Page 13 of 13 FirstFirst ... 3910111213
Results 361 to 389 of 389
  1. #361
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Posts
    267
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Red4ever View Post
    This.
    Bez just said on air that his understanding is the ref apologized. Don't think he goes public with that unless it came right from both Bradley and Vazquez.

  2. #362
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Gone
    Posts
    3,102
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by UpTheReds View Post
    Bez just said on air that his understanding is the ref apologized. Don't think he goes public with that unless it came right from both Bradley and Vazquez.

    Cheers.

    My thought: was there something lost in translation? I don't deny the source but it seemed odd.

    May have been like, "Sorry, too bad" or "sorry, I should have made it clear you can't do that" . Anyway now I'm speculating haha. Just seems odd that the ref would own up to anything after that unmitigated dumpster fire of a performance.

  3. #363
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    8,091
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    A referee that apologizes to the players during the game for a call, no matter how bad, shouldn't be reffing. Lol.

  4. #364
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Posts
    267
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Bez indicates it was after the game. Vazquez Asked the ref if he was enforcing the 10 yards, he said no and the ref blew the whistle. Early free kick, goal should have stood it appears, hence the reason for the apology I believe.
    Last edited by UpTheReds; 11-06-2017 at 01:02 PM.

  5. #365
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Mar 2015
    Posts
    8
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    I know there is a lot of debate around what calls were correct. I think Globetrotter made a good point saying maybe they reduce it down to a second yellow which Jozy would still miss the next game.

    I thought defensively we were very strong. I know Moore has been taking some slack in these forums but he had an exceptional match.

    What was the reason for Mavinga to be subbed off? Was he hurt? or was this a tactical switch?

  6. #366
    Registered User
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Posts
    358
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Globetrotter View Post
    Because it's not clearly onside. Call was offside.

    The VAR is someone in an office or a truck setup outside the stadium on what is a 3-8 second delay from real time.
    VAR is there to overturn OVERWHELMINGLY obvious calls.
    As soon as the ball is put in play, you cant review.


    Think about this... it's easy. Ball ends up in the net, called offside. Team puts the ball back in play. Assume all that takes 15 seconds from time ball gets in the net, to the time the ball leaves the keepers foot to re-enter the game.

    In those 15 seconds, upwards of 8 seconds is gone simply due to tape delay. That leaves 7 seconds left in our scenario. In those 7 seconds, the VAR has to decide 1) is this on overwhelmingly obvious error, watch the replays several times to prove his own theory, then relay back to the field to conduct a video review. Could you do all that in 7 seconds?

    It's a problem with how the VAR system is currently structured. If there's a goal - legit or otherwise - they would have to implement some type of mandatory grace period so VAR could accurately assess... which by nature conflicts with VAR's goals of not wanting to disrupt the flow of the game. Regardless... that procedure is not currently available.
    http://www.tsn.ca/altidore-kjelsten-...unnel-1.906338
    Watch the highlights he is clearly on side. Blown call by linesman. 5th official should have let ref know to review.

  7. #367
    Registered User
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Section 110 Row 24
    Posts
    7,291
    Mentioned
    5 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by viewsfromthe6 View Post

    What was the reason for Mavinga to be subbed off? Was he hurt? or was this a tactical switch?
    I thought it was tactical.

    Mavinga kept moving further and further up the pitch as the game went on - clearly being more attack focused - which is what we needed in general, Hence why Hasler was brought on for Beita

    However - you can't attack at the sacrifice of your defence - hence why you bring in Hagglund, keeps the defence a bit more safe. and Hagglund is decent at making his runs when it's appropriate - as oppose to Mavinga who was trying to be more of an offensive starter

  8. #368
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    1,800
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    On the broadcast on TSN it was mentioned that Mavinga looked injury and wasn't moving well and waiting to be subbed off so idk.

