Match Day 6 - Chicago Fire @ TFC Saturday April 28 3pm - Coming Back Home

[Fort York Redcoat]

Alan Gordon moved past Seba all-time with that goal.

[MightyDM]

I support the idea of VAR.

The implementation last year was good.

VAR says something needs to be looked at
Ref goes look.
Ref makes the decision.

This year, for some reason, they have given the OK for the VAR to tell the ref that there was a clear and obvious error and you don't need to look at the screen.

i.e. VAR's are making decisions in some cases and in others its the ref.

That's not what we were told was going to happen and its leading to complete inconsistency in application.

Og, I generally find that i agree with you, but not on this. VAR pretends a level of precision that never will apply to soccer. We have seen how screwed up it is at the moment . That is exhibit A

exhibit B: why dont they review every play? For example, just before the Chicago striker fouled Morgan in the box (earning a VAR penalty in the process) , Schweinstager made a two footed challenge studs up on Bradley just outside the box. Clearly important and possibly game changing.. What are the substantive reasons why it has been determined that an illegal challenge just just outside the box should not be reviewed, but a potential one three feet closer to the goal should be reviewed?

If you pursue these questions, it becomes very difficult to justify using it at all,\\.

[Auzzy]

Og, I generally find that i agree with you, but not on this. VAR pretends a level of precision that never will apply to soccer. We have seen how screwed up it is at the moment . That is exhibit A

exhibit B: why dont they review every play? For example, just before the Chicago striker fouled Morgan in the box (earning a VAR penalty in the process) , Schweinstager made a two footed challenge studs up on Bradley just outside the box. Clearly important and possibly game changing.. What are the substantive reasons why it has been determined that an illegal challenge just just outside the box should not be reviewed, but a potential one three feet closer to the goal should be reviewed?

If you pursue these questions, it becomes very difficult to justify using it at all,\\.

A red card decision can actually be reviewed by VAR. I haven't seen the Schweinsteiger challenge in a replay so I don't know how blatant it was. But there also needs to be a break in play for the review.

We're hardly talking about the PK awarded to Chicago based on VAR, because Bono saved it. However what would have happened if Toronto hadn't kicked the ball out, and had maintained possession longer? How far back would they have reviewed that and changed the call?

And in googling about the above, I found this, with quotes from Webb (who was/is in charge of VAR for MLS): https://www.whitecapsfc.com/post/201...s-how-it-works

If the VAR alerts the referee to a clear and obvious error or serious missed incident in one of the four categories, then the referee will either accept the VAR’s recommendation and change the call or he will review the play himself on a sideline monitor at the first natural stoppage or when the ball is in a neutral zone.
...

“We feel the centre referee in most cases should be the one who makes the final decision,” Webb said. ... “I think there’s credibility in the referee taking a look again at the play and making the final judgment on what has or hasn’t happened.”


“If it’s really clearly factual, for example if the ball was two yards out of play before coming back in and there’s a goal scored straight after or if a player was three yards offside, then we don’t advocate the referee on the field going to the pitchside monitor. We feel that would just add time that’s not necessary. But if there’s any element of interpretation needed, and that happens a lot in soccer, then we want the referee to go there and make the final determination.”


Once a review takes place, the final outcome – and decisive camera angle – will be shown on the videoboard in stadium and on the broadcast.

So in reference to Og's points:
- I would say all the VAR decisions on Saturday, going in either direction, were very close. However I believe the ref only went to the monitor once. That contradicts what Webb said above.

- In most of those VAR cases on Saturday, no decisive angles were shown in the broadcast, as far as I can tell in checking the highlights online. (I don't know about ever showing them in the stadium, as is mentioned in the article. Was that ever done, even when VAR was first implemented? I thought they never show controversial plays in the stadium.)

[Blkndkr]

Went looking for the RPB tailgate on Saturday to sign up (gotta get those member benefits!) but had no luck finding anyone. In fairness, I didn't get to BMO until closer to 2pm. Was the weather a factor?

)

Shameless plug...

Game Day!

We’re Back!!!!

RPB Tailgate



Saturday April 28th @ 11:30am (Toronto FC v Chicago Fire 3:00pm Kick-Off)


You heard it right. Tailgates are back with some sweet eats to match the sweet taste of success as reigning MLS Champs!! Everyone is welcome to attend.

** Food available until 1:30pm **


Planned Menu
Supporters Shield Pulled Chicken Sandwiches
MLS Cup Champion Tacos
Glenn M’s Ribs!!
Burgers & Hot dogs (vegetarian available)
Salads
Water & Pop
Snacks


We will be set up in our usual location in the parking lot on the east side of BMO field. (Nunavut Rd.) We hope to see you there!


RPB Tailgate Team

[ag futbol]

Og, I generally find that i agree with you, but not on this. VAR pretends a level of precision that never will apply to soccer. We have seen how screwed up it is at the moment . That is exhibit A

exhibit B: why dont they review every play? For example, just before the Chicago striker fouled Morgan in the box (earning a VAR penalty in the process) , Schweinstager made a two footed challenge studs up on Bradley just outside the box. Clearly important and possibly game changing.. What are the substantive reasons why it has been determined that an illegal challenge just just outside the box should not be reviewed, but a potential one three feet closer to the goal should be reviewed?

If you pursue these questions, it becomes very difficult to justify using it at all,\\.

I support it to the extent it can be used to get rid of all the handbags / fakery stuff ... but generally agree with the above.

There seemed to be some thought that using video reply negates having a poorly funded and trained group of officials ... it does not.

MLS needs to get past the fact officiating needs to be invested in, heavily.

[MightyDM]

A red card decision can actually be reviewed by VAR. I haven't seen the Schweinsteiger challenge in a replay so I don't know how blatant it was. But there also needs to be a break in play for the review.

We're hardly talking about the PK awarded to Chicago based on VAR, because Bono saved it. However what would have happened if Toronto hadn't kicked the ball out, and had maintained possession longer? How far back would they have reviewed that and changed the call?

And in googling about the above, I found this, with quotes from Webb (who was/is in charge of VAR for MLS): https://www.whitecapsfc.com/post/201...s-how-it-works



So in reference to Og's points:
- I would say all the VAR decisions on Saturday, going in either direction, were very close. However I believe the ref only went to the monitor once. That contradicts what Webb said above.

- In most of those VAR cases on Saturday, no decisive angles were shown in the broadcast, as far as I can tell in checking the highlights online. (I don't know about ever showing them in the stadium, as is mentioned in the article. Was that ever done, even when VAR was first implemented? I thought they never show controversial plays in the stadium.)

This is really interesting stuff.

The schweinstager challenge wasn't a red card offence, I don't think, but it sure looked studs up so could easily have been a foul or a yellow. I am just citing it because it was immediately before the Morgan incident and therefore the lack of call led to a potential goal scoring chance (and the penalty) but wouldn't be reviewed under the current rules. Why not? Because they are keeping circumstances narrow as they know that VAR by its nature interrupts the flow of games and is therefore to be limited to only where it is absolutely necessary. That's why all of these incidents drove me crazy: it wasn't absolutely necessary because none were clear cut. That's why it took a total of ten minutes for the reviews.

Finally, the Morgan penalty for me wasn't - it was arguably a foul on the Chicago guy who put his foot in to prevent Morgan from clearing the ball - Morgan was in mid strike before the Chicago player moved. Last year in a quite similar play a foul was called against Jozy. So at a minimum it isn't clear cut.

[C.Ronaldo]

if i wanted all this VAR tech, I'd go watch an ea sports tourny.

Keep it simple and just improve, Its not menat o be perfect. add another ref on a screen calling in missed calls to even it out on another play if you must but I have enough tech in my life

similar reasons I dont use McDs kiosks unless i really have to

[paul-collins]

MLS needs to get past the fact officiating needs to be invested in, heavily.

This.

[jazzy]

Went looking for the RPB tailgate on Saturday to sign up (gotta get those member benefits!) but had no luck finding anyone. In fairness, I didn't get to BMO until closer to 2pm. Was the weather a factor?

)

It was scheduled 11:30 to 1:30 , but weather wasn’t great AND city grounds security told them to take down their tent . They had a lot of food left over , and the people involved really went out of their way . It usually sets up much earlier before the game .

[Auzzy]

It was scheduled 11:30 to 1:30 , but weather wasn’t great AND city grounds security told them to take down their tent . They had a lot of food left over , and the people involved really went out of their way . It usually sets up much earlier before the game .

Holy crap that sucks, they had to take down the tent?! Maybe Manning or somebody can put in a word for us next time... I was hoping to go to the tailgate & wouldn't have minded the rain, but my whole weekend was insanely busy so I only made it to the game.

[Carter]

Went looking for the RPB tailgate on Saturday to sign up (gotta get those member benefits!) but had no luck finding anyone. In fairness, I didn't get to BMO until closer to 2pm. Was the weather a factor?

)

we were there until about 2pm, then we dispersed and went into the stadium, we will be having other tailgates, you can always sign up on the board or at Joes pregame/away games when there isn’t a tailgate.

CoachGT is the Membership team leader, if you wanted to reach out to him if you want to get the process started sooner rather than later.

[Carter]

Holy crap that sucks, they had to take down the tent?! Maybe Manning or somebody can put in a word for us next time... I was hoping to go to the tailgate & wouldn't have minded the rain, but my whole weekend was insanely busy so I only made it to the game.

yeah buddy busted out a “bylaw” infraction of erecting structures on Exhibition Place property, but couldn’t tell me what bylaw it was... I’m in the process of hunting down the bylaws, to see if it actually is true (I know the city of Toronto has one for semi permanent structures, but that doesn’t include tents). He also said they weren’t weighted down properly (so maybe we need some weights) hehe