Speaker 1: Hey, y'all, Welcome to a special edition of Reughing Down here,
Speaker 1: looking back at the weekend preceding December sixteenth. I am Bart.
Speaker 1: I am host of the Soccer for US podcast here
Speaker 1: on the SDCH network. I also make regular appearances on
Speaker 1: the SDCH Morning Show on Mondays at ten am to
Speaker 1: talk about referee decisions and other US soccer news. Obviously
Speaker 1: that did not happen on this Monday, as we are
Speaker 1: kind of in the festive period for SDH and that
Speaker 1: means that there's a lot of moving parts that can't
Speaker 1: seem to come together and we do these kind of
Speaker 1: asynchronous recordings. On this particular segment, I'm going to look
Speaker 1: at three incidents from the past weekend. First, the Manchester
Speaker 1: Derby mass confrontation, the Reds seeing red against Fulham, and
Speaker 1: how the refs handled a College Cup semi final. Now,
Speaker 1: while I have you, let me ask you to follow
Speaker 1: my show on Twitter and Blue Sky at Soccer for
Speaker 1: US Pod. Also, you can support my work at buy
Speaker 1: Me a Coffee dot com slash by excuse me, buy
Speaker 1: Me a Coffee dot com slash Soccer for US Pod.
Speaker 1: My show comes out on the same feed as the
Speaker 1: Soccer down here shows, So whatever podcaster you use to
Speaker 1: listen to soccer down here, you can use that to
Speaker 1: listen to soccer for us. And you know, when they drop,
Speaker 1: they drop. Hopefully we have one coming out this week,
Speaker 1: so look forward to that. All right, let's get started first,
Speaker 1: a mass confrontation incident in the Manchester City Manchester United match,
Speaker 1: so this will cover laws twelve and five as we
Speaker 1: dig into it.
Speaker 2: On Sunday on the.
Speaker 1: Blue Side of Manchester, Manchester City and Manchester United had
Speaker 1: a coming together of sorts.
Speaker 2: In the thirty eighth.
Speaker 1: Minute, there was a long ball into the Manchester City
Speaker 1: defensive third. Kyle Walker goes to defendant and just runs
Speaker 1: into Rasmus Hoyland for Manchester United under cuts him very
Speaker 1: very carelessly.
Speaker 2: Anthony Taylor called.
Speaker 1: The foul, but that foul sparked a contentious series of
Speaker 1: events that we're going to talk about now. Walker fouls them,
Speaker 1: Taylor calls the foul points for the free kick, but
Speaker 1: Hoyland is upset, to say the least. This came basically
Speaker 1: right after, yeah, right after Manchester City scored to take
Speaker 1: the lead, so it's safe to say that there were
Speaker 1: some tensions rising for United, who have been, you know,
Speaker 1: on a decent reniform since the new co took over,
Speaker 1: but still scrapping for any points they can find in
Speaker 1: the league table. And Hoyland did not like this challenge
Speaker 1: on that Kyle Walker made on him, so he kind
Speaker 1: of walks over to Walker, puts his forehead against his
Speaker 1: and then Kyle Walker just falls down after that, a
Speaker 1: very clear flop, I will say. The two teams came
Speaker 1: together to exchange pleasantries and put some hands on each other,
Speaker 1: including andre Onnana who came up from his position in
Speaker 1: the Manchester United goal to I don't know, get involved
Speaker 1: for some reason. Lots of little pushes, lots of exchanges
Speaker 1: of maybe you know, sharing the peace if this were
Speaker 1: an Anglican Communion church up there in England.
Speaker 2: But nothing major happened.
