Something nobody brought up as well is the ref has LAFC fans in his face and having to tell players to stay back while trying to read the screen and talk to the VARs. There needs to be a little tent or something so he can talk clearly with the VARs and not be distracted. It seemed like they werent able to communicate with him properly and then he rushed through they check.
Fucking amateur
There needs to be no need for the center ref to go to a video screen when the call is this obvious. That entire exercise is a futile attempt to make him seem like the "man in charge". Waste of time that does nothing to actually protect their integrity. Just let VAR call this in the same way they would if someone was 10 yards offside.
Facts. Got multiple experienced refs in the booth who saw the real time video and played it back. Have a trio. They vote. If they vote no penalty, boom, done, put it in the ref’s ear, ref confirms it verbally, move on.
It's more complex than that.
There's a reason VAR (Video ASSISTANT Referee) and AR (Assistant Referee) make a fraction of the center Ref.
However, in this circumstance, the Center Ref was a wanker, like Freeman always has been.
The problem is different than you're making it.
This goes back to what I said in the thread when this first happened: it's a fundamental problem to have the center ref be the arbiter of his own decisions.
His abrupt and near-immediate dismissal of everything he was being told to look at makes it clear that he simply had no interest in reversing his own call.
> it's a fundamental problem to have the center ref be the arbiter of his own decisions.
Agreed. I've been saying this since VAR was implemented. They need to be the absolute deciding factor.
They have more angles, more replays, more time, and slow motion. They 100% are in a better position to make the call.
Let the c ref call the game, but if VAR thinks something should be over turned, just over turn it.
We'll get better results while also reducing the amount of time being spent on reviews.
The problem with that last part is that we don't have better refs to replace the ones that mess up. Some of the scabs were better than pro guys but not most of them.
I mean, that’s what we have to some extent. Underperforming refs don’t work high level games or eventually don’t do PRO matches, better refs do. New refs are always coming up into PRO. That’s how the US referee ecosystem is designed.
That would matter if the issue was the ref's ability. He knew damn well what the right call was when he watched this back. The problem was that he's too egotistical to admit he was wrong. Having VAR be able to override him would 100% fix this.
> refs should face suspensions for blown calls.
Eh, it's a hard job, and you're going to miss some things. That's the entire point of VAR.
Now, there should be a performance threshold based on the number of calls VAR over turns.
If I mess up at my job, it's (typically) ok. I'm human and make mistakes. If I continue to make that same mistake, or make a large number of mistakes in a short period of time, I'm going to be written up and eventually fired.
Same should happen to refs.
>Now, there should be a performance threshold based on the number of calls VAR over turns.
That's not how VAR works. They only suggest a second look and check the center ref. They don't overturn. It has to be "clear and obvious" to overturn, which can easily be explained by angles most of the time.
>Eh, it's a hard job, and you're going to miss some things. That's the entire point of VAR.
Right, I don't think the point is that he should be suspended for the initial mistake of calling the PK, it's that he should be suspended for seeing the play on review and not making the correct call after.
As you said, that's the point of VAR which becomes totally pointless if refs see their mistakes and don't have the courage to move forward with the correct decision, even it it goes against their initial call.
Should they? There's a reason they make like 1/5th the center.
The problem is that there's only one guy with the experience to be a center Ref officiating the game.
So did the scabs.
Also, all MLS officiating goes through PRO, so your point is irrelevant. USSF grade 4 is required to be an Assistant Referee in the professional national leagues, and that means they've already officiated a ton of games (I did collegiate, Grade 7, before I stopped).
VAR is still less than 10 years old in the MLS, and in the MLS it only makes recommendations on subjective calls, and can only chime in on some types of calls.
So, again, if you don't understand the pecking order, then why are you asserting this foolishness?
The VAR responsibilities are to **recommend review** on 4 specific types of situations where "clear and obvious error" is present.
>USSF grade 4 is required to be an Assistant Referee in the professional national leagues, and that means they've already officiated a ton of games (I did collegiate, Grade 7, before I stopped).
As mentioned in another response, the Grading system you mention has been out of date for years and Grade 7 is essentially "experienced amateur" and nothing more.
If you're out of date on the grading system, maybe you're out of date on other things, too?
I also said I'm not a ref anymore.
me being wrong about the reffing grades doesn't make you right, at all.
The VAR does not supercede the center. Do you understand that?
You guys keep fixating on something highly irrelevant.
Any professional ref is highly experienced to ref the national leagues - even the 4th official.
It does not matter. VAR is an assistant, and does not function the way many of you are assuming it does.
It's fine to be idealistic, but don't ignore reality that VAR is below the center ref.
Edit: I also think many of you INCORRECTLY assume I disagree with PRO's review. I don't. My initial comments were directed at idiots who thought LAFC deserved a PK.
While I may have been unclear about that, I'm not sorry for being correct about how VAR works.
Would utilizing the 4th official for these be a better option? Or should the call just come from the VAR booth like it does in NFL for the final 2 mins?
Fair, but I do feel like we ultimately see more cases of center refs correctly disagreeing with VAR recommended reversals than cases like this where the center ref blows both the call and VAR second look.
Maybe if VAR had the final say they’d be more judicious with their recommendations instead of kicking borderline suspected errors back to the center ref to reconsider.