  9. #369
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    2,036
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Globetrotter View Post
    Because it's not clearly onside. Call was offside.
    The VAR is someone in an office or a truck setup outside the stadium on what is a 3-8 second delay from real time.
    VAR is there to overturn OVERWHELMINGLY obvious calls.
    As soon as the ball is put in play, you cant review.
    Quote Originally Posted by Prof View Post
    http://www.tsn.ca/altidore-kjelsten-...unnel-1.906338
    Watch the highlights he is clearly on side. Blown call by linesman. 5th official should have let ref know to review.
    https://imgur.com/GMoVNuP



    I dont know how to upload pics nicely, but I prepared the link above.

    image 1) no way you know he's conclusively offside/onside, or that it's unbelievably a bad call.
    image 2) Player appears onside. TSN uploaded the video at about 10pm last night with all their special graphics. The call was not horrendous enough when done live (Osorio was not 15 yards offside). The challenge becomes the VAR limitations. VAR doesn't have a TSN yellow bar drawing a line helping the eye determine a straight line when looking on angle, let alone having to see that and correct the error conclusively within 5-10 seconds after initially seeing it. There's just no way.

    In football, anything controversial, the offense will rush to the line of scrimmage to run the next play, even if that means spiking the ball and wasting a down.
    In hockey, everything is slow and guided by the refs - so there's no rush to make a decision.
    Baseball, you get to watch the replay, go out for tea, then come back and let the umps know if you want to challenge.

    Because of the lightning pace involved in the review process - managers need a red flag (coaches challenge) to more or less stop the play, and force the refs to look at the review. Without it, Robles collects the ball, hoofs it 50 yards out of play immediately, and VAR cant do anything about it.

    Our error in Atlanta was 2 fold. Moor should have run over to Bono and immediately say "I felt something hit my arm... maybe it was the ball", and Bono kick it right away to start the play - eliminating a VAR review. The other error is taking the time to get the ball from the ball kid, then lollygagging waiving your players to run up field before kicking the ball out to them (or purposely kicking out of bounds). It should have been bang-bang... close call, get the next play going no matter what.

  10. #370
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    8,091
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Mavinga has clearly been playing injured. The time off will be good for him.

  11. #371
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    3,477
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Canary10 View Post
    Mavinga has clearly been playing injured. The time off will be good for him.
    and yet he performs at that level. hes is so good

  12. #372
    RPB Member
    Moderator

    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Centre of My Bloody Universe.
    Posts
    19,075
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    So how many RB fans would welcome Jozy back today?
    FORMER FULL TIME KOOL-AID DRINKER

  13. #373
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    138
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Globetrotter View Post
    https://imgur.com/GMoVNuP



    I dont know how to upload pics nicely, but I prepared the link above.

    image 1) no way you know he's conclusively offside/onside, or that it's unbelievably a bad call.
    image 2) Player appears onside. TSN uploaded the video at about 10pm last night with all their special graphics. The call was not horrendous enough when done live (Osorio was not 15 yards offside). The challenge becomes the VAR limitations. VAR doesn't have a TSN yellow bar drawing a line helping the eye determine a straight line when looking on angle, let alone having to see that and correct the error conclusively within 5-10 seconds after initially seeing it. There's just no way.

    In football, anything controversial, the offense will rush to the line of scrimmage to run the next play, even if that means spiking the ball and wasting a down.
    In hockey, everything is slow and guided by the refs - so there's no rush to make a decision.
    Baseball, you get to watch the replay, go out for tea, then come back and let the umps know if you want to challenge.

    Because of the lightning pace involved in the review process - managers need a red flag (coaches challenge) to more or less stop the play, and force the refs to look at the review. Without it, Robles collects the ball, hoofs it 50 yards out of play immediately, and VAR cant do anything about it.

    Our error in Atlanta was 2 fold. Moor should have run over to Bono and immediately say "I felt something hit my arm... maybe it was the ball", and Bono kick it right away to start the play - eliminating a VAR review. The other error is taking the time to get the ball from the ball kid, then lollygagging waiving your players to run up field before kicking the ball out to them (or purposely kicking out of bounds). It should have been bang-bang... close call, get the next play going no matter what.
    Sorry but your arguments do not stand.
    First of all, the error was clear and since all goals are being reviewed by VAR, the referee was most likely notified that the play needs to be reviewed.
    Then the referee had ample time to go back and review after the goal was scored. There is no "lightning pace " here. He just chose not to.

