Maxime Crépeau

[costarg]

2 hours ago, Unnamed Trialist said:

The "good" thing is that Pantemis will get some more minutes, he seems to be as solid as Crepeau should be this year.

Pantemis is not even close.

Great shot stopper.  For the rest, I don't know how to put it politely, but I've watched 16 year olds with a better understanding of the game.  I'm talking about the most basic of things, like taking his sweet time while his team is losing and hurries when leading.  It's seriously mind-boggling that someone with his experience hasn't figured things like that out yet.

Edited April 14 by costarg

[Unnamed Trialist]

Just now, costarg said:

Pantemis is not even close.

I don't know how to put it politely, but I've watched 16 year olds with a better understanding of the game.  I'm talking about the most basic of things, like taking his sweet time while his team is losing and hurries when leading.  It's seriously mind-boggling that someone with his experience hasn't figured things like that out yet.

Maybe, but this year when Maxime was out he seemed to have done well. 

I also did not mind him at all in Olympic qualifying, apart from little details. 

What you are saying about not having the game in your head, that is worrying though, drives me nuts.

[BearcatSA]

23 minutes ago, costarg said:

Pantemis is not even close.

Great shot stopper.  For the rest, I don't know how to put it politely, but I've watched 16 year olds with a better understanding of the game.  I'm talking about the most basic of things, like taking his sweet time while his team is losing and hurries when leading.  It's seriously mind-boggling that someone with his experience hasn't figured things like that out yet.

Can make a great reflex save in one moment, then makes a brain cramp decision in the next.  

[Stryker911]

3 hours ago, BearcatSA said:

Can make a great reflex save in one moment, then makes a brain cramp decision in the next.  

So he's a younger Borjan?

[costarg]

41 minutes ago, Stryker911 said:

So he's a younger Borjan?

Without the charm and coolness factor.

[costarg]

4 hours ago, Unnamed Trialist said:

What you are saying about not having the game in your head, that is worrying though, drives me nuts.

Best way I can describe it is he plays the game like it only affects him and his stats, not realizing or understanding the bigger picture and team comes first.  

[SthMelbRed]

13 hours ago, Unnamed Trialist said:

I watched on the MLS highlights, Nolan.

I think you have to look at the full repeats on the full screen.

Crepeau is in the box but contact is made on a leg that is clearly planted outside the box, not on the line. So foul outside the box.

Then you could argue whether he's clearly last defender. There is a defender in parallel to him, on the other side of the box, but a long way away from the play. I think if you apply the last defender rule properly, where any other defender has to be reasonably close to be able defend the play if Crepeau was beaten, it's a red.

The "good" thing is that Pantemis will get some more minutes, he seems to be as solid as Crepeau should be this year.

Just to clarify, from a Laws of the Game perspective, there's no sanction for being the last defender. The sanction is for Denying an Obvious Goal Scoring Opportunity (DOGSO). The position of other defenders, in relation to where the foul took place, is one of the major considerations when determining if DOGSO has occurred, but it's not the only one. You often get teams who are about to get a player sent off gesticulating at referees claiming that there was another defender further back then the one who's about to walk. It's gamesmanship, but also betrays a lack of understanding of the actual laws.

[Unnamed Trialist]

3 hours ago, SthMelbRed said:

Just to clarify, from a Laws of the Game perspective, there's no sanction for being the last defender. The sanction is for Denying an Obvious Goal Scoring Opportunity (DOGSO). The position of other defenders, in relation to where the foul took place, is one of the major considerations when determining if DOGSO has occurred, but it's not the only one. You often get teams who are about to get a player sent off gesticulating at referees claiming that there was another defender further back then the one who's about to walk. It's gamesmanship, but also betrays a lack of understanding of the actual laws.

So if you can see full repeats on the play, give us your interpretation, please, I think we'd find it interesting.

[The Real Marc]

16 hours ago, costarg said:

Without the charm and coolness factor.

It's the sweatpants.

[SthMelbRed]

13 hours ago, Unnamed Trialist said:

So if you can see full repeats on the play, give us your interpretation, please, I think we'd find it interesting.

I think the referee's gotten this one right. Max clearly misses the ball and kicks the LAFC player, bringing him down. Had he not done so, the LAFC player has a wide-open goal into which to shoot, with the only covering defender much too wide to affect the obvious goal scoring opportunity. If the foul is inside the box, it's a penalty and a yellow card for Max. As they've determined that it's just outside the box, it's a free kick and Max has to be sent off. 

In this case, it's irrelevant that the defender may have been slightly deeper than Crepeau, meaning that he may have been the actual last man. The fact that he wasn't in a position to actually defend the play means that it's still an obvious goal scoring opportunity, and the red card must be shown.