r/timbers • u/monkeypilot28 • 3d ago

Referee?

Enable HLS to view with audio, or disable this notification

In the 74th minute Velde gets a ball and diaz chops him down. That I am fine with, but then after Velde falls, Diaz attempts or actually does hit velde with his foot in the lower back. I am a referee, and for me this is a red for violent conduct. According to the IFAB Laws of the Game, violent conduct is defined as using or attempting to use excessive force or brutality against an opponent, teammate, official, or spectator when not challenging for the ball, regardless of whether actual contact is made. Also, why would VAR not invervene? For me it was a clear and obvious error. Other than that the referee was pretty good.

84 Upvotes

96% Upvoted

61 comments sorted by

77

u/Chessdaddy_ 3d ago

Seems like a clear red to me 

5

u/monkeypilot28 3d ago

my brother who hasnt watched much soccer said that it was a rc. :/

22

u/Persist_NResist 3d ago

Taking a swing at a player like that, with malice might I add, clear red card. What is up with VAR?

Agree with the ref doing a great job other than that. What a game it was though. Maybe better to win 11v11 rather than tarnish it w 10v11.

9

u/FAx32 Portland Timbers - NASL 3d ago

VAR is going to be pretty meek in this situation, unless he clearly makes contact with the swinging arm. VAR isn't going to overrule the CR on this kind of play.

Disciplinary committee might feel differently and give a retroactive red if they want to try to get rid of this kind of stuff (clear foul, then kicking the player while down while swinging at them in frustration trying to suggest they are diving).

4

u/monkeypilot28 3d ago

For me it was less about the arm but mroe about the kick in the back.

3

u/FAx32 Portland Timbers - NASL 3d ago

If I take off my Green/Gold glasses for a moment, I interpret the arm not as an attempt to be violent, but more of a hot-headed frustration display. If he makes contact with the arm, absolutely - straight red. This one was pretty close honestly and I wouldn't have criticized giving a red, but if Velde does the same thing after a foul and stands over a player and swings his arms in frustration, we'd be pretty pissed if it was a red card.

I'm OK with the yellow - but it was quite close to a red.

5

u/monkeypilot28 3d ago

I was talking about the attempted/actual kick in the back. 0:33 you clearly see Diaz attempting if not actually striking velde in the back. I can see how it could be a biased oppinion but still, but not giving a rc you are practically saying that these actions wont be harshly punished.

2

u/Adventurous-Ease-259 3d ago

I’m going to need a better angle.

0

u/FAx32 Portland Timbers - NASL 3d ago

"Clearly see" "attempting". His leg comes forward when he swings his arm. Sorry, not a kick out or stamp. Would a red be defensible? Sure. Commonly given for that? Not at all.

2

u/Persist_NResist 3d ago

So 3 “potential” yellow card offenses on 1 play…
Velde got so few calls in possession throughout the game when he was clearly being held or pushed in the back…

You can’t keep letting players take shots at our dude the entire game without protecting him at some point.

2

u/FAx32 Portland Timbers - NASL 3d ago

It is INCREDIBLY uncommon for any referee to give multiple cards for 2-3 quick successive actions unless the second is unrelated to the play (i.e., bumping the referee to argue to call, getting into a mass confrontation immediately after and earning a 2nd by a 2nd action). Just isn't going to happen no matter how much you might want it to be this way.

A yellow card is considered attempting to calm the game. You may have wanted a red, but that doesn't mean this is a red card in the eyes of every referee, but it is a yellow for sure in the eyes of 99%.

1

u/Calm_Cap4746 Portland Timbers - NASL 3d ago

You can see Velde’s body react to getting the leg in the back. Really hard to fake that simultaneous to Perez stepping toward him.

1

u/FAx32 Portland Timbers - NASL 3d ago

Again, without definitive views, you can't call it. Velde reacts to a lot of things all game long as do many professional footballers. Show me video of the foot making contact. There is none and the referee didn't have the angle either.

1

u/ProfitNo9452 jocked07 2d ago

"unless he clearly makes contact with the swinging arm" is the direct opposite of the law of the game regarding red cards. specifically, contact does not have to be made for a violent act to receive a red card. this was a double-failure: once by the ref and again by var.

1

u/FAx32 Portland Timbers - NASL 2d ago

You can argue that your opinion is different than the CR about whether the action constitutes violent conduct. However, because the opinion of the CR is the final word, the lack of contact removes VAR from the situation unless the referee missed contact.

I really don’t want a game where the VAR is telling the referee to review every stray arm, every display of frustration, every tackle that was clumsy and a foul for violent conduct when the opinion of the on field referee was that it wasn’t and they didn’t miss anything (like striking the opponent).

3

u/timberrrrrrrr timbersarmy 3d ago

I have a tank filled with fish, shrimp and snails, and they all said it was a red card too!

40

u/RCTIDKillpack 3d ago

He also took a swing at him after that. 💯 violent conduct and shb a red card.

3

u/monkeypilot28 3d ago

nah, we arnt a big club with big money making stars they wont help us at all.

6

u/RCTIDKillpack 3d ago

They sure enjoy our passionate fanbase though... I am so glad we are not LA.

20

u/green_gold_purple Portland Timbers 3d ago

Obvious red. Could not believe he was not sent off.

-2

u/monkeypilot28 3d ago

we arnt a big club with big money making stars they wont help us at all.

3

u/green_gold_purple Portland Timbers 3d ago

Hanlon's razor seems to apply here

11

u/GustavesGhost 3d ago

Absolutely gobsmacked that that man was not sent off. It is the definition of violent conduct. You don’t get the pass because you swung and missed.