Speaker 1: And I think that this is a great example of
Speaker 1: Anthony Taylor refereing fairly well. So that's why I wanted
Speaker 1: to talk about it. So, like I said, this covers
Speaker 1: law twelve and five. You know, Taylor did see the
Speaker 1: whole thing, and this is something we've talked about on
Speaker 1: the SGH Morning Show. The referees taking a step back
Speaker 1: to get a look at the confrontation as a whole,
Speaker 1: and so Taylor sees not just the foul that he calls,
Speaker 1: he then spots Hoyland and Walker kind of come together
Speaker 1: for a second. And I think that's why he didn't
Speaker 1: really do anything drastic in that moment. He didn't rush
Speaker 1: to give out any cautions because he saw what happened,
Speaker 1: he saw Kyle Walker flop, but he also stayed back
Speaker 1: to once he saw some other players getting in because obviously,
Speaker 1: you know, Hoyland goes to Walker and Walker falls down,
Speaker 1: there's gonna be some player involvement who you know, probably
Speaker 1: shouldn't be involving themselves. The foul was a clear charging
Speaker 1: foul by Walker. It's very careless and I would even
Speaker 1: say possibly reckless, which could have warranted a yellow card
Speaker 1: on its own. Hoylan's alignment maneuver, whatever you want to
Speaker 1: call it, is silly. It's certainly under the umbrella of
Speaker 1: unsporting behavior outlawed outlined in Law twelve, and the insuing
Speaker 1: kerfuffle didn't get out of hand, and I think that
Speaker 1: then goes to Law five. A good example of Anthony
Speaker 1: Taylor using this discretion. So under Law five, the referee
Speaker 1: is charged with controlling the match in cooperation with the
Speaker 1: other match officials. So Taylor takes a step back, watches
Speaker 1: everything unfold, watches the players come together, put some hands
Speaker 1: on each other, you know, little silly things, and other
Speaker 1: than Walker and Hoyland, there's not anything that deserves disciplinary action.
Speaker 1: And so you know, he Anthony Taylor understands he has
Speaker 1: three officials on the field with him, two ars and
Speaker 1: a fourth.
Speaker 2: He also has eyes in the sky with bar so he's.
Speaker 1: Just making sure he can observe as much as possible
Speaker 1: so he can correct it in the moment. But nothing
Speaker 1: happened that he needed to correct or discipline. So he
Speaker 1: gives Walker a yellow card and he gives Hoyland a
Speaker 1: yellow card. Now I think both of these were given
Speaker 1: for the unsporting behavior of creating the incident. But I
Speaker 1: will say that it wouldn't surprise me, and I haven't
Speaker 1: been able to see the actual report if Walker's foul
Speaker 1: was what earned him a yellow card. Now, I didn't
Speaker 1: see Taylor bring out his yellow card immediately when the
Speaker 1: foul is called, so that's kind of why I don't
Speaker 1: think it may have been. But to me, Walker undercutting
Speaker 1: Hoyland like that could have definitely earned him a yellow
Speaker 1: card in this incident, but he didn't. Both I think
Speaker 1: are going to be listed as unsporting behavior. But I
Speaker 1: do want to point out that Walker is a little
Speaker 1: lucky he didn't get the yellow card for a reckless foul,
Speaker 1: which still would have been unsporting behavior. Or technically, I
Speaker 1: don't think there was anything else, no red cards needed.
Speaker 1: This is not a This is not a headbutt at all.
Speaker 1: It was calm, It was you know, it was caressed. Really,
Speaker 1: he didn't use force at all to make contact with Walker,
Speaker 1: which is kind of why this never really needed to
Speaker 1: be escalated to a red card and VR didn't get involved.
Speaker 1: There was no excessive force. This was not an act
Speaker 1: of violent conduct. This is just unsporting behavior, silly behavior,
Speaker 1: stupid behavior, if you will. So nothing more needed here
Speaker 1: in this particular incident. Now I want to fast forward
Speaker 1: in this game a little bit at the request of
Speaker 1: Abby Schiffman, who is a great follower and friend of
Speaker 1: not just the SDH family of networks, but also my
Speaker 1: show is Soccer for us, and Abby wanted me to
Speaker 1: talk about a potential penalty kick not called in the sixty.
Speaker 1: I believe it happens in the sixty six minute for
Speaker 1: Manchester United. Now again in Manchester United chasing a goal
Speaker 1: spoiler alert, they do get a goal at the end.
Speaker 1: They get two goals at the end to steal three
Speaker 1: points from Manchester City. But in this incident, in the
Speaker 1: sixty fifth minute, Hoyland gets a three ball loft three
Speaker 1: ball and Reuben Diaz is defending. Now Hoyland is running
Speaker 1: onto the ball. Diaz does seem to get his body
Speaker 1: position in front of Hoyland, but he does so by extending.
