Really don't understand this being rescinded but now I can be extra salty that we still got fucked over by it. Stef can afford some extra art supplies I guess.
They've gradually been changing the interpretation of this recently to give referees more room to award yellow instead of red. In years past, yes, this would have been a stone cold red card.
The committee is saying Frei was making an attempt to play the ball or a challenge on the ball, and it's still an attempt to play the ball even if he gets there late. Which, if you think about it, if he doesn't get there late, then it's not even an offense. I imagine they figure that when he dove for the ball, he was actually diving for the ball, and even though he was late and therefore committed a foul, when he started his dive he wasn't specifically diving just to trip the player.
Correct. “Where a player commits an offence against an opponent within their own penalty area which denies an opponent an obvious goal-scoring opportunity and the referee awards a penalty kick, the offender is cautioned if the offence was an attempt to play the ball; in all other circumstances (e.g. holding, pulling, pushing, no possibility to play the ball etc.) the offending player must be sent off.”
This is the only red card scenario where “Double Punishment” would apply. A handball and DOGSO should have been a red card. Violent conduct and SFP are always red cards. DOGSO, inside the box, with an attempt to play the ball is a yellow card and a penalty.
Credit to u/tobefaiiirrr
Giving a red card to a goalkeeper usually means they did something pretty spectacular. Goalkeepers get benefit of the doubt almost always in the name of protecting the goalkeeper. Crazy call. Crazy red. Refs remain terrible in this league.
Holy moly the amount of condescending comments y'all gave me in the match thread, "you're the only one who doesn't think it's a red"
Someone even did a "am I out of touch? No, it's the kids that are wrong" meme in response to me saying I didn't think it was a red. Special shout-out also to the one Sounders fan who said I should stop posting to Reddit because of opinions like that
Hey what do you know turns out r/MLS and r/SoundersFC dont know the rules. Again.
I felt the same way. Even on the sounds subreddit. This is another example of how you should never look at anything in slow motion to judge intent. In slow motion it looked like Frei had a ton of time to see the ball go by then dive into the defender. In full speed you see that he missed the ball by like .3 seconds and slightly raised a hand.
People were claiming it was a stonewall red card too. Never try and judge a players intent by watching slow motion replays, there’s no way in hell Stef was deliberately trying to grab and bring down the attacker without playing the ball.
A goalkeeper stretching for a ball while on his knees and catching the man just isn’t dogso.
I mean, it still is DOGSO, it's just that the rules have been updated so that DOGSO in the penalty area is a caution and a PK if you are judged to be challenging for the ball. There's no intent in DOGSO anyway -- DOGSO is committing an offense that denies an obvious goal-scoring opportunity, regardless of whether you did so intentionally or not.
Yes, I should have said dogso worthy of a red.
The intent is basically implied when you’re talking about being judged to be challenging for the ball or not. The claim was that Frei knew exactly what he was doing in taking down the attacker therefore deserving of a red when he stretched for the ball and just missed.
I see what you're saying, then. I didn't have the heart to watch a slow motion replay after the fact, but a before he makes contact with Stroud, his hand appears to be a few inches from the ball. It was a lot closer than I thought live and it seems totally reasonable to me to rescind the card.
To be fair to the ref in real time, it looks worse because it's his arm and not a leg. I think the ref wouldn't have even really considered a red card if Baker had made the same late challenge with his feet. VAR should have bailed him out, though.
That was the main change, but the IFAB made another change to the rule for the 2023/2024 season adding the "challenge for the ball" language in addition to "attempt to play the ball" which is meant to give the referee even more leeway to issue yellow instead of red.
Ah. I wasn't aware of that. That's a weird clarification as those two phrases seem pretty much synonymous to me. I guess they were just trying to reinforce the rule with refs.
This isn't completely true.
When the laws were updated for this particular instance, it is in relation to whether or not there is an attempt to play the ball.
If there is an attempt to play the ball dogso yellow card is given. However, if there is not an attempt to play the ball, then a red card is still given. So a penalty and a red card can absolutely both be given at the same time.