    See below the FAQ's

    https://www.mlssoccer.com/video-review/faq

  14. #374
    RPB Member
    Moderator

    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Sec-115
    Posts
    9,922
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by marquis View Post
    Sorry but your arguments do not stand.
    First of all, the error was clear and since all goals are being reviewed by VAR, the referee was most likely notified that the play needs to be reviewed.
    Then the referee had ample time to go back and review after the goal was scored. There is no "lightning pace " here. He just chose not to.

    See below the FAQ's

    https://www.mlssoccer.com/video-review/faq

    This 100% correct.

    If goal is scored within 5 seconds from time whistle was blown it is reviewed by VAR,that was clearly case and ref still decided not to review.
    Great love does not exist without joy and without great suffering ,that's why One club is worth only as much as its fans !


  15. #375
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    2,036
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by marquis View Post
    Sorry but your arguments do not stand.
    First of all, the error was clear and since all goals are being reviewed by VAR, the referee was most likely notified that the play needs to be reviewed.
    Then the referee had ample time to go back and review after the goal was scored. There is no "lightning pace " here. He just chose not to.

    See below the FAQ's

    https://www.mlssoccer.com/video-review/faq
    Thanks - but I'm not making arguments for or against.

    There's a delay between live action and anyone watching via a feed (VAR). If you're watching at home... consider yourself the VAR, and you're already behind. Now you have to review the play. How long does that take you? You rewind, pause, review, repeat, then channel that back to the field. During this 5-15 second period, do you think the keeper could pull the ball out of the net and put it in play before anyone could request a review? Of course.

    This system is only a few months old and we're seeing one area that will be looked into for further improvement.

    Same thing in the CLB vs ATL game. Why wasn't VAR used when CLB should have been credited with a goal? Because according to the rules, they couldn't. Guzan was smart enough to get the ball back in play so that VAR was taken out of the equation. Lightning pace. Beat the system.

  16. #376
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    2,036
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Further:

    Upon a recommendation to the referee by the VAR for a Video Review of a potential clear error, it's the head referee's decision whether to perform a Video Review


    The head referee can go back to review any incident that happens between stoppages in play. However, if play is restarted after a stoppage (ex. on a throw-in, corner kick, goal kick, free kick or drop ball) then a referee CANNOT go back to review any instances prior to that restart (except for a serious missed incident involving violent conduct or serious foul play). For that reason, the head referee may delay a restart until a VAR check of a reviewable play is complete.
    Those are the rules.

    Ref and linesman ruled offside. They have no immediate reason to question their own decision at the time (they make decisions every second of the game). In the next few seconds, they have to convince themselves to consider whether they had made a significant mistake. Most human beings will still believe in what they just saw with their own eyes. VAR still haven't even seen their first glimpse of this as they're time-delayed. Ref hasn't heard anything back from VAR, and seconds tick by. Eventually a team puts the ball back in play - and life moves on, no chance for review.

  17. #377
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Jan 2015
    Posts
    489
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Globetrotter View Post
    Thanks - but I'm not making arguments for or against.

    There's a delay between live action and anyone watching via a feed (VAR). If you're watching at home... consider yourself the VAR, and you're already behind. Now you have to review the play. How long does that take you? You rewind, pause, review, repeat, then channel that back to the field. During this 5-15 second period, do you think the keeper could pull the ball out of the net and put it in play before anyone could request a review? Of course.

    This system is only a few months old and we're seeing one area that will be looked into for further improvement.

    Same thing in the CLB vs ATL game. Why wasn't VAR used when CLB should have been credited with a goal? Because according to the rules, they couldn't. Guzan was smart enough to get the ball back in play so that VAR was taken out of the equation. Lightning pace. Beat the system.
    Actually in that instance, the ref blew the whistle before the ball went in so VAR can not be applied. Once the ref blows the play dead before the ball is in the net when there is a potential dispute about offside it becomes irrelevant. As the play is considered to be stopped and it no longer becomes a reviewable items.