Speaker 2: His leg to try to kick the ball away.
Speaker 1: He does not make contact with the ball and kind
Speaker 1: of does make contact with Hoyland.
Speaker 2: However, his leg more so.
Speaker 1: Interferes with Hoyland's ability to then chase the ball that
Speaker 1: kind of had already gone away. No one had any
Speaker 1: control of the ball in this moment. The referee did
Speaker 1: not call a foul ache and then did not call
Speaker 1: a penalty kick. To my knowledge, it wasn't really reviewed.
Speaker 1: Maybe for a hot second there VR did check it
Speaker 1: because it was a you know, if you will, a
Speaker 1: controversial play, But when you look at it again, I
Speaker 1: understand Abby was wondering that, you know, why it wasn't
Speaker 1: a penalty kick.
Speaker 2: You thought it was.
Speaker 1: And I think the biggest thing is because if we're
Speaker 1: talking about var seeing a clear and obvious error here,
Speaker 1: this didn't seem to be clear and obvious that it
Speaker 1: was a foul. Right, This is a fifty to fifty challenge.
Speaker 1: Diaz doesn't necessarily win the ball, but he doesn't make
Speaker 1: any real contact with Hoyland, and in fact, him putting
Speaker 1: his leg out, Hoyland runs into him. Now, had this
Speaker 1: been given a penalty, I could see how that could
Speaker 1: have upheld as well, But I don't think the referee
Speaker 1: not calling this is going to be overturned and maybe
Speaker 1: Manchester United fans will feel a little hard done. But
Speaker 1: the fact that VR didn't spend a whole lot of
Speaker 1: time on this confirms this was not a big deal
Speaker 1: as maybe some of the United fans wanted it to
Speaker 1: be so. Again spoiler alert, Manchester United does end up
Speaker 1: getting the victory to one over Manchester City with some
Speaker 1: very very late goals. But I think for this match,
Speaker 1: Anthony Taylor, a very experienced referee, does manage the match
Speaker 1: pretty well and definitely gets the yellow car defenses correct
Speaker 1: and then I think gets the penalty.
Speaker 2: Kick call correct as well.
Speaker 1: Now, we will move just southwest of Manchester to Liverpool
Speaker 1: where Andy Robertson got himself a red card in the
Speaker 1: Liverpool Fulham match. In the sixteenth minute, Robertson cuts out
Speaker 1: across that Fulham was making. It was kind of a
Speaker 1: deep lying switch more than it was across, but he
Speaker 1: goes to control the ball and.
Speaker 2: Fails to do so.
Speaker 1: So therefore Harry will is able to take it off
Speaker 1: of him and immediately start heading toward goal. But basically
Speaker 1: as soon as Harry Wilson gets the ball, Robertson trips
Speaker 1: him from behind. The ref blows his whistle. But this
Speaker 1: is a key thing. The ball does squirt to Raul
Speaker 1: Jomenez who is making a run on goal. Jimenez tries
Speaker 1: to chip the goalkeeper, is unsuccessful, and then the referee
Speaker 1: blows his whistle. And this is a key point that
Speaker 1: I want to talk about because within the realm of
Speaker 1: Low twelve, which is basically all this particular incident will
Speaker 1: talk about, there is a provision about a referee applying advantage.
Speaker 1: There's also the provision about what constitutes an obvious goal
Speaker 1: scoring opportunity and what happens if you deny one.
Speaker 2: So we're going to.