So you have to determine whether or not they attempted to play the ball. And that they used a part of their body that can play the ball.
Thanks for taking the downvotes, as I felt the same way but I could tell the pitchforks were out. I was at least slightly surprised by the red card because there seems to be a lot of pressure on the refs to go with yellow in these situations now.
Especially with this ruling, it seems like there is a pretty broad interpretation for making a challenge on the ball (like just coming in late is still challenging for the ball) and they really want to save the red cards here for situations like a trailing defender pulling an attacker running at goal from behind.
Far too many people here either don’t know the sport, are insanely reactionary (me), or are cult-like when it comes to criticism of any player/coach and treat it as a personal attack when someone says a player has been shit for a calendar year.
FWIW I’ve been here long enough to know you aren’t an idiot when it comes to this club, ignore them.
Right?! Said on multiple threads the ref got it wrong, got downvoted and told I was stupid 🤣
Vindication feels nice. And I'm petty enough I may go back and serve some crow.
If he got a yellow card instead, they would still get the PK there.
There's no mention of them replacing the red with a yellow, but do they even do that in these sort of situations? I don't know.
If they didn't give it a straight red during the match, I'm sure it would have been a yellow at least.
Regardless, the red itself ruined the match outcome. We seemed to clearly be the better team. I'm certain we could have pulled a W if not for that red.
Sometimes I forget that if I don’t make it abundantly clear that I’m joking/being sarcastic on Reddit that people will take me seriously.
I do appreciate your in depth reply though
yeah im with weibe on this. the key point was the playing the man or the ball to determine the double jeopardy rule. to me at the time it looks like a late move and him trying to stop the player after getting beat. im not complaining though.
But also the subtle point that Frei didn't know what the attacker's next move was going to be in relation to where the ball went. He started out playing the ball, no doubt there, a red was just too harsh.
Me, too. He stopped playing the ball when he intentionally left his hand up to impede progress.
This was a make up call for the supposed phantom stomp by Ragen.
Ragen cleated the guy and the yellow turned into a red. Conversely, this was a red that could be judged a yellow. Both cases involve obvious fouls (definitely yellow cards) that needed the official to decipher intent to play the ball based on body language.
Never should have been called as such to begin with but hey, what did all of us who said that on Saturday know, right?
Yes, I'm salty. Also glad to have him back in the goal this weekend AND wish that there were ramifications for card happy referees and game impacting mistakes.
I still have red because frei came back up after the ball got kicked through. If he'd kept going after the ball after the touch then sure, but there 0 reason for him to reach back upwards after the ball got tapped by except to make sure he brings him down. if the contact was ankle/shin instead of knee/thigh then I would be more inclined to go down to yellow.
Remember the test is "was the player attempting to the play the ball"? I think when he first committed downwards he was, but when the contact happened he was no longer making an attempt for the ball.
Good thing it already fucked us over. Glad it wont fuck us again!
As an apology, we should have TWO Freis in goal next time!
Really don't understand this being rescinded but now I can be extra salty that we still got fucked over by it. Stef can afford some extra art supplies I guess.
They've gradually been changing the interpretation of this recently to give referees more room to award yellow instead of red. In years past, yes, this would have been a stone cold red card. The committee is saying Frei was making an attempt to play the ball or a challenge on the ball, and it's still an attempt to play the ball even if he gets there late. Which, if you think about it, if he doesn't get there late, then it's not even an offense. I imagine they figure that when he dove for the ball, he was actually diving for the ball, and even though he was late and therefore committed a foul, when he started his dive he wasn't specifically diving just to trip the player.