    IMO when offsides are close, I think the ref / linesman should let the play go and then review it. This way the offense team will not be penalized for an incorrect decision.

  18. #378
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Section 105
    Posts
    368
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Well. That was an utter cluster fudge of a game. As much as I wish the lads had kept their composure it was ridiculous how much NYRB and the ref antagonized them. Jozy diving on the shove was shit but he was kicked, fouled otherwise and jawed at through the whole first half with no support from the ref so I can understand the antics no matter how disappointed I am in them. F#@K the NYRB CHUDs and that ref.

    Similar story with GIO. Such a stupid yellow but man, how many times must the man be blatantly fouled without a call before he goes ballistic. TWO CLEAR PENALTIES missed and multiple ankle jambings. That said some of the tackles on him were actually fantastic. The timing was impeccable. But most of them were clear fouls.
    The Jozy red should be rescinded but probably won’t be. The man was attacked from behind by the pedo-stached CHUD. SK is so lucky it was in an environment with police/officials as otherwise he’d have been absolutely crushed by Jozy. What a stupid douche baggy thing to do.

    That said I’m glad we are still alive and managed to hold on against that crap disruptive/negative anti-football strategy.

    I really hope we find our midsummer form magically again but I fear our chances now. Not because we are missing Jozy/Seba (we played some amazing games without them) but because the whole team seems disjointed. We will need the Victor/Michael partnership clicking to take out a very motivated Cbus.

    COME ON YOU REDS!!!
    Last edited by Section_105; 11-06-2017 at 03:09 PM. Reason: paragraphs make it easier to read if anyone wastes their time on my post :)

  19. #379
    Registered
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    4,555
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Globetrotter View Post
    Thanks - but I'm not making arguments for or against.

    There's a delay between live action and anyone watching via a feed (VAR). If you're watching at home... consider yourself the VAR, and you're already behind. Now you have to review the play. How long does that take you? You rewind, pause, review, repeat, then channel that back to the field. During this 5-15 second period, do you think the keeper could pull the ball out of the net and put it in play before anyone could request a review? Of course.
    Not sure where you are getting this from. Might be true, but I would be shocked if the VAR is watching the same feed the home viewers are watching. Otherwise, VA would never be implemented. There was ample time for the VAR to request a review on that play.

    Additionally, it is not the job of the VAR to overturn the call. Just alert the ref to the fact that there may be an error. The ref then reviews the play to make the final call. Personally, given the importance of the moment and the closeness of the call, I don't understand why VA wasn't used. The outcome may have been the same (too close to overturn the call on the field), but isn't the point of VA to make sure the best call is made?

  20. #380
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Jun 2016
    Posts
    295
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Apparently TFC has security footage of the tunnel incident. What are the odds we'll ever see it?

    https://www.thestar.com/sports/tfc/2...heir-case.html

  21. #381
    Registered
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    4,555
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by TheGoodson View Post
    Actually in that instance, the ref blew the whistle before the ball went in so VAR can not be applied.
    This would be the only explanation that would make sense. However, I just watched the replay twice and it does not seem to me that the whistle went until after the ball was in the net...

  22. #382
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Jan 2015
    Posts
    489
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by JonO View Post
    This would be the only explanation that would make sense. However, I just watched the replay twice and it does not seem to me that the whistle went until after the ball was in the net...
    I was referencing a play from Atl vs Columbus where Columbus scored player was 2 yards onside and they called the play for offside before the ball went on the net.

    Yesterday's goal some one said that they might have called a foul on Oso..

  23. #383
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    3,477
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by JonO View Post
    Not sure where you are getting this from. Might be true, but I would be shocked if the VAR is watching the same feed the home viewers are watching. Otherwise, VA would never be implemented. There was ample time for the VAR to request a review on that play.

