Gian-Luca Posted March 17, 2015 Author Share Posted March 17, 2015 Am I missing something? That vine is showing as a still image for me...i keep reloading it too. It is a moving image (a gif I think) that repeats, it just doesn't show anything we (or at least I) haven't seen before, which isn't surprising because it is the same play and the other angles were pretty comprehensive. It's not this is a special angle required to see if Geoff Hurst's ball went over the German goal line. If anything it makes it more clear that Finley trips over Morrow's legs and that Morrow was in front of Finley by this point in the 50/50 ball. The angle also makes it look like Perquis was in position to not make like Morrow was the last defender, but which shows how deceiving some angles can be because honestly I don't think there's anyway that Perquis would have caught Finley on the play. On another note, Unless Columbus Crew announcers and every media outlet I've seen doesn't count as part of the consensus, I'm not sure that it swings the way as being suggested on this thread, but to be honest I'm a bit sick of debating this. It's over and done with. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jonovision Posted March 17, 2015 Share Posted March 17, 2015 Whether or not it was a foul (I think it was), it was a rash challenge of the sort that will result in a foul more often than not. In one or two more strides Morrow could have closed him down or at least cut off his desired path. TFC put themselves in a difficult situation and were punished for it. This is bound to happen as long as they start two lead-footed CBs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trillium Posted March 17, 2015 Share Posted March 17, 2015 Was a foul based on the Vine video.. clearly contact before ball contact. Gantar in position or not made the right call, he consulted with his assistant and upheld his whistle to stop play and subsequent red card. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Unnamed Trialist Posted March 17, 2015 Share Posted March 17, 2015 The general consensus now from non-TFC fans is that this was a foul and the correct call. We'll see MLS uphold the card and suspension. I f-ing hate TFC, so you are wrong. Because whatever opinion I have on a given subject is the basis for consensus, okay? Just the argument we are having here proves it's not that easy for refs, if we can argue like this about a call then you can't say the ref was crap. He made a decision on the spot and, for me, erred. But that is not the kind of call on which MLS reffing has to be judged. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Ref Posted March 18, 2015 Share Posted March 18, 2015 I don't deny that referees make mistakes. A key element that is not available to the observer is the written report that the referee submits after the game which would state the basis in law for cards given, specially red cards. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Havoc88 Posted March 18, 2015 Share Posted March 18, 2015 Whether or not it was a foul (I think it was), it was a rash challenge of the sort that will result in a foul more often than not. In one or two more strides Morrow could have closed him down or at least cut off his desired path. TFC put themselves in a difficult situation and were punished for it. This is bound to happen as long as they start two lead-footed CBs. You need to watch the full play again - Morrow was ahead of him the entire time until the last touch where he closed the distance and went for the tackle. There was nothing rash about it, it was pretty standard defending. For me - the contact made shoulder to shoulder and the tackle are not one in the same. You aren't called for a foul just for touching a guy or bumping him 50/50 - when Morrow went for the tackle it was ball first. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AvroArrow Posted March 18, 2015 Share Posted March 18, 2015 Correct me if I'm wrong, but wasn't the "no tackles from behind even if you get the ball first" rule implemented to prevent situations where a defender touched the ball first and then absolutely demolished the attacker as the defender followed through with his undercutting slide tackle? Because that clearly did not happen here. To me, these videos show: 1. It is unclear if Morrow was coming "from behind". 2. It is unclear if ball contact and player contact happened at distinct separate times. With that being the case, does the referee decide that he will make a game altering decision (red card), call the foul but play it safe (yellow card), or wave play on? Ganter chose the first, which then means the game hinges on a controversial referee decision. That being said, it was a risky tackle. Morrow put his fate in the hands of a referee that has a history with TFC. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gian-Luca Posted March 18, 2015 Author Share Posted March 18, 2015 Just the argument we are having here proves it's not that easy for refs, if we can argue like this about a call then you can't say the ref was crap. He made a decision on the spot and, for me, erred. But that is not the kind of call on which MLS reffing has to be judged. Just to clarify, the reason why I started this thread with this particular incident was moreso for the shenanigans which happened after the play (ie. the stuff that Kristian Jack wrote about in the paragraph that I quoted in the first post), rather than the call itself, even though I think it is incorrect. The inspiration was the Ref taking over a minute to figure out if a Red should be given for a foul he apparently saw clearly, and then either forgetting who it was that made the challenge or visually mistaking a 6 foot 4 blonde white man with a 5 foot 9 bald black man with a beard. That doesn't exactly inspire confidence that he is on the ball & making accurate decisions. TFC have appealed the red card, incidentally but haven't heard back yet from the league on whether it will be rescinded. Even though I think it was the wrong call, I don't expect the league will overturn the decision though, I'm guessing they will always err on the side of the Officials in order to support them unless it is completely clear cut the wrong decision. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gian-Luca Posted March 19, 2015 Author Share Posted March 19, 2015 Correct me if I'm wrong, but wasn't the "no tackles from behind even if you get the ball first" rule implemented to prevent situations where a defender touched the ball first and then absolutely demolished the attacker as the defender followed through with his undercutting slide tackle? Because that clearly did not happen here. I think that basically was the idea, yes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Unnamed Trialist Posted March 19, 2015 Share Posted March 19, 2015 Yes, Morrow was ahead of him, so he had position, but I think he chose to make a good decision: go for the tackle before he got into the box. That was mature defending. Is Finley a right or left-footed player? If he is right I think Morrow could have waited as he would not have had the shot; if is left he definitely did the right thing going for the tackle. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shamrock Posted March 22, 2015 Share Posted March 22, 2015 I stand by my point that ref's are good and bad sometimes and you shouldn't get yourself too involved with them as a team. But just for arguments sake, the guy that did Montreal sucked. Yes most of his yellows for Impact were correct, but when a NER player would commit the same foul, he wouldn't draw a card. Home-whistler. Camara was stupid to grap that shirt (and hold on to it for so long) and he also deserved that first yellow (although it was harsh). BUT, Kelyn Rowe clearly kicked Camara after the foul was committed, which is a straight red IMO. It can happen that you miss something, but the linesman was right there and the ref even went to him to get informed. So 2 men within reasonable distance completely missed that unsportsmanlike conduct. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aloyol Posted March 22, 2015 Share Posted March 22, 2015 Professional Referee Organization think the call on Morrow was correct: http://www.proreferees.com/news-play-of-the-week-2015-week-2.php Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nolando Posted March 27, 2015 Share Posted March 27, 2015 Caps had not one but two players suspended after review by the league. Manneh got a deserved game for his thoughtless two footer and Rodriguez got two games for grabbing below the belt. Can't really argue with either. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tmcmurph Posted March 27, 2015 Share Posted March 27, 2015 Caps had not one but two players suspended after review by the league. Manneh got a deserved game for his thoughtless two footer and Rodriguez got two games for grabbing below the belt. Can't really argue with either. Manneh was lucky there was no contact or it would have been much worse. 2 games for an accidental crotch grab? That's a bit much. One would have been fine. 2 puts him on par with the blatant intent to injure stuff. He was watching the ball in the corner and doing what all defenders do on corner kicks (grab) but got a grip too low. Kind of funny actually unless you're the player getting "squeezed". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Keegan Posted March 27, 2015 Share Posted March 27, 2015 Manneh was lucky there was no contact or it would have been much worse. 2 games for an accidental crotch grab? That's a bit much. One would have been fine. 2 puts him on par with the blatant intent to injure stuff. He was watching the ball in the corner and doing what all defenders do on corner kicks (grab) but got a grip too low. Kind of funny actually unless you're the player getting "squeezed". An accidental crotch grab? Hahaha that was clearly an intentional wind up to get Collins sent off. What else would he be grabbing for? As a defender you don't reach that low and "grab". Much more convenient/subtle to get the back of a shirt if anything. Of course he was looking at the ball/corner, it's what you do when you're giving a cheap shot. Two games is actually a decent punishment.. one would set a precedent too low but I wouldn't have been surprised to see 3. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shamrock Posted March 28, 2015 Share Posted March 28, 2015 Manneh was lucky there was no contact or it would have been much worse. 2 games for an accidental crotch grab? That's a bit much. One would have been fine. 2 puts him on par with the blatant intent to injure stuff. He was watching the ball in the corner and doing what all defenders do on corner kicks (grab) but got a grip too low. Kind of funny actually unless you're the player getting "squeezed". It was deserved allright but I have to say it wasn't with dirty intend though. More over-enthusiastic than anything else. Not to say you can't seriously injure someone with this action. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gian-Luca Posted March 30, 2015 Author Share Posted March 30, 2015 TFC can only blame themselves for giving up a game winning goal by switching off mentally (a sign of inexperience and a makeshift backline with all four starters out) but yet another goal called back on a phantom foul makes this year's list. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
afun Posted March 30, 2015 Share Posted March 30, 2015 Don't forget the brutal off-side call (was probably on-side by a good 3 ft). But no one remembers it because Creavalle bungled his first touch anyway - otherwise he would've have been in alone. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.