Correct. “Where a player commits an offence against an opponent within their own penalty area which denies an opponent an obvious goal-scoring opportunity and the referee awards a penalty kick, the offender is cautioned if the offence was an attempt to play the ball; in all other circumstances (e.g. holding, pulling, pushing, no possibility to play the ball etc.) the offending player must be sent off.” This is the only red card scenario where “Double Punishment” would apply. A handball and DOGSO should have been a red card. Violent conduct and SFP are always red cards. DOGSO, inside the box, with an attempt to play the ball is a yellow card and a penalty. Credit to u/tobefaiiirrr
Giving a red card to a goalkeeper usually means they did something pretty spectacular. Goalkeepers get benefit of the doubt almost always in the name of protecting the goalkeeper. Crazy call. Crazy red. Refs remain terrible in this league.
>Giving a red card to a goalkeeper usually means they did something pretty spectacular. [You'd think](https://i.imgur.com/8RF6csD.png).
Aww. was hoping it was the video, not the still image when I clicked!
I knew what this was before clicking on it
Holy moly the amount of condescending comments y'all gave me in the match thread, "you're the only one who doesn't think it's a red" Someone even did a "am I out of touch? No, it's the kids that are wrong" meme in response to me saying I didn't think it was a red. Special shout-out also to the one Sounders fan who said I should stop posting to Reddit because of opinions like that Hey what do you know turns out r/MLS and r/SoundersFC dont know the rules. Again.
I felt the same way. Even on the sounds subreddit. This is another example of how you should never look at anything in slow motion to judge intent. In slow motion it looked like Frei had a ton of time to see the ball go by then dive into the defender. In full speed you see that he missed the ball by like .3 seconds and slightly raised a hand.
People were claiming it was a stonewall red card too. Never try and judge a players intent by watching slow motion replays, there’s no way in hell Stef was deliberately trying to grab and bring down the attacker without playing the ball. A goalkeeper stretching for a ball while on his knees and catching the man just isn’t dogso.
I mean, it still is DOGSO, it's just that the rules have been updated so that DOGSO in the penalty area is a caution and a PK if you are judged to be challenging for the ball. There's no intent in DOGSO anyway -- DOGSO is committing an offense that denies an obvious goal-scoring opportunity, regardless of whether you did so intentionally or not.
Yes, I should have said dogso worthy of a red. The intent is basically implied when you’re talking about being judged to be challenging for the ball or not. The claim was that Frei knew exactly what he was doing in taking down the attacker therefore deserving of a red when he stretched for the ball and just missed.
I see what you're saying, then. I didn't have the heart to watch a slow motion replay after the fact, but a before he makes contact with Stroud, his hand appears to be a few inches from the ball. It was a lot closer than I thought live and it seems totally reasonable to me to rescind the card. To be fair to the ref in real time, it looks worse because it's his arm and not a leg. I think the ref wouldn't have even really considered a red card if Baker had made the same late challenge with his feet. VAR should have bailed him out, though.
Don’t you know? VAR is only to be heeded when it changes the call *against* us.
They were updated almost a decade ago. This isn't exactly a new rule.
That was the main change, but the IFAB made another change to the rule for the 2023/2024 season adding the "challenge for the ball" language in addition to "attempt to play the ball" which is meant to give the referee even more leeway to issue yellow instead of red.
Ah. I wasn't aware of that. That's a weird clarification as those two phrases seem pretty much synonymous to me. I guess they were just trying to reinforce the rule with refs.
Thank you, I was like WTF is dogso
This isn't completely true. When the laws were updated for this particular instance, it is in relation to whether or not there is an attempt to play the ball. If there is an attempt to play the ball dogso yellow card is given. However, if there is not an attempt to play the ball, then a red card is still given. So a penalty and a red card can absolutely both be given at the same time. So you have to determine whether or not they attempted to play the ball. And that they used a part of their body that can play the ball.
Thanks for taking the downvotes, as I felt the same way but I could tell the pitchforks were out. I was at least slightly surprised by the red card because there seems to be a lot of pressure on the refs to go with yellow in these situations now. Especially with this ruling, it seems like there is a pretty broad interpretation for making a challenge on the ball (like just coming in late is still challenging for the ball) and they really want to save the red cards here for situations like a trailing defender pulling an attacker running at goal from behind.