    Additionally, it is not the job of the VAR to overturn the call. Just alert the ref to the fact that there may be an error. The ref then reviews the play to make the final call. Personally, given the importance of the moment and the closeness of the call, I don't understand why VA wasn't used. The outcome may have been the same (too close to overturn the call on the field), but isn't the point of VA to make sure the best call is made?
    too close to overturn would mean too close to call in the first place .......... hmmmm

  24. #384
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    3,477
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by samuraizero View Post
    Apparently TFC has security footage of the tunnel incident. What are the odds we'll ever see it?

    https://www.thestar.com/sports/tfc/2...heir-case.html

    Toronto president Bill Manning said there were five security guards and three police officers around the tunnel area. But they were outnumbered by Red Bulls players and staff who confronted Toronto players up the tunnel past where the visitors should have exited to get to their dressing room.

    at point, there needs to be charges for assault on a police officer

  25. #385
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    55
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Globetrotter View Post
    Thanks - but I'm not making arguments for or against.

    There's a delay between live action and anyone watching via a feed (VAR). If you're watching at home... consider yourself the VAR, and you're already behind. Now you have to review the play. How long does that take you? You rewind, pause, review, repeat, then channel that back to the field. During this 5-15 second period, do you think the keeper could pull the ball out of the net and put it in play before anyone could request a review? Of course.

    This system is only a few months old and we're seeing one area that will be looked into for further improvement.

    Same thing in the CLB vs ATL game. Why wasn't VAR used when CLB should have been credited with a goal? Because according to the rules, they couldn't. Guzan was smart enough to get the ball back in play so that VAR was taken out of the equation. Lightning pace. Beat the system.
    Ah ok, so the ball must've stayed in play for those 2 minutes in Atlanta... Bono picked it up and played it to another defender, but the whistle never blew, and the ball didnt go out at the time.

  26. #386
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    3,477
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by samuraizero View Post
    Apparently TFC has security footage of the tunnel incident. What are the odds we'll ever see it?

    https://www.thestar.com/sports/tfc/2...heir-case.html

    Toronto president Bill Manning said there were five security guards and three police officers around the tunnel area. But they were outnumbered by Red Bulls players and staff who confronted Toronto players up the tunnel past where the visitors should have exited to get to their dressing room.

    at point, there needs to be charges for assault on a police officer

  27. #387
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Gone
    Posts
    3,102
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by C.Ronaldo View Post
    Toronto president Bill Manning said there were five security guards and three police officers around the tunnel area. But they were outnumbered by Red Bulls players and staff who confronted Toronto players up the tunnel past where the visitors should have exited to get to their dressing room.

    at point, there needs to be charges for assault on a police officer
    Not totally ridiculous. One clearly gets bumped.

    Gotta love the people who want Vazquez suspended for not bumping a ref, while have no problem with NYRB scum actually shoving cops.
    Last edited by Red4ever; 11-06-2017 at 03:50 PM.

  28. #388
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Posts
    2,845
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by UpTheReds View Post
    Bez indicates it was after the game. Vazquez Asked the ref if he was enforcing the 10 yards, he said no and the ref blew the whistle. Early free kick, goal should have stood it appears, hence the reason for the apology I believe.
    The ref was a travesty with the yards. If the player doesn't ask, then they can take it quick. If they ask, the ref is supposed to count them. Happened a couple times late in the game, where TFC asked for yards and the ref refused to count them and told them to take the kick. I get that its a time wasting technique, but the REd Bulls players were not 10 yards away, so TFC was well in their right to ask for the yards they are entitled to, but the ref refused

  29. #389
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    2,036
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by tfcfan2011 View Post
    Ah ok, so the ball must've stayed in play for those 2 minutes in Atlanta... Bono picked it up and played it to another defender, but the whistle never blew, and the ball didnt go out at the time.
    Yes, if the ball is still live and you're the team at fault... damned if you do, damned if you don't.

    If you continue play, at first stop in play there could be a review. So if natural play goes on for another 20 seconds to 5 minutes, that's much more time for VAR to make a suggested call for review.

    If you put the ball right out of play, but end up not having committed any errors in the first place, then you've handed the ball over needlessly.

    If you do put the ball out of play, the team that would be screaming for a review could simply take their time before doing a throw in/restarting game play. They would of course buy as much time as possible for a review.

    Strategy comes into play when a possible error occurs (goal, foul, etc) and the play is whistled dead at the time. If you feel you're in danger - you want to restart ASAP.

 

 

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •