas9n to grab there.
"he didn't' even have the ball." is 100% irrelevant.
lol, it's a penalty 100% of the time. The tug was not super minor. Even the Orlando keeper agreed with it after seeing it on the screen. Every single player will go down with any contact in the box to draw a penalty. It's part of the game. Don't commit a foul if you don't want to give up a pk. But I am sure some random person on the internet knows much more than a professional referee. VAR thought it was a PK, the center ref thought it was a PK, MLS employees on instant replay thought it was a PK, Pro thought it was a PK, and even an Orlando player thought it was a PK. But hey, this dude on youtube doesn't, so it must not have been a PK.
@@bradleyklemetson375 good point. I didn't see that one as being "by the collar" until specifically looking for it, and I'm still not 100% sure it was (could conceivably be just "near the collar" but technically below it). But, a grab by the collar would be a much more serious offense, and a collar grab would be much more likely to bring the player to the ground from the choking/discomfort (vs. the actual force of the tug pulling him down). So, that would make more sense.