Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity
On Twitter: SoccerInsider and PostSports  |  Facebook  |  Sports e-mail alerts  |  RSS

USSF Opinion on Dallas Red Card

In the latest installment of the USSF's Referee Week in Review, the supervisors do not address whether D.C. United's Santino Quaranta was truly fouled for a game-tying penalty kick in last weekend's 2-2 draw at Dallas. However, they do conclude that the decision to send off Dallas defender Daniel Torres was incorrect.

By Steve Goff  |  September 11, 2009; 12:16 AM ET
Categories:  D.C. United , MLS , USSF  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: Drivers Wanted: Mike Ammann
Next: Friday Kickaround


Well if the USSF don't say Quaranta is a diver I won't either.
You heard it here FIRST!

Posted by: DadRyan | September 11, 2009 12:38 AM | Report abuse

is the ussf really helping itself by second guessing mls referees' decisions every week?

Posted by: HWLongfellow | September 11, 2009 12:56 AM | Report abuse

We could hope that perhaps it's helping MLS' referees...

Posted by: vivzig | September 11, 2009 1:15 AM | Report abuse

I think that is the hope.

Posted by: DadRyan | September 11, 2009 1:21 AM | Report abuse

SIAPOA?? The 4 Ds? No wonder refs get so many calls wrong. They're trying to remember ridiculous acronyms, instead of making intuitive calls.

Posted by: fischy | September 11, 2009 1:33 AM | Report abuse

I suspect that the evaluations that MLS officials receive after each match is more helpful to them than the week in review page. The goal of the that page is to instruct other referees on the finer points of the federation's advice (and as Fischy has noted, the USSF produces lots of advice). Sometimes, the "Week in Review" page highlights correct decisions or actions by referees, ARs, and 4Os. This way, theoretically, the folks doing house leagues, travel leagues, and adults are all using the same criteria on when to issue cards, or are using the same mechanisms to handle mass confrontations.

Posted by: mason08 | September 11, 2009 1:53 AM | Report abuse

Can someone please explain how these refs are hired and what they are paid? Where's the funding come from?? And in comparison to other leagues how do the MLS refs compare in terms of salary?

Completely utterly OT: How about just piping in the pre-recorded anthem? It works. I just remembered this from Wed night.

Posted by: DCB23 | September 11, 2009 6:27 AM | Report abuse

"The 4 Ds?"

Sounds like my report card after my first semester of college.

Posted by: no_recess | September 11, 2009 8:22 AM | Report abuse

So will fans complaining how we were "robbed" of X points this season now give two of them back?

Posted by: beach3 | September 11, 2009 8:30 AM | Report abuse

So will fans complaining how we were "robbed" of X points this season now give two of them back?

Posted by: beach3 | September 11, 2009 8:30 AM | Report abuse


I mean one. I count as well as MLS refs see.

Posted by: beach3 | September 11, 2009 8:31 AM | Report abuse

Irregardless, bigapplesoccer needs an editor.

Posted by: Reignking | September 11, 2009 8:36 AM | Report abuse

Wow, I'm surprised that they would be that picky about the interpretation of DOGSO (well, I guess referees are a picky lot).

If Quaranta switches the ball to his left foot - a relatively simple move for a professional - the angle is completely to his advantage and the keeper at sea.

Posted by: teo_68 | September 11, 2009 9:08 AM | Report abuse

This Week in Review is full of crap and in direct contradiction to all sorts of past guidance on DOGSO. Now they want to focus on "obvious" where in the past they focused on "opportunity". That is to say, that the player only needed to have an opportunity to score taken away by the foul, not a definite goal. They admit that the window to score would have been small, but not that it didn't exist at all. If any opportunity existed then this should be the correct decision.

This is what happens when Paul Tamberino and Brian Hall have too much time on their hands.

Posted by: fedssocr | September 11, 2009 9:14 AM | Report abuse

So will the MLS rescind the one-game suspension handed out to the player given the red card?

They should. Red cards should be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. Suspending a player for an additional game due to an official's mistake is an unfair travesty.

Posted by: Cerealman | September 11, 2009 9:56 AM | Report abuse

Doesn't make a whole lot of sense, and directly contradicts FIFA guidance, never mind USSF's. If a player's brought down from behind in a one-on-one opportunity, isn't that an automatic red? I thought the red was harsh/regrettable too, but if it's judged that a foul did take place -- vicious or not -- I don't think the ref has a choice in the matter.


Posted by: Godfather_of_Goals | September 11, 2009 10:12 AM | Report abuse

Wow..the reaction to this DOGSO interpretation on ref forums has been instant and brutal. You ever wonder why refs make mistakes on major calls, or why different refs call things different ways? Because of stupid memos like this from the USSF.
They've taken a simple call, and now make is as confusing as offside. It's not enough to be fouled when your on a breakaway, now it's only a red card if you're running at the proper angle and keeper's not in a good position to make the save. It's time to stop blaming the refs...start blaming their bosses.

Posted by: icehippo | September 11, 2009 10:54 AM | Report abuse

It's just a horrible interpretation of the law.
It's supposed to be a red card if a foul denies an "obvious goalscoring opportunity".
The USSF is ignoring the word "obvious", and replacing it with "easy". That's not the law! It's obvious that Santino has a goalscoring'd have to be an idiot to deny that. I can't wait until a US ref makes this new call at a FIFA tournament...they'll be skewered!

Posted by: icehippo | September 11, 2009 11:09 AM | Report abuse

The USSF should be working to simplify and standardize foul calls, not make them more and more complicated.
Maybe next they'll have us consider the players involved. If there's a really good keeper and a rookie on attack, , maybe it's not as obvious a goal scoring opportunity as it would be with a world class striker and a poor keeper.
maybe that's a bit extreme, but we really seem to be going in that direction.

Last one...I promise. :)
As a ref, I'm just really pissed here.

Posted by: icehippo | September 11, 2009 11:11 AM | Report abuse

I have no idea what all these acronyms stand for (IHNIWATASF).

Posted by: I-270Exit1 | September 11, 2009 11:17 AM | Report abuse

beach3 wrote "So will fans complaining how we were "robbed" of X points this season now give (one) of them back?"

Yes. Completely irrespective of the USSF Week in Review in this case, I've been doing just that, because I honestly don't think Tino was fouled.

So, instead of seven points, I'm griping about six.

Posted by: christopher_a_metzler | September 11, 2009 11:32 AM | Report abuse

Screw it, I'm still griping about 7 points!

This article never says that it was wrong to call a penalty kick, it just says that it was wrong to award a red card. While the defender might not have denied an obvious goal scoring opportunity, he did still commit a foul. Tino was running at full speed and Torres clipped his heel. That's a foul anywhere on the field, including within the penalty area.

Posted by: DCUMD | September 11, 2009 12:14 PM | Report abuse

tino embelished the foul. he sold it. i dont think it was a red card. but we have been owed 5 previous bad calls. so now we are owed only 4.

the refs in the mls are worse than any refs in europe, mexico or south america.

Posted by: castroviejo | September 11, 2009 2:50 PM | Report abuse

there are plenty of bad referee performances in all of those places you mention. MLS does not have the monopoly on that.

Posted by: fedssocr | September 11, 2009 6:46 PM | Report abuse

Does ne1 know where the USA National Soccer team will be staying in San Pedro Sula?

Posted by: yositunel | September 14, 2009 6:27 PM | Report abuse

The comments to this entry are closed.

RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company