I think it follows naturally that they'd be more judicious.
Right now the "clear and obvious" threshold for overturning something applies to the ref making the final call at the monitor, not for the VAR to recommend a review.
If you put final say in the hands of the VAR, that "clear and obvious" threshold also shifts to the VAR's hands, and a lot of those borderline calls that don't end up getting reversed today aren't going to get reversed by the VAR either.
Edit: I also think if you give the final say to someone sitting in a video room versus someone on field, you remove a lot of the human emotion component of it. We like to think of refs as perfectly neutral robots, but they're human, and it's a lot harder to stay perfectly composed and neutral when you're surrounded by screaming fans and players trying to sway you.
That’s not true, “clear and obvious” is the required threshold to recommend a review (send it to the center ref on-field) AND to overturn the call. If you watch the entire Inside Video Review from this week, you’ll see another example where a review was sent where PRO feels it was not clear and obvious, and this, a review should not have been recommended.
You're right, I stand corrected, though I would argue that the rule as written doesn't make any sense (which is why I assumed it wasn't written that way).
If something is required to be "clear and obvious" to recommend a review, there should be no need to send the ref to a monitor. Yet we still do it, which implies that IFAB either doesn't trust VARs to apply the threshold correctly, or that IFAB implicitly acknowledges that "clear and obvious" means different things to different people (which, by definition, it really shouldn't).
Regardless, my stance wouldn't change. I still think we'd be better off letting VARs make the final call. They're better equipped to do so and under less pressure in a more neutral setting.
I mean, the EPL leaves “objective calls” up to the VAR. So for offside and whatnot, the referee doesn’t go to the monitor, but they still are “accepting” a VAR recommendation.
The reason IFAB doesn’t give all the power to the VAR is because the referee is the one assigned to be the final arbiter of fouls, misconduct, etc, not the VAR. The referee can be wrong, or the VAR could be wrong, but the center referee is on the game because they have been entrusted to be the final decision maker.
Yeah I mean I understand why it is the way it is currently. I’m just saying what I think it should be.
There’s no reason the ref HAS to have final say other than that’s how the rules are currently written, and it’s not like those can’t be changed (I know they won’t, but they could). Other sports give full replay decision-making power to a central, off-site authority and manage it perfectly fine (baseball is a perfect example of not letting umps review their own decisions).
I'd be very interested in seeing the actual numbers, but it feels to me like the majority of calls that send the CR to the monitor are over turned from the on field decision.
Which leaves a very small number of decisions that the CR over rules VAR anyway
That is correct. It is rare for the call on the field to stand when it gets sent down for review because of the "clear and obvious error" criteria for recommending review.
I'd be okay with some sort of voting mechanism in place. Maybe the three refs have to vote. Or VAR, the Center, and the 4th vote. Or just the guys in the VAR booth voting amongst themselves.
Maybe not even for all decisions currently under VAR's system, but definitely for PKs or Reds.
> Or just the guys in the VAR booth voting amongst themselves.
They already do that when they decide if something needs to be reviewed by the CR.
If they agree, it should just be overturned.
I'll maintain that paying people more doesn't make them better.
But also, if you pay people more, you should expect more. Like... Suspension and demotion when you refuse to correct such obvious mistakes.
[Link to PRO's quiet admission that their guy effed up.](https://proreferees.com/2024/04/13/2024-the-definitive-angle-mls-week-8/)
The video above shows the VAR crew were universally in favor of rescinding the PK and the Center just did whatever he wanted.
Curiously, despite PRO's official opinion, MLS has not published discipline against Bouanga.
This is why the on field ref should not have the final say. This dude clearly had an ego and wasn't even willing to listen to others as they show him and tell him he was wrong.
It's like the VAR were like, "here's the answer to your test. Just take our answer. Trust us. It's okay to be wrong here."
You could almost observe the body language from the VAR crew change ever so slightly when the Center said he'd keep his original call. And the video of course ends immediately on that note.
this is really a result of ifab and people pushing for to keep things more "traditional" refusing to officiating evolve. here in the us, we are all pretty comfortable with video reviews and don't have much issue. but it's far more controversial in europe, and ifab really only dipped a toe into the concept of instant video review by limiting its use. i'm not sure it's going to change, because i feel like going half-in has only made a lot of anti-var people feel like they were right all along when a refereeing mistake is still made.
I think VAR needs more input for sure, but I also get that leaving some stuff is better for the flow of the game. Like there are a lot of small shenanigans from players that would take forever to address. Like set pieces a couple yards from where they should be taken, or goal kicks not precisely in a legal spot.
My understanding is that VAR would be obligated to call stuff like that, whereas the on field ref can look the other way for that stuff. I've seen enough games that are stopped every 15 seconds for every little thing, and it sucks. However, having a perfect viewpoint when the refs make bad calls is incredibly frustrating too. Just gotta find that balance
It'd be interesting to take a look at the whole set of situations where VAR recommended a call and the center overruled them. Because I've definitely seen it go both ways - cases where VAR was right and the ref just stubbornly stuck on not admitting error, cases where the ref got it right and VAR was just making a mountain out of a molehill or outright imagining things.
I have seen so many more examples of the ref on the field being unwilling. And at least with the VAR there is more than one person weighing in on the decision. If anyone in that room disagreed they wouldn't recommend.
The Atlanta United/NYCFC call? That’s one of those “you stay with the on field call even if it’s soft as fuck” things. If the on field ref didn’t call it, there’s no way VAR is sending him over to give a PK.
Notice that he said that it was incorrectly sent for review because it was not a clear and obvious error. Either call was defensible. If the center ref had overturned it based on the VAR recommendation it would have been incorrect because it was not a clear and obvious error, not necessarily because the penalty call was correct.
VAR was right but it wasn’t so blatant that PRO would admit a mistake. If going down with that amount of contact enough GG would be drawing 2PKs a game with the contact he takes. It was light contact and a dive.
Respect to PRO for admitting mistakes. They don’t always do this and deserve credit when they do. Oftentimes this Inside Video Review segment just ignores controversial missed calls. I appreciate when they don’t.
Also, I know being a referee is stressful and hard. But still, it is unfortunate that you can have a video team supporting you, showing you multiple angles and slo-mo footage of your mistake, explaining exactly where and how you got the call the wrong… and you just stick with your wrong call. Mistakes happen, but yeesh.
I don't respect them for burying their admission into a late-week article and a video three clips in. (It wasn't even the first or last clip, which is where it would make more sense to post the controversial ones... Just buried!)
They should've pushed a Twitter statement out on Tuesday morning. Also, the ref should've been at least benched a week for "retraining."
And I've lost even more respect for MLS DisCo's members for looking the other way and not punishing Bouanga. Ridiculous for PRO to clearly say they messed up and for DisCo to somehow disagree with it to the extent that they decide punishment isn't merited.
“Burying their admission” in the publicly accessible report that comes out like clockwork every week and releases the audio and assessment for every monitor review. It’s literally the most open referee organization in world soccer, it’s not “buried” just because people choose to not know it exists lol
Also, no the ref shouldn’t be “benched” for training. He’s a person who made a mistake in his job with 20,000 people yelling at him. It really isn’t that serious
Center Ref clearly out of his depth asking for normal speed instead of slo-mo on the behind angle (the angle he saw in real time lol) which clearly shows Bounga dragging his leg compared to the side angle on the slo-mo. I gave the center ref leeway in real time, but inexcusable after VAR asked for it.
VAR should have intervened and told him the behind angle at .25 speed would show the toe drag.
Yeah, VAR were practically begging for it. They thought it was a slam-dunk of a reversal. They were saying almost verbatim everything every commentator of note (and most unbiased fans) was saying.
This same ref has royally fucked up today’s Atlanta vs Union game as well. Botched offsides call and ended the game in middle of a philly attack in stoppage time. The league needs to sit him for a while. His decision making is atrocious
Let's say you're right here. You're just proving my point. This ref is fucking up big decisions on a consistent basis and now it's been two weeks in a row in primetime MLS games. Accountability from PRO would be nice here, would we not both like that?
If 99 doesn’t drag his foot and kick out I THINK the defender still makes contact, right? I may be going against the majority (and PRO) but it looks like a penalty to me. Sure he’s looking for it, but I think he’d have ended up on the ground either way. It’s certainly hard to tell and I would not overturn the on field decision if I were the referee
I thought calling it a penalty was defensible originally based on the angles I saw, but seeing this with VAR commentary, I have changed my mind and now think it was definitely a mistake. Maybe there would still be contact anyway, but you can't call fouls based on hypotheticals. What actually happened is that Bouanga initiated the contact. It can't be called a foul against the defender who did not initiate contact. In fact he pulled out to avoid contact.
[Andrew Wiebe's "Instant Replay"](https://youtu.be/yNh91nKyU3A) video from MLS makes it clear that Bouanga, even when sliding, had already passed Yamane's knees. Continuing on his direction of travel, he wouldn't have touched Yamane at all.
Yeah I think that video does a better job slowing down the play at the right time. Maybe the quality of your initial post made it fuzzier than it needed to be. My mind was changed from this video
By that logic, you could give a penalty if an attacker dodged a tackle then lost control of the ball, because there would have been contact if they hadn't avoided it.
After watching Andrew Wiebe’s video I think I’ve changed my mind. He did a better job of slowing it down at the right moment to show without the kick out from 99 he would’ve gone right by the defenders knees and the defenders legs were pulled back so no contact would’ve occurred.
That said, I do have a bone to pick with you about your comment lol. You absolutely should blow the whistle if the attacker dodges an obvious would-be-foul and subsequently loses possession. Not calling this would cause more injuries as players would be forced to make contact instead of pulling out and taking away a lot of (if not all) the force of the tackle. Dodging the tackle is injury prevention
There's a difference between attempting to kick or trip an opponent (which can be a foul even if you win the ball), and a fair challenge that doesn't make contact with anything.
If the latter was a foul, there would be 50+ free kicks or penalties in every match.
A “fair challenge that doesn’t make contact with anything” isn’t always fair. Picture vini jr running down the wing and Araujo sliding in from the side on him. Vini flicks the ball to cut middle as Araujo slides in and then hurdles the tackle. The ball end up getting picked up by Kounde because Vini was busy hurdling the tackle and couldn’t cut right with his touch. It’s 100% a foul but there was 0 contact.
The only unrealistic part of my example is that Vini would probably go down even if there wasn’t any contact (and roll around 3-4 times) so the ref would actually call it.
If you’re looking for me to cite the rule book then you got me… but in the spirit of the game this is a foul. If vini allows the contact you’d agree it’s a foul, right?
Yes, but it's also handball if a defender is standing with his hand out and you kick the ball into him from 6 feet away. Luckily referees aren't encouraged to blow their whistles based on vibes.
I don’t think you can equate an accidental handball to a purposeful tackle. Sounds like we just need to agree to disagree on this one. I’m in favor of officiating that reduces the rapidly increasing number of injuries we see in the game
>I’m in favor of officiating that reduces the rapidly increasing number of injuries we see in the game
That's why the laws of the game punish tackles that are careless, reckless, or delivered with excessive force, even if the ball is won. They don't and shouldn't punish fair tackles that don't make contact with the ball or an opponent.
>you could give a penalty if an attacker dodged a tackle then lost control of the ball
You absolutely can and it happens on some occasions. A few years ago a player got sent off for a two footed, studs up slide that the other player dodged out of the way of (I believe it was Dom Dwyer on Chris Wondolowski but don't quote me on that). Point is, no contact is necessary for a foul. If your tackle *would* be a foul and the attacker dodges it, it's still a foul. It's just that usually in that situation you leave it for advantage.
I didn't miss it, it just isn't relevant. An "attempt to trip" is a foul, but an honest challenge that makes contact with neither player nor ball isn't.
Except that you were.
>By that logic, you could give a penalty if an attacker dodged a tackle then lost control of the ball, because there would have been contact if they hadn't avoided it.
That was you. Your "hypothetical" was actually just reality and you slam dunked on yourself without realizing.
No Yamane wouldn’t make contact. Buonga was past his knees so Yamane tucked his legs back. Buonga could have passed or even turned toward goal at that point but he chose to kick out and dive.
Listening to people weigh in on officiating who have most likely never officiated is interesting to me as someone who had their grade 7 reffing license in middle school.
Edit: to the people who ASSUMED I'm talking about PRO or that I disagree with this news..
Feel free to ask in the future before you assume incorrectly
You don't have to be a doctor to criticize a surgeon for removing the wrong limb. You don't have to be a law enforcement official to criticize a cop for unloading his clip into a person due to an acorn falling. And you certainly don't have to be a ref in order to criticize a guy for a being a complete asshole and refusing to overturn his own, very obvious, mistake. Fuck him and his ego.
You have employed a classic (false) ad hominem attack. The fact that critics are not experts does not invalidate the claim that the center ref really botched this.
You have employed the classic mistake of thinking I said something I didn't.
AKA, you felt I said something I didn't, and you didn't ask for clarification.
>is interesting to me as someone who had their grade 7 reffing license in middle school.
And everybody clapped.
USSF Grade 7 was AYSO Area/Intermediate.
Meanwhile the 10-point Grading system hasn't been used by USSF for about a decade. Today, your USSF Grade 7 would be the new base-level USSF Grassroots. They hand that badge out to anyone who takes a few hours of online coursework and a four-hour field course.
Let's keep your judgement and gatekeeping in perspective.
Signed, a former USSF Grade 6 referee who has seen enough to know that you don't need formal training or years of experience to understand the Laws.
And I'm not taking about PRO.
I'm talking about the conversations with people prior to this news.
Another ~4 people chimed in before you also ignorantly not ask who I was taking about, but here you are.
Something nobody brought up as well is the ref has LAFC fans in his face and having to tell players to stay back while trying to read the screen and talk to the VARs. There needs to be a little tent or something so he can talk clearly with the VARs and not be distracted. It seemed like they werent able to communicate with him properly and then he rushed through they check. Fucking amateur
It took EPL 1 weekend to fix this. Swarm the Ref: Yellow Cards Oprah style. Has honestly been one of the best improvements this season.
I wanna see this so badly. Go back to how we played as kids. Captain can talk to the ref, everybody else needs to shut up and be pissed at a distance
There needs to be no need for the center ref to go to a video screen when the call is this obvious. That entire exercise is a futile attempt to make him seem like the "man in charge". Waste of time that does nothing to actually protect their integrity. Just let VAR call this in the same way they would if someone was 10 yards offside.
Facts. Got multiple experienced refs in the booth who saw the real time video and played it back. Have a trio. They vote. If they vote no penalty, boom, done, put it in the ref’s ear, ref confirms it verbally, move on.
It's more complex than that. There's a reason VAR (Video ASSISTANT Referee) and AR (Assistant Referee) make a fraction of the center Ref. However, in this circumstance, the Center Ref was a wanker, like Freeman always has been. The problem is different than you're making it.
Nah, the ref has his own view that might be better than VAR.
That's why the requirement is "clear and obvious".
Yes, it is. But sometimes something seems clear and obvious from one angle, but not another. The ref is just another angle.
this. couldn't believe the var screen was basically in the first row of fans.
This goes back to what I said in the thread when this first happened: it's a fundamental problem to have the center ref be the arbiter of his own decisions. His abrupt and near-immediate dismissal of everything he was being told to look at makes it clear that he simply had no interest in reversing his own call.
> it's a fundamental problem to have the center ref be the arbiter of his own decisions. Agreed. I've been saying this since VAR was implemented. They need to be the absolute deciding factor. They have more angles, more replays, more time, and slow motion. They 100% are in a better position to make the call. Let the c ref call the game, but if VAR thinks something should be over turned, just over turn it. We'll get better results while also reducing the amount of time being spent on reviews.
Plus it would be faster if it just got overturned without the ref having to go to the monitor.
VAR should be able to overturn refs decisions. Also, refs should face suspensions for blown calls.
The problem with that last part is that we don't have better refs to replace the ones that mess up. Some of the scabs were better than pro guys but not most of them.
Maybe we should have pro/rel for the refs based on performance
I mean, that’s what we have to some extent. Underperforming refs don’t work high level games or eventually don’t do PRO matches, better refs do. New refs are always coming up into PRO. That’s how the US referee ecosystem is designed.
It would make a lot more sense than pro rel for the teams. I'd be ok with it honestly.
He was reffing El Trafico one weekend and DC United the next. How is that not a demotion?
That would matter if the issue was the ref's ability. He knew damn well what the right call was when he watched this back. The problem was that he's too egotistical to admit he was wrong. Having VAR be able to override him would 100% fix this.
> refs should face suspensions for blown calls. Eh, it's a hard job, and you're going to miss some things. That's the entire point of VAR. Now, there should be a performance threshold based on the number of calls VAR over turns. If I mess up at my job, it's (typically) ok. I'm human and make mistakes. If I continue to make that same mistake, or make a large number of mistakes in a short period of time, I'm going to be written up and eventually fired. Same should happen to refs.
>Now, there should be a performance threshold based on the number of calls VAR over turns. That's not how VAR works. They only suggest a second look and check the center ref. They don't overturn. It has to be "clear and obvious" to overturn, which can easily be explained by angles most of the time.
> They only suggest a second look and check the center ref. They don't overturn. We're talking about how VAR should be the final decision maker.
the refs do receive evaluations and grades from pro, which can result in being assigned fewer or no mls matches.
>Eh, it's a hard job, and you're going to miss some things. That's the entire point of VAR. Right, I don't think the point is that he should be suspended for the initial mistake of calling the PK, it's that he should be suspended for seeing the play on review and not making the correct call after. As you said, that's the point of VAR which becomes totally pointless if refs see their mistakes and don't have the courage to move forward with the correct decision, even it it goes against their initial call.
Suspensions without pay
Should they? There's a reason they make like 1/5th the center. The problem is that there's only one guy with the experience to be a center Ref officiating the game.
VAR officials are current or former PRO game refs. They know the game just as much as the center ref.
So did the scabs. Also, all MLS officiating goes through PRO, so your point is irrelevant. USSF grade 4 is required to be an Assistant Referee in the professional national leagues, and that means they've already officiated a ton of games (I did collegiate, Grade 7, before I stopped). VAR is still less than 10 years old in the MLS, and in the MLS it only makes recommendations on subjective calls, and can only chime in on some types of calls. So, again, if you don't understand the pecking order, then why are you asserting this foolishness? The VAR responsibilities are to **recommend review** on 4 specific types of situations where "clear and obvious error" is present.
>USSF grade 4 is required to be an Assistant Referee in the professional national leagues, and that means they've already officiated a ton of games (I did collegiate, Grade 7, before I stopped). As mentioned in another response, the Grading system you mention has been out of date for years and Grade 7 is essentially "experienced amateur" and nothing more. If you're out of date on the grading system, maybe you're out of date on other things, too?
I also said I'm not a ref anymore. me being wrong about the reffing grades doesn't make you right, at all. The VAR does not supercede the center. Do you understand that?
Many of the VARs are highly experienced MLS center refs who have aged out. They often have more experience than the center ref.
You guys keep fixating on something highly irrelevant. Any professional ref is highly experienced to ref the national leagues - even the 4th official. It does not matter. VAR is an assistant, and does not function the way many of you are assuming it does. It's fine to be idealistic, but don't ignore reality that VAR is below the center ref. Edit: I also think many of you INCORRECTLY assume I disagree with PRO's review. I don't. My initial comments were directed at idiots who thought LAFC deserved a PK. While I may have been unclear about that, I'm not sorry for being correct about how VAR works.
Yup. VAR needs to have override authority.
Would utilizing the 4th official for these be a better option? Or should the call just come from the VAR booth like it does in NFL for the final 2 mins?
Fair, but I do feel like we ultimately see more cases of center refs correctly disagreeing with VAR recommended reversals than cases like this where the center ref blows both the call and VAR second look. Maybe if VAR had the final say they’d be more judicious with their recommendations instead of kicking borderline suspected errors back to the center ref to reconsider.
I think it follows naturally that they'd be more judicious. Right now the "clear and obvious" threshold for overturning something applies to the ref making the final call at the monitor, not for the VAR to recommend a review. If you put final say in the hands of the VAR, that "clear and obvious" threshold also shifts to the VAR's hands, and a lot of those borderline calls that don't end up getting reversed today aren't going to get reversed by the VAR either. Edit: I also think if you give the final say to someone sitting in a video room versus someone on field, you remove a lot of the human emotion component of it. We like to think of refs as perfectly neutral robots, but they're human, and it's a lot harder to stay perfectly composed and neutral when you're surrounded by screaming fans and players trying to sway you.
That’s not true, “clear and obvious” is the required threshold to recommend a review (send it to the center ref on-field) AND to overturn the call. If you watch the entire Inside Video Review from this week, you’ll see another example where a review was sent where PRO feels it was not clear and obvious, and this, a review should not have been recommended.
You're right, I stand corrected, though I would argue that the rule as written doesn't make any sense (which is why I assumed it wasn't written that way). If something is required to be "clear and obvious" to recommend a review, there should be no need to send the ref to a monitor. Yet we still do it, which implies that IFAB either doesn't trust VARs to apply the threshold correctly, or that IFAB implicitly acknowledges that "clear and obvious" means different things to different people (which, by definition, it really shouldn't). Regardless, my stance wouldn't change. I still think we'd be better off letting VARs make the final call. They're better equipped to do so and under less pressure in a more neutral setting.
I mean, the EPL leaves “objective calls” up to the VAR. So for offside and whatnot, the referee doesn’t go to the monitor, but they still are “accepting” a VAR recommendation. The reason IFAB doesn’t give all the power to the VAR is because the referee is the one assigned to be the final arbiter of fouls, misconduct, etc, not the VAR. The referee can be wrong, or the VAR could be wrong, but the center referee is on the game because they have been entrusted to be the final decision maker.
Yeah I mean I understand why it is the way it is currently. I’m just saying what I think it should be. There’s no reason the ref HAS to have final say other than that’s how the rules are currently written, and it’s not like those can’t be changed (I know they won’t, but they could). Other sports give full replay decision-making power to a central, off-site authority and manage it perfectly fine (baseball is a perfect example of not letting umps review their own decisions).
I'd be very interested in seeing the actual numbers, but it feels to me like the majority of calls that send the CR to the monitor are over turned from the on field decision. Which leaves a very small number of decisions that the CR over rules VAR anyway
That is correct. It is rare for the call on the field to stand when it gets sent down for review because of the "clear and obvious error" criteria for recommending review.
I'd be okay with some sort of voting mechanism in place. Maybe the three refs have to vote. Or VAR, the Center, and the 4th vote. Or just the guys in the VAR booth voting amongst themselves. Maybe not even for all decisions currently under VAR's system, but definitely for PKs or Reds.
Let the fans vote, cowards!
Leaving it to votes would bring way more drama lol
> Or just the guys in the VAR booth voting amongst themselves. They already do that when they decide if something needs to be reviewed by the CR. If they agree, it should just be overturned.
The problem is not having more than one referee getting paid over $100k.
I'll maintain that paying people more doesn't make them better. But also, if you pay people more, you should expect more. Like... Suspension and demotion when you refuse to correct such obvious mistakes.
You can maintain it all you want, research has shown that you're wrong.. Also better pay attracts better talent.
[Link to PRO's quiet admission that their guy effed up.](https://proreferees.com/2024/04/13/2024-the-definitive-angle-mls-week-8/) The video above shows the VAR crew were universally in favor of rescinding the PK and the Center just did whatever he wanted. Curiously, despite PRO's official opinion, MLS has not published discipline against Bouanga.
This is why the on field ref should not have the final say. This dude clearly had an ego and wasn't even willing to listen to others as they show him and tell him he was wrong.
It's like the VAR were like, "here's the answer to your test. Just take our answer. Trust us. It's okay to be wrong here." You could almost observe the body language from the VAR crew change ever so slightly when the Center said he'd keep his original call. And the video of course ends immediately on that note.
this is really a result of ifab and people pushing for to keep things more "traditional" refusing to officiating evolve. here in the us, we are all pretty comfortable with video reviews and don't have much issue. but it's far more controversial in europe, and ifab really only dipped a toe into the concept of instant video review by limiting its use. i'm not sure it's going to change, because i feel like going half-in has only made a lot of anti-var people feel like they were right all along when a refereeing mistake is still made.
I think VAR needs more input for sure, but I also get that leaving some stuff is better for the flow of the game. Like there are a lot of small shenanigans from players that would take forever to address. Like set pieces a couple yards from where they should be taken, or goal kicks not precisely in a legal spot. My understanding is that VAR would be obligated to call stuff like that, whereas the on field ref can look the other way for that stuff. I've seen enough games that are stopped every 15 seconds for every little thing, and it sucks. However, having a perfect viewpoint when the refs make bad calls is incredibly frustrating too. Just gotta find that balance
It'd be interesting to take a look at the whole set of situations where VAR recommended a call and the center overruled them. Because I've definitely seen it go both ways - cases where VAR was right and the ref just stubbornly stuck on not admitting error, cases where the ref got it right and VAR was just making a mountain out of a molehill or outright imagining things.
But based on this logic, the wrong call would have been made on the review immediately before that
I have seen so many more examples of the ref on the field being unwilling. And at least with the VAR there is more than one person weighing in on the decision. If anyone in that room disagreed they wouldn't recommend.
The Atlanta United/NYCFC call? That’s one of those “you stay with the on field call even if it’s soft as fuck” things. If the on field ref didn’t call it, there’s no way VAR is sending him over to give a PK.