Speaker 1: Talk about those two things. First, let's talk about Tony
Speaker 1: Harrington having to consider whether or not Robertson did in
Speaker 1: fact deny an obvious goal scoring opportunity. Now he blew
Speaker 1: the whistle and immediately it produced a red card to
Speaker 1: Robertson for a dog so foul. First off, it's very
Speaker 1: clearly a foul. It's a trip from behind. It's a foul, absolutely,
Speaker 1: But in the moment Harrington does have to consider if
Speaker 1: it's a red card or not. So he has to
Speaker 1: go through the four d's of dogsow which, as we've
Speaker 1: talked about before, are distance, direction, distance, and defenders. So
Speaker 1: the first one is distance to goal. The foul happens
Speaker 1: about twenty seven yards from goal. I think it's fair
Speaker 1: to say this is a safe goal scoring opportunity for
Speaker 1: what at this point is now Harry Wilson and Fulham
Speaker 1: direction to play well, Wilson is heading directly toward goal
Speaker 1: after he nips the ball from Robertson. Distance to the ball,
Speaker 1: Wilson is very much controlling it, he's dribbling it. He's
Speaker 1: His first touch was fine. His second touch probably would
Speaker 1: have been fine had he not been fouled by Robertson,
Speaker 1: so his control of the ball and his ability to
Speaker 1: then make a play at had he not been fouled
Speaker 1: very clear. We checked the distance to the ball criteria
Speaker 1: as well. The last one is defenders. I think it's
Speaker 1: very fair to say that while there may have been
Speaker 1: Liverpool defenders in the general area, they were all behind Robertson,
Speaker 1: so it's very unlikely they would have caught Harry Wilson
Speaker 1: in on goal. Now, yes, the goalkeeper was there, but
Speaker 1: we're not talking goalkeepers, were talking defenders, and at this
Speaker 1: point there were no defenders who probably would have had
Speaker 1: to stand a chance to catch up to him, even
Speaker 1: Virgil van Dijk. So even after VR review, which the
Speaker 1: var review.
Speaker 2: Was for.
Speaker 1: What seemed to be more so offside, I think they
Speaker 1: were double checking dogsow but it seemed like they were
Speaker 1: checking to see that Wilson wasn't offside build up, which
Speaker 1: possibly could have negated the goal, which glad we didn't
Speaker 1: get into it because that could have been a very
Speaker 1: contentious offside ruling that we probably would have been talking
Speaker 1: about in this segment instead. But regardless, this meets all
Speaker 1: the requirements for a red card for dogso Robertson is
Speaker 1: rightly sent off, and I think Tony Harrington got this
Speaker 1: very correct in the moment, and I'm.
Speaker 2: Glad var upheld it.
Speaker 1: The second piece of this puzzle to this particular foul
Speaker 1: is the advantage application. Now the play goes on for
Speaker 1: a half second, maybe a full second. The ball rolls
Speaker 1: to Raul Jimenez. Now this is a good piece of
Speaker 1: referring from Harrington, because he sees the foul, he holds
Speaker 1: his whistle for a second to see what happens to
Speaker 1: the ball, because he knows this is a very clear
Speaker 1: and obvious goal scoring opportunity, and he can see that
Speaker 1: ral Jimenez has a chance to get to the ball,
Speaker 1: so he holds his whistle for a second. He doesn't
Speaker 1: necessarily signal advantage or play on, but he does hold
Speaker 1: his whistle.
Speaker 2: He sees him and as get the ball.
Speaker 1: He sees him in as try to chip the goalkeeper,
Speaker 1: which I think at this point now is Ali Solan.
Speaker 1: I think he's back. I think Ali so On is back.
Speaker 1: And then Virgil van Dyke does catch up to it
Speaker 1: and clears the ball before it gets into the goal.
Speaker 1: At that point, when Van Dyke touches the ball, Harrington
Speaker 1: blows his whistle. Now, the reason this is important is
Speaker 1: because Tony Harrington gave a red card to Robertson. Had
Speaker 1: he applied a true advantage and say Jimnez does score, right,
Speaker 1: the foul that Robertson commits is no longer able to
Speaker 1: be given a red.
Speaker 2: Card because the double jeopardy theory.
Speaker 1: So, first off, I think Harrington doesn't really give a
Speaker 1: full on advantage call, So I think that's one way
Speaker 1: that he's kind of saving himself a little bit. But
Speaker 1: for all intents and purposes, he does allow advantage to play,
Speaker 1: or at least allows play to continue just seeing if
Speaker 1: an advantage occurs. Advantage does not occur, so he's able
Speaker 1: to call the foul, bring it back, give a red card.