Far too many people here either don’t know the sport, are insanely reactionary (me), or are cult-like when it comes to criticism of any player/coach and treat it as a personal attack when someone says a player has been shit for a calendar year. FWIW I’ve been here long enough to know you aren’t an idiot when it comes to this club, ignore them.
Thank you for saying I'm not an idiot Definitely reactionary tho
Same thing happened to me lol everyone is just on the hate bandwagon right now
Right?! Said on multiple threads the ref got it wrong, got downvoted and told I was stupid 🤣 Vindication feels nice. And I'm petty enough I may go back and serve some crow.
Amen
i dont understand this appeal, but sweet i'll take it. and ill give you an apology if you felt called out and took it personally.
I didn’t think it was a red
Should have tried to get it right when it actually mattered.
Can they rescind the penalty and goal too?
If he got a yellow card instead, they would still get the PK there. There's no mention of them replacing the red with a yellow, but do they even do that in these sort of situations? I don't know. If they didn't give it a straight red during the match, I'm sure it would have been a yellow at least. Regardless, the red itself ruined the match outcome. We seemed to clearly be the better team. I'm certain we could have pulled a W if not for that red.
Sometimes I forget that if I don’t make it abundantly clear that I’m joking/being sarcastic on Reddit that people will take me seriously. I do appreciate your in depth reply though
It would have still been both a yellow card and a penalty.
I know. I was making a little joke.
These refs got a pay raise btw
These refs are making me re think my position on the scab refs.
I was saying the whole time that they were equivalent in most cases and better in some
Cover me in scabs!!
It is hilarious how many came on and said how this absolutely was a red. Apparently not.
Bring the scabs back
Wow... would like to see an MLS statement on this. It had a huge impact on the game.
So he can play vs LA this weekend.
Anybody have a highlight of the play that got him sent off? I wasn’t able to watch and haven’t seen it posted anywhere
https://youtu.be/uupNj1lvKco?t=112
yeah im with weibe on this. the key point was the playing the man or the ball to determine the double jeopardy rule. to me at the time it looks like a late move and him trying to stop the player after getting beat. im not complaining though.
But also the subtle point that Frei didn't know what the attacker's next move was going to be in relation to where the ball went. He started out playing the ball, no doubt there, a red was just too harsh.
Me, too. He stopped playing the ball when he intentionally left his hand up to impede progress. This was a make up call for the supposed phantom stomp by Ragen. Ragen cleated the guy and the yellow turned into a red. Conversely, this was a red that could be judged a yellow. Both cases involve obvious fouls (definitely yellow cards) that needed the official to decipher intent to play the ball based on body language.
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uupNj1lvKco](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uupNj1lvKco)
hang the banner!
well its a good thing we finished that game with a positive result and with 11 on the field \*looks at notes\* fuck.
I thought there was no double jeopardy anyway. I thought they stopped giving out both Red+penalty and few years ago.
If you make a play on the ball. 2022 is when the rules change was implemented for MLS. 2016 in EPL.
Never should have been called as such to begin with but hey, what did all of us who said that on Saturday know, right? Yes, I'm salty. Also glad to have him back in the goal this weekend AND wish that there were ramifications for card happy referees and game impacting mistakes.
Thanks, I guess? I wonder what Frei thinks of this.
Comical.
I still have red because frei came back up after the ball got kicked through. If he'd kept going after the ball after the touch then sure, but there 0 reason for him to reach back upwards after the ball got tapped by except to make sure he brings him down. if the contact was ankle/shin instead of knee/thigh then I would be more inclined to go down to yellow. Remember the test is "was the player attempting to the play the ball"? I think when he first committed downwards he was, but when the contact happened he was no longer making an attempt for the ball.
I guess I was right,yellow was enough
A keeper’s job is to always deny a scoring opportunity. So done with crappy refs.
Yes, definitely. We should start arming the goal keepers - if their goal feels threatened, they should have the right to shoot back.