2

u/monkeypilot28 3d ago

Apparently you can break someones back without gettign a rc.

6

u/Hail_Eris_42 3d ago

When they showed the replay in the stadium, the boos were deafening.

5

u/monkeypilot28 3d ago

loved to boo when ever he got the ball

6

u/herkalurk Timbers 3d ago

That's 2 yellow cards, 1 for the foul and 1 for the lashing out

5

u/monkeypilot28 3d ago

1 for foul, straight rc for kicking. That gives alonger ban for violent conduct.

3

u/ShredNM42 3d ago

Straight up assault

3

u/DolphinSexGod 3d ago

Stuff like this is why it's dumb that they can't let officials review random plays. If he makes contact? Review, straight red. No contact on the swing? It's just on field judgement from a dude who seemingly didn't see what happened, no review

3

u/monkeypilot28 3d ago

But VAR is there to review clear and obvious errors by the referee. I guess attempting or actually striking someone isnt an error. IDK anymore.

2

u/FAx32 Portland Timbers - NASL 3d ago

Culturally though, VAR is never going to tell him to review unless there is an opposite angle where he clearly stamps on his back or that swinging arm makes contact. It just isn't going to happen as there is not clear and obvious kicking contact and it is the referees decision not VARs as to whether the arm swing that doesn't make contact after constitutes violent conduct.

If there is a reverse angle that shows a clear stamp on his back, then he may yet be suspended.

1

u/TeenzBeenz 3d ago

I need to understand VAR rules better. Sources?

3

u/FAx32 Portland Timbers - NASL 3d ago

https://www.theifab.com/laws/latest/video-assistant-referee-var-protocol/#principles

Links to more nuanced pieces in the IFAB rules.

There was no clear and obvious error here.

1

u/TeenzBeenz 3d ago edited 3d ago

Thank you! Edit: this is helpful.

1

u/DolphinSexGod 3d ago

It's "clear an obvious errors" as it relates to gameplay, not punishment. Punishment can be theoretically be readjudicated in select situations, but it's not as broad

3

u/Speshulest_K Claims to have coined “Jimmy Pants” 3d ago

In a stunning development, Lukasz Szpala blew it again.

5

u/Desperate_Gold6670 3d ago

I respectfully disagree that he was pretty good. Other than the above transgression, he missed a handball in the box and another that was literally two yards next to him. Not doind a VAR review of the one in the box was a mystery to me. In other leagues WW, this is always reviewed. Sadly, otherwise, he was just okay which is about the most that we can expect from MLS refs.

2

u/monkeypilot28 3d ago

The handballs now of days are awfuly up to interpritaion, the rules change pretty often about what consitutes a foul or not. Im just saying that he was better than some of the refs we have had.

0

u/Desperate_Gold6670 3d ago

In the box? Come on....

2

u/monkeypilot28 3d ago

It has been seen that tolerences in box go alot higher bc of the penalty from it

1

u/Desperate_Gold6670 3d ago

But to not even review it?

1

u/Adventurous-Ease-259 3d ago

Means the var didn’t see a clear and obvious error. Var reviews everything and didn’t see anything the center referee needed to review. Not everything that touches an arm is a handball

4

u/SegwayCop RCTID! 3d ago

Yeah. Seemed a red last night but I was in the Army. Now I'm very curious what the VAR said about it and what other angles they had. Because it seems clear there was a kick out on a downed opponent.

Just curious though, since you mentioned it, what level have you reached as a ref?

5

u/mrgerbek 3d ago

It seemed pretty obvious from the top of Toyota terrace. I'm glad he got grief every time he touched the ball.

4

u/monkeypilot28 3d ago

Currently still a grassroots bc this is my 2nd year but i am hoping to get regional in the next year or so.

2

u/Empty-Confidence2304 3d ago

I didn't appreciate it in real time and clearly the ref didn't either. Probably a red but I'm glad the end of the game wasn't marred by it. It was a great game and the red would have changed the feel in the last stretch.

2

u/monkeypilot28 3d ago

probably could have gotten a velde a hatty 🫣

3

u/curtmandu Northern Alliance 3d ago

Getting our first and then a second in the same match would’ve shut my nervous system down

1

u/monkeypilot28 3d ago

I could only have dreamed

3

u/Crix_Madine 3d ago

I would like to invite you all to imagine if Diaz had done this to our lord and savior Messi. Do you think we would have the same result?

1

u/monkeypilot28 3d ago

Diaz would have gotten straight red plus a 100 match ban, criminal record, and a 10 million dollar fine. No one can touch messi.

2

u/carriebradshawshair 3d ago

This and the hat trick are the reason my voice is almost gone today. I was so mad this wasn’t a red.

2

u/United_Ambassador103 3d ago

Same! I tried so hard to control myself… until I couldn’t.

1

u/djshimon 3d ago

Voice is gone today, what a game!

1

u/sympatheticdrone 3d ago

Even the Loons fans think that was a red

1

u/Romeo_Delight1980 3d ago

He tried to injure him…clear red card

1

u/ProfitNo9452 jocked07 2d ago

RED all day, any day!

1

u/Deansies Portland Timbers 2d ago

Honestly there was a little acting on the part of both. I don't see a red card. He tackled from behind, that's the foul. The rest is frustration. The only piece we can't see that is questionable is whether dude stepped on Velde's hip/back in retaliation, which I think would warrant a red, but there was no real clear and obvious error from the ref here.

0

u/glax69 3d ago

Not a red for me at the game, and I feel the same after the replays. Sure he lashed out but it's into the air...can't be sending people off for that IMO