Speaker 1: Had he not called the foul, had again Hermenez scored,
Speaker 1: or maybe the ball goes out for a corner kick
Speaker 1: or something.
Speaker 2: I don't know.
Speaker 1: To me, only in this incident, a goal scoring would
Speaker 1: have been enough to call the not call the foul back.
Speaker 1: Had he given that advantage, and again a goal is
Speaker 1: scored or something, this foul could not have been a
Speaker 1: red card. It would have had to have been a
Speaker 1: yellow card foul because it's not a handball, a deliberate
Speaker 1: handball anyway, And it's while it's a dilberate, deliberate foul,
Speaker 1: it is within the realm of a legitimate play on
Speaker 1: the ball. I mean, I think Robertson, you could see
Speaker 1: he's not trying to take down Wilson. He is, I
Speaker 1: think trying to at least try to make a challenge
Speaker 1: on the ball. It looks like he's trying to tackle him,
Speaker 1: and he very badly misses. So if an advantage is played,
Speaker 1: and that advantage is given and played through once the
Speaker 1: next stop of the play occurs, Harrington would have had
Speaker 1: to come back and give Robertson a yellow card, not
Speaker 1: a red card, because we do not allow for that advantage.
Speaker 2: To be played.
Speaker 1: Outside of the box for something like this and then
Speaker 1: to get you know, again a goal and a red card.
Speaker 1: Think of this as the same way that we do
Speaker 1: not give red cards that often four thousandside the penalty
Speaker 1: area when we're giving a penalty kick. And the reason
Speaker 1: is the double jeopardy theory that we have been using
Speaker 1: for almost a decade now, if not more.
Speaker 2: So.
Speaker 1: We still try to extend that because you don't want
Speaker 1: to give a team a goal down and a red
Speaker 1: card at any point in time, that's really just not
Speaker 1: okay unless it's a very deliberate, you know, handball or
Speaker 1: you know, if it's in the penalty box, you know,
Speaker 1: a shirt tug or something like that. It's not a
Speaker 1: legitimate play on the ball for Robertson. He's a little
Speaker 1: unlucky that Jamenez doesn't score because he would have stayed
Speaker 1: in the game. But in this instance, I think Harrington
Speaker 1: got a spot on. He saw the foul, he allowed
Speaker 1: play to play on for a half second. Once that
Speaker 1: advantage was very clearly gone, he blew his whistle, came
Speaker 1: back to the original spot of the foul, gave Robertson
Speaker 1: the red card, and allowed Fulham to then take a
Speaker 1: direct free kick from there. Good job by Harrington. But
Speaker 1: I just wanted to talk about the advantage part of
Speaker 1: that and again go over the dog so criteria.
Speaker 2: All right.
Speaker 1: Final play that I want to talk about comes from
Speaker 1: the world of college soccer in the Men's College Cup
Speaker 1: semi final, which, by the way, the Men's College Cup
Speaker 1: Final is going on tonight at this is Monday, so
Speaker 1: going on Monday night, you can watch that on ESPNU
Speaker 1: so the question here is a handball by Vermont. Now,
Speaker 1: the game tying goal scored by Yaev Benzani with seven
Speaker 1: minutes to play, went to VAR review. He scores on
Speaker 1: a very nice lofted through ball. He controls it with
Speaker 1: what looks like his chest, but there is maybe a
Speaker 1: little bit of a possible handball, which again is why
Speaker 1: it goes to VAR. He controls it with his chest,
Speaker 1: brings it down, slots it under the goalkeeper, goes to
Speaker 1: the cornerback flag to celebrate.
Speaker 2: We've got a tie ball game.
Speaker 1: Looks like the College Cup semi final is heading to overtime,
Speaker 1: but VAR wants to take a look. And now VR
Speaker 1: in college is a little bit weird because the camera
Speaker 1: angles are basically only accessible excuse me, the only camera
Speaker 1: angles accessible are those from the television. So we're a
Speaker 1: little lucky that we have TV for these games. But Vermont,
Speaker 1: you know, is celebrating. VR wants to take a check,
Speaker 1: and when you look at it, it wasn't that long
Speaker 1: of a check, but it was long enough to kind
Speaker 1: of make you a question what they were going to do.
Speaker 1: I think the reason why this was checked, and we'll
Speaker 1: talk about Law twelve, is because there's kind of a
Speaker 1: double touch around his shoulder area, and that's the cause
Speaker 1: for the pause.
Speaker 2: Right.
Speaker 1: So Law twelve defines the boundary of the arm as
Speaker 1: the armpit, So anything above the armpit you can play.
Speaker 1: Anything below the armpit can't play. A lot of times,
Speaker 1: we can look at that as the sleeve of the jersey.
Speaker 1: That's not a cut and dry rule for a number
Speaker 1: of reasons, but it's a good.
Speaker 2: Way to kind of visualize it.
Speaker 1: Right where that jersey goes down mid bicep, if you will.
Speaker 1: The first touch hits right at his upper bicep on
Speaker 1: his left arm. Then the ball goes back across his
Speaker 1: body and hits right about where the shoulder joint is
Speaker 1: on his right arm. In live action, that looked clean,
Speaker 1: but the double deflection, I think is why var.
Speaker 2: Kind of wanted to question it.
Speaker 1: However, both of these touches are legal and legitimate, and Bazini,
Speaker 1: you get a goal, you're celebrating.
Speaker 2: It's a good goal.
Speaker 1: And then Vermont goes on to win, not just an overtime,
Speaker 1: but in penalty kicks. So that game tiangle stands, we
Speaker 1: go to penalty kicks, Vermont takes it, they will be
Speaker 1: playing Marshall in the College Cup finals, so some college
Speaker 1: soccer action now again VR in this was we were
Speaker 1: lucky we had some good camera angles. Shout out to
Speaker 1: ESPNU for bringing all the cameras we did get to
Speaker 1: have a couple of looks at it. I do wonder
Speaker 1: had this been maybe in a regional round or before that,
Speaker 1: or even a regular season, how many cameras we would
Speaker 1: have had put up to get the right camera angle,
Speaker 1: in which case I still think the outcome would have
Speaker 1: been the same because you wouldn't have had a legitimate
Speaker 1: view to see if it was good or not.
Speaker 2: But I would have been curious because I don't see.
Speaker 1: I did not see a single camera angle that showed
Speaker 1: this to be any sort of handball. But I'm glad
Speaker 1: they at least took the time to check it. Again,
Speaker 1: it's a very important goal. It's a game deciding goal, really,
Speaker 1: I mean we go from a we go from Denver
Speaker 1: being ahead to Vermont tying, and it's worth taking a
Speaker 1: look and checking it. But again, that boundary for a
Speaker 1: playable part of our arm is the armpit, right, So
Speaker 1: if you look at your armpit, you go down here.
Speaker 1: It's again around your mid bicep. Some people like to
Speaker 1: use it as the shoulder or excuse me, the sleeve
Speaker 1: at the end of the sleeve, but it's around the
Speaker 1: mid bicep really that we're looking at. And both of
Speaker 1: these touches by Bazzini to control of this ball and
Speaker 1: score completely legal.
Speaker 2: Love to see that from the referee crew. Well that's
Speaker 2: all I have for you. I just wanted to talk
Speaker 2: about those three instances.
Speaker 1: I'm sure you'll be hearing from me throughout the holiday
Speaker 1: season as I give you some more updates, not just
Speaker 1: on Reffing Down here, but also on US Soccer. You
Speaker 1: can see you can hear episode one oh six I
Speaker 1: believe of Soccer for US coming out this week as well.
Speaker 1: It'll be a foldlength episode. It's about an hour long
Speaker 1: with my friends US Keeper and USM and T Corner.
Speaker 1: We'll be talking about the year interview and the year
Speaker 1: that was for US soccer. So again, I'm bart for
Speaker 1: Soccer for US podcast, here for Refing down here on
Speaker 1: this SGH special edition. You can follow me on Twitter
Speaker 1: at Soccer for US pod, follow me blue Sky at
Speaker 1: Soccer for US Pod. Hope everyone has a wonderful evening
Speaker 1: and I will talk to you next time.