I’m torn about the Miami-Charlotte PK. On one hand, the defender gets the ball. On the other hand, he grabs the attacker’s shoulder way before making contact with the ball. I’d have upheld the PK. The contrast is especially stark with the Toronto PK at the end. What the VAR showed the official did not come close to establishing that the defender tripped the attacker. If anything, the views VAR showed the ref made it look like the defender got the ball and the attacker tripped over the stopped ball. It’s only with the very last view shown here, that VAR did not show the ref, that establishes that the defender did not get the ball. Even then, the contact was minimal at best and the attacker drops like a sack of grain. I also did not like the way VAR was trying to establish the defender’s intent. They were clearly going for the ball, but the attacker made a touch to maneuver around them. It was deceptive to say the defender moved his leg to trip the attacker. The defender had stepped there and was leaving his leg there to intercept the ball. No way they could establish intent without magically reading the defender’s mind.
Also remember that a “pulling foul” on DOGSO is a red card, it does look like the defender pulls the attacker back in order to get the ball. Should have been a PK, but PRO will not be transparent with their errors and tends to find a justification to support the officials.
Intent is wholly irrelevant for whether or not a tripping foul occurred. Thats not what the VAR meant, nor does it have anything to do with the referees decision.
@@thepigproductivity I completely agree about intent - that’s why I found it so strange that VAR kept pushing it. If that’s not what they meant, then they should have been clearer. They were definitely saying the defender wasn’t trying to play the ball. Given where his foot was (right where he put it when running), there was no motion towards the attacker, the only way to interpret that is that the VAR was trying to establish intent.
@@DukeTrout I just watched the conversation between the VAR and the referee and I didn’t hear anyone say anything about intent. Describing a leg moving backwards is not trying to establish intent because intent is irrelevant. It is just describing the motion of the challenge. And the defender absolutely moved his leg backwards, into the path of the attacker. Which is useful to point out, not to establish intent, but to establish that a tripping foul occurred.
Big surprise. Someone would give Miami the penalty and the win. Big shocker. I am so sick of Messi. Can't wait for him to retire and never darken soccer's doorstep ever again. Plus, Malanda doesn't even touch the defender's shoulder until AFTER he touched the ball.
i thought var was supposed to assist and provide camera angles not strongly hold opinions well showing the film. Also the Miami reversal penalty caul is not a foul with medium contact and the defenders hand on the shoulder pulling him back at least slightly we cant tell the force, but the next or last video of the defender holding is leg out where the attacker runs into is a foul. I could see foul for both but the last one is soft
VAR is a full referee who does look for infractions that were overlooked. They find the film and present it to the center ref, with their opinion. The center ref still has the final call, but if he missed something, as on the last example, even THEY thought it was ok at first if you listen and then they examined it, as they should, and found the foul, which the defender would have gotten away with otherwise. A ref cannot always see things, but they must be told what the team has found, and I have seen these where the VAR makes a recommendation and the center ref STAYS with their original call, even if it was incorrect. The presenter will break the more complex ones down. It is a really great watch on these, it helps you understand more what is happening when something is being checked.
@@btjohnns VAR is definitely supposed to make a recommendation. We’ve seen that shown as both passive and very aggressive recommendations on this channel.
He was traveling at a decent speed and he would have stumbled at best still and not made a good shot. When his leg gets tagged like that, it can easily throw the player off balance so that he can't recover.
@@eboethrasher How much culpability does the attacker have for creating the contact? The defender just left their foot in the way of the ball. The attacker ran over it. We’ve seen it several times this season with players like Denny Bouanga, where the attacker creates the contact and goes down. For me, that’s not a foul. An attacker tripping over an object that is either static or moving away from them is simulation.
That Charlotte-miami pen is such a penalty its not even funny. Horrid work from the var crew. Malanda has to go straight through the Miami player to get the ball. It is so clear in the replay that he gets his knee way before the ball. Not only should it have not been taken to the monitor, even at the monitor how did the ref not catch it???
VAR giving too much opinion. On that first PK, there is contact on the hips before contact with the ball. Whether that changes the call or not is up for discussion, but the VAR should not be giving such strongly held opinions.
I’m torn about the Miami-Charlotte PK. On one hand, the defender gets the ball. On the other hand, he grabs the attacker’s shoulder way before making contact with the ball. I’d have upheld the PK. The contrast is especially stark with the Toronto PK at the end. What the VAR showed the official did not come close to establishing that the defender tripped the attacker. If anything, the views VAR showed the ref made it look like the defender got the ball and the attacker tripped over the stopped ball. It’s only with the very last view shown here, that VAR did not show the ref, that establishes that the defender did not get the ball. Even then, the contact was minimal at best and the attacker drops like a sack of grain. I also did not like the way VAR was trying to establish the defender’s intent. They were clearly going for the ball, but the attacker made a touch to maneuver around them. It was deceptive to say the defender moved his leg to trip the attacker. The defender had stepped there and was leaving his leg there to intercept the ball. No way they could establish intent without magically reading the defender’s mind.
Also remember that a “pulling foul” on DOGSO is a red card, it does look like the defender pulls the attacker back in order to get the ball. Should have been a PK, but PRO will not be transparent with their errors and tends to find a justification to support the officials.
Intent is wholly irrelevant for whether or not a tripping foul occurred. Thats not what the VAR meant, nor does it have anything to do with the referees decision.
@@thepigproductivity I completely agree about intent - that’s why I found it so strange that VAR kept pushing it. If that’s not what they meant, then they should have been clearer. They were definitely saying the defender wasn’t trying to play the ball. Given where his foot was (right where he put it when running), there was no motion towards the attacker, the only way to interpret that is that the VAR was trying to establish intent.
@@DukeTrout I just watched the conversation between the VAR and the referee and I didn’t hear anyone say anything about intent. Describing a leg moving backwards is not trying to establish intent because intent is irrelevant. It is just describing the motion of the challenge.
And the defender absolutely moved his leg backwards, into the path of the attacker. Which is useful to point out, not to establish intent, but to establish that a tripping foul occurred.
Big surprise. Someone would give Miami the penalty and the win. Big shocker. I am so sick of Messi. Can't wait for him to retire and never darken soccer's doorstep ever again.
Plus, Malanda doesn't even touch the defender's shoulder until AFTER he touched the ball.
i thought var was supposed to assist and provide camera angles not strongly hold opinions well showing the film. Also the Miami reversal penalty caul is not a foul with medium contact and the defenders hand on the shoulder pulling him back at least slightly we cant tell the force, but the next or last video of the defender holding is leg out where the attacker runs into is a foul. I could see foul for both but the last one is soft
VAR is a full referee who does look for infractions that were overlooked. They find the film and present it to the center ref, with their opinion. The center ref still has the final call, but if he missed something, as on the last example, even THEY thought it was ok at first if you listen and then they examined it, as they should, and found the foul, which the defender would have gotten away with otherwise. A ref cannot always see things, but they must be told what the team has found, and I have seen these where the VAR makes a recommendation and the center ref STAYS with their original call, even if it was incorrect. The presenter will break the more complex ones down. It is a really great watch on these, it helps you understand more what is happening when something is being checked.
@@btjohnns VAR is definitely supposed to make a recommendation. We’ve seen that shown as both passive and very aggressive recommendations on this channel.
While that last one was a pen I wish I wasn't because he could have just played through but chose to fall like a whimp.
He was traveling at a decent speed and he would have stumbled at best still and not made a good shot. When his leg gets tagged like that, it can easily throw the player off balance so that he can't recover.
@@eboethrasher How much culpability does the attacker have for creating the contact? The defender just left their foot in the way of the ball. The attacker ran over it. We’ve seen it several times this season with players like Denny Bouanga, where the attacker creates the contact and goes down. For me, that’s not a foul. An attacker tripping over an object that is either static or moving away from them is simulation.
That Charlotte-miami pen is such a penalty its not even funny. Horrid work from the var crew. Malanda has to go straight through the Miami player to get the ball. It is so clear in the replay that he gets his knee way before the ball. Not only should it have not been taken to the monitor, even at the monitor how did the ref not catch it???
VAR giving too much opinion. On that first PK, there is contact on the hips before contact with the ball. Whether that changes the call or not is up for discussion, but the VAR should not be giving such strongly held opinions.