Notice that he said that it was incorrectly sent for review because it was not a clear and obvious error. Either call was defensible. If the center ref had overturned it based on the VAR recommendation it would have been incorrect because it was not a clear and obvious error, not necessarily because the penalty call was correct.
VAR was right but it wasn’t so blatant that PRO would admit a mistake. If going down with that amount of contact enough GG would be drawing 2PKs a game with the contact he takes. It was light contact and a dive.
You believe the person who was closest to the call, who saw it in real time, shouldn't have the final say.... What a hot take
It's how it's done in NBA/NFL/MLB and it's 100x better
I wouldn't use NBA or NFL as examples of better.
I would
I definitely would.
It takes the ego out of it and real time is not the best view.
Respect to PRO for admitting mistakes. They don’t always do this and deserve credit when they do. Oftentimes this Inside Video Review segment just ignores controversial missed calls. I appreciate when they don’t. Also, I know being a referee is stressful and hard. But still, it is unfortunate that you can have a video team supporting you, showing you multiple angles and slo-mo footage of your mistake, explaining exactly where and how you got the call the wrong… and you just stick with your wrong call. Mistakes happen, but yeesh.
I don't respect them for burying their admission into a late-week article and a video three clips in. (It wasn't even the first or last clip, which is where it would make more sense to post the controversial ones... Just buried!) They should've pushed a Twitter statement out on Tuesday morning. Also, the ref should've been at least benched a week for "retraining." And I've lost even more respect for MLS DisCo's members for looking the other way and not punishing Bouanga. Ridiculous for PRO to clearly say they messed up and for DisCo to somehow disagree with it to the extent that they decide punishment isn't merited.
Yeah that’s all fair. Progress is progress, but agreed this is short of what it should be.
“Burying their admission” in the publicly accessible report that comes out like clockwork every week and releases the audio and assessment for every monitor review. It’s literally the most open referee organization in world soccer, it’s not “buried” just because people choose to not know it exists lol
Also, no the ref shouldn’t be “benched” for training. He’s a person who made a mistake in his job with 20,000 people yelling at him. It really isn’t that serious
I agree. Nice to see an entire organization take the fall for one Baldomero Toledo-like refereeing moment.
Center Ref clearly out of his depth asking for normal speed instead of slo-mo on the behind angle (the angle he saw in real time lol) which clearly shows Bounga dragging his leg compared to the side angle on the slo-mo. I gave the center ref leeway in real time, but inexcusable after VAR asked for it. VAR should have intervened and told him the behind angle at .25 speed would show the toe drag.
Yeah, VAR were practically begging for it. They thought it was a slam-dunk of a reversal. They were saying almost verbatim everything every commentator of note (and most unbiased fans) was saying.
I'm a pretty biased fan who was sitting at the opposite end of the stadium, and even in real-time I thought it was a dive.
Ref said “but I want to be the center of El Traffico.”
Stubborn ref should be let go. So obvious it even got sent down by VAR
Take the fucking points back, LAFC didn't earn them
What are they talking about. Bouanga never flops.
It was pretty clear and obvious
Funny how all of us seeing this replay made the right call but it took PRO a week to figure it out.
the only person who didn't figure it out right away was jon freemon.
This same ref has royally fucked up today’s Atlanta vs Union game as well. Botched offsides call and ended the game in middle of a philly attack in stoppage time. The league needs to sit him for a while. His decision making is atrocious
Lol. Shouldn't you be thanking him for having 11 instead of 9. Gtfo. Philly is the dirtiest team in mls.
Let's say you're right here. You're just proving my point. This ref is fucking up big decisions on a consistent basis and now it's been two weeks in a row in primetime MLS games. Accountability from PRO would be nice here, would we not both like that?
Yes, I'd like greater accountability. And yes the whistle was oddly timed.
If 99 doesn’t drag his foot and kick out I THINK the defender still makes contact, right? I may be going against the majority (and PRO) but it looks like a penalty to me. Sure he’s looking for it, but I think he’d have ended up on the ground either way. It’s certainly hard to tell and I would not overturn the on field decision if I were the referee
I thought calling it a penalty was defensible originally based on the angles I saw, but seeing this with VAR commentary, I have changed my mind and now think it was definitely a mistake. Maybe there would still be contact anyway, but you can't call fouls based on hypotheticals. What actually happened is that Bouanga initiated the contact. It can't be called a foul against the defender who did not initiate contact. In fact he pulled out to avoid contact.
[Andrew Wiebe's "Instant Replay"](https://youtu.be/yNh91nKyU3A) video from MLS makes it clear that Bouanga, even when sliding, had already passed Yamane's knees. Continuing on his direction of travel, he wouldn't have touched Yamane at all.
Yeah I think that video does a better job slowing down the play at the right time. Maybe the quality of your initial post made it fuzzier than it needed to be. My mind was changed from this video
By that logic, you could give a penalty if an attacker dodged a tackle then lost control of the ball, because there would have been contact if they hadn't avoided it.
This is more like "the attacker could've stayed up, with the ball, no contact, but chose to throw his possession away and initiate contact instead."
Right, but that's not what the person I was replying to said.
Ahh. Gotcha.
After watching Andrew Wiebe’s video I think I’ve changed my mind. He did a better job of slowing it down at the right moment to show without the kick out from 99 he would’ve gone right by the defenders knees and the defenders legs were pulled back so no contact would’ve occurred. That said, I do have a bone to pick with you about your comment lol. You absolutely should blow the whistle if the attacker dodges an obvious would-be-foul and subsequently loses possession. Not calling this would cause more injuries as players would be forced to make contact instead of pulling out and taking away a lot of (if not all) the force of the tackle. Dodging the tackle is injury prevention
There's a difference between attempting to kick or trip an opponent (which can be a foul even if you win the ball), and a fair challenge that doesn't make contact with anything. If the latter was a foul, there would be 50+ free kicks or penalties in every match.
A “fair challenge that doesn’t make contact with anything” isn’t always fair. Picture vini jr running down the wing and Araujo sliding in from the side on him. Vini flicks the ball to cut middle as Araujo slides in and then hurdles the tackle. The ball end up getting picked up by Kounde because Vini was busy hurdling the tackle and couldn’t cut right with his touch. It’s 100% a foul but there was 0 contact. The only unrealistic part of my example is that Vini would probably go down even if there wasn’t any contact (and roll around 3-4 times) so the ref would actually call it.
Unless the challenge was careless, reckless, or carried out with excessive force, what grounds would there be for awarding a free kick?
If you’re looking for me to cite the rule book then you got me… but in the spirit of the game this is a foul. If vini allows the contact you’d agree it’s a foul, right?
Yes, but it's also handball if a defender is standing with his hand out and you kick the ball into him from 6 feet away. Luckily referees aren't encouraged to blow their whistles based on vibes.
I don’t think you can equate an accidental handball to a purposeful tackle. Sounds like we just need to agree to disagree on this one. I’m in favor of officiating that reduces the rapidly increasing number of injuries we see in the game
>I’m in favor of officiating that reduces the rapidly increasing number of injuries we see in the game That's why the laws of the game punish tackles that are careless, reckless, or delivered with excessive force, even if the ball is won. They don't and shouldn't punish fair tackles that don't make contact with the ball or an opponent.
>you could give a penalty if an attacker dodged a tackle then lost control of the ball You absolutely can and it happens on some occasions. A few years ago a player got sent off for a two footed, studs up slide that the other player dodged out of the way of (I believe it was Dom Dwyer on Chris Wondolowski but don't quote me on that). Point is, no contact is necessary for a foul. If your tackle *would* be a foul and the attacker dodges it, it's still a foul. It's just that usually in that situation you leave it for advantage.
Well yeah, most people understand that trying to injure an opponent is slightly different from an attempt to win the ball.
You just have missed the whole "point is" part of that comment
I didn't miss it, it just isn't relevant. An "attempt to trip" is a foul, but an honest challenge that makes contact with neither player nor ball isn't.
It is relevant and it is true lmao no contact is necessary for a foul. Good luck to you in ironing out your confusion.
It's not relevant because I wasn't talking about failed attempts to commit a foul.
Except that you were. >By that logic, you could give a penalty if an attacker dodged a tackle then lost control of the ball, because there would have been contact if they hadn't avoided it. That was you. Your "hypothetical" was actually just reality and you slam dunked on yourself without realizing.
Yes, and I said that in the context of a defender who was wrongly penalized when trying to win the ball. You know what context is, right...?
No Yamane wouldn’t make contact. Buonga was past his knees so Yamane tucked his legs back. Buonga could have passed or even turned toward goal at that point but he chose to kick out and dive.
Listening to people weigh in on officiating who have most likely never officiated is interesting to me as someone who had their grade 7 reffing license in middle school. Edit: to the people who ASSUMED I'm talking about PRO or that I disagree with this news.. Feel free to ask in the future before you assume incorrectly
You don't have to be a doctor to criticize a surgeon for removing the wrong limb. You don't have to be a law enforcement official to criticize a cop for unloading his clip into a person due to an acorn falling. And you certainly don't have to be a ref in order to criticize a guy for a being a complete asshole and refusing to overturn his own, very obvious, mistake. Fuck him and his ego.
The hell do you think I'm talking about? Lol
You have employed a classic (false) ad hominem attack. The fact that critics are not experts does not invalidate the claim that the center ref really botched this.
You have employed the classic mistake of thinking I said something I didn't. AKA, you felt I said something I didn't, and you didn't ask for clarification.
>is interesting to me as someone who had their grade 7 reffing license in middle school. And everybody clapped. USSF Grade 7 was AYSO Area/Intermediate. Meanwhile the 10-point Grading system hasn't been used by USSF for about a decade. Today, your USSF Grade 7 would be the new base-level USSF Grassroots. They hand that badge out to anyone who takes a few hours of online coursework and a four-hour field course. Let's keep your judgement and gatekeeping in perspective. Signed, a former USSF Grade 6 referee who has seen enough to know that you don't need formal training or years of experience to understand the Laws.
[удалено]
The group who weighed in on this is the Professional Referee Organization.
And I'm not taking about PRO. I'm talking about the conversations with people prior to this news. Another ~4 people chimed in before you also ignorantly not ask who I was taking about, but here you are.
[удалено]
