I missed this, what time in the match did it occur (approximately)? I'll go back to my PVR and see if I can grab the clip.
I missed this, what time in the match did it occur (approximately)? I'll go back to my PVR and see if I can grab the clip.
Atlanta's 2nd goal was at 72:09 so that would put it a couple of minutes beforehand. It wasn't on the highlight reel either.Originally Posted by paul-collins
Road Games:
2013 - Montréal , 2014 - Orlando (Disney Classic), Montréal
2015 - Columbus, New England, Montréal
2016 - NYCFC (Leg 2 Conference Semis), Montréal (Leg 1 Conference Final)
2017 - Ottawa (Leg 1 Canadian Championship Semi), DCU, Red Bulls (Leg 1 Conference Final), Columbus (Leg 2 Conference Final)
2019 - Montréal, NYCFC (Eastern Conference Semi @ Citi Field), Seattle (MLS Cup Final)
Did Vazquez go off injured or was it precautionary?
im shocked by the hate for Jozy by some USMNT
he had an off game in the qualifier, but its not his fault they are out.
He's reading all this hate on twitter, im hoping he uses that as fuel
Its during the 63'. so start around 62:30 I think and watch from there. Mavinga plays the long ball to Altidore and Larentowicz jumps on his back and rides him into the box. Giovinco and Bradley are incredulous.
Yea I remember that, surprised that VAR wasn't used the same way Moor's handball was called earlier.
How that is not a penalty and straight red is beyond me
League intervention, advantage to Atlanta, VAR had gone for a beer, so no one was at the controls. The referee had already used his allocation of 1 VAR per match.
That play shows how ridiculous Video replay is. They replay for the tiniest of touches by Moor’s hand, which no one noticed or cared about, and then no foul on this rugby tackle. The use of VAR means that the first call was to a standard of perfection beyond the normal vision of referees, yet the second no call, a far more obvious foul to everyone, is missed. The game would have been officiated more fairly without VAR: no penalty, and no foul here. If you are going to have VAR that finds tiny little fouls or hand balls, it is unfair to the teams not to get these calls right as well.
Maybe they thought it was a Falcons game
Blame the ref running the VAR, whoever that was. The play got reviewed by the VAR ref, he deemed it was not 100% certain a mistake was made, and let the centre ref know to play on. At least that's way it's suppose to happen.
“Years have gone by and I’ve finally learned to accept myself for who I am: a beggar for good football.
I go about the world, hand outstretched, and in the stadiums I plead: ‘A pretty move, for the love of God.’
And when good football happens, I give thanks for the miracle and I don’t give a damn which team or country performs it.”
-Eduardo Galeano
I think we actually saw a couple of unique aspects of VAR that show it won't always make things seem more fair or reliable.
One issue: VAR is only supposed to overturn a call when there was a "clear and obvious error." An out-of-position hand touching the ball is pretty clear and obvious. However in this case you also see a certain dubious accuracy due to VAR, when a minor event that would likely never be caught by the naked eye, seriously affects the game. (Similar case recently in the NFL, when a TD against the Patriots was denied because the ball was momentarily out of the hands/out of control of the opponent as he crossed the line for the touchdown, with the player then immediately going out-of-bounds while also regaining control of the ball. "Accurate" but bizarre.)
Fouls can often be less of a "clear and obvious error." Personally I think the foul on Jozy was pretty obvious, although a bit hard to see in the short grainy highlight above. But the VAR might see that differently. Was Jozy doing anything with his hands that might make it look like they were both grappling, for example?
Avoiding VAR, PK and possible DOGSO against a 72k home crowd might also play a factor...
A bigger issue here IMO: I believe the ref usually reviews plays with VAR during a natural break in the game, back to the beginning of the current attacking phase of play. I.e. the review period does not extend beyond a turnover. I believe after Drew's nit-picky hand ball, TFC maintained possession until the ball went out at the other end. That's when the head ref reviewed the play. Because that was quite a bit later, it was a very delayed VAR decision and felt very strange. (Or imagine if TFC had scored a goal then, but the goal was rescinded & Atlanta awarded a PK. Similar things have happened this year in MLS!)
I believe after the likely foul on Jozy, Atlanta did not keep possession of the ball for long. They turned it over to TFC again, and there was no natural break in play.
Although VAR often works well, we can get bizarre situations that don't feel fair at all. Perhaps we'll see gamesmanship by footy teams, and teams even reviewing video in real-time to game the system? What if TFC had quickly got an inkling that Drew might have committed a hand ball. What if they gave the ball back to Atlanta soon after, w/o the ball going out of play? I bet with Atlanta back in the advantage, and the ball still in play, Drew's handball would never have been reviewed.
Last edited by Auzzy; 10-25-2017 at 12:14 PM.
Since VAR started, if there is any question after a goal, teams are waiting to restart & bugging the ref - you can actually see the conversations going on. Its happening on about 50% of goals.
Same is happening on other restarts - TFC did that at least once on Sunday.
Its making for unnatural calls.
The issue with Moor ( according their logic) is that his hand was in an unnatural position. BUT if you actually follow the play real time, you realize that both players had their hands up because they were ready to jump to battle for the ball up high. It something that happens on a lot of corners, it is not like he had his hands extended out, which would impeded the progress of the ball.
They also called that back so long after it was over, we had taken the ball all the way to their final third, and then it was looked again. It was all kind of unussual. The one with Jozy seemed to be so much more clear cut as something that you would look at in detail.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote