Network News

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

Koman Coulibaly at the center of World Cup controversy

Simon Haydon of the Associated Press looks at the controversy surrounding Koman Coulibaly, who negated Maurice Edu's goal late in the United States' 2-2 draw with Slovenia.

By Matt Bonesteel  |  June 18, 2010; 3:40 PM ET
Categories:  2010 World Cup  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: Poll: After USA vs. Slovenia, will the Americans advance in World Cup?
Next: World Cup tiebreakers: Where the U.S. stands

Comments

Excellent stuff.

Posted by: Reignking | June 18, 2010 3:55 PM | Report abuse

I read that article a few hours ago and it's a piece of garbage...It was a terrible call, plain and simple, don't go making up reasons for why it's okay, and why it was a foul. Refs are paid to do their job, and do it well, and when they fail, the world sees and they have to take the blame for it. Jim Joyce deserved to burn far more than he got, and these scumbag refs at the World Cup deserve to never ref again. FIFA is a joke of an organization in that it hires refs that have been suspended in the past for match fixing. This guy was a joke of a referee all game, just like how the guy who wrote this article is a joke for making excuses.

Posted by: bryan579 | June 18, 2010 3:57 PM | Report abuse

Just unbelievable.

I believe it was Carlos Bocanegra that was being held in a head lock and it gets missed...

Posted by: CapsNut | June 18, 2010 3:57 PM | Report abuse

Algeria = good.

Our next match will not be easy.

Posted by: Rand-al-Thor | June 18, 2010 3:57 PM | Report abuse

He's not quoting the Ref, right? He's just guessing at the call like anyone else??

Or did I miss somewhere where the actual ref who called it said what he called???

Posted by: JkR- | June 18, 2010 4:12 PM | Report abuse

I have never seen such outrageous bias and absurd disregard for fairness in any sport until I saw Koman Coulibaly today. Either he doesn't understand the game or he is on someone's payroll.

Posted by: icovenant1977 | June 18, 2010 4:12 PM | Report abuse

I've seen hassan yebda play 25 or 30 times. He really is a top player and I wonder what damage he might do to us next week.

Posted by: troy6 | June 18, 2010 4:12 PM | Report abuse

Wow re:England

Posted by: rockotodd | June 18, 2010 4:20 PM | Report abuse

Absolut apologist drivel. Lets see now....US goal disallowed with US players being help all over (see photos) and we are to believe its an honest mistake(s)?
I like the POV from the refs vantage point best. Could you tell me again definitely what the ref saw and what he didn't see and then the odds of missing the fouls against the US and seeing/calling a sort of maybe foul against Slovenia after a game game changing goal?
It is what is.
Remember a Soviet-US basketball game in the 1970's? Could you give me the run down on that too? You know, what the refs saw then too.

Posted by: bluedude | June 18, 2010 4:22 PM | Report abuse

Hands up if you had 1-nil Serbia, 2-2 and nil-nil today...

Posted by: Kev29 | June 18, 2010 4:23 PM | Report abuse

If you want a good laugh, turn on an English radio station right now.

Posted by: Kev29 | June 18, 2010 4:25 PM | Report abuse

The winners today: The English Tabloids.

Posted by: RedDevil1 | June 18, 2010 4:26 PM | Report abuse

That's a horrible article. It's nothing but conjecture but is gussied up as if it's fact. There has not been a single declaration or even hint that a foul was called on Bocanegra. The only thing we know is the match report says foul on Edu. Unless the ref comes out and says he called it on boca there is absolutely no reason to try and claim that as a fact. the ref hasnt comented though which makes it all conjecture.

this is a shockingly bad dereliction of journalistic standards by the AP and the Post. had it been an opinion piece it would be fine (but wrong). but as a factual piece it's shockingly unethical.

Posted by: PindarPushkin | June 18, 2010 4:27 PM | Report abuse

The winners today: The English Tabloids.

Posted by: RedDevil1 | June 18, 2010 4:26 PM

Oh really? We should remind them of this...

http://cdn.majorleaguesoccertalk.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/12/the-sun-world-cup-2010.jpg

Posted by: Kev29 | June 18, 2010 4:29 PM | Report abuse

Seriously? A foul on Bocanegra? He was trying to free himself from the defender's headlock. That was a pretty horrible performance by the referee, and most of it went against the US.

Posted by: zeledonia | June 18, 2010 4:32 PM | Report abuse

As I was reading two things happened...

1) I was watching the replay right on ESPN and I don't see the Boca foul that the "writer" claims happened 10 feet away from the ref...So I call the bull's waste on that claim.

2) As I was reading I kept saying to myself that tis has to be a ref writing. Then I asked "Howard Webb is that you?" Then at the end the writer was identified as a ref.

Birds of a feather and support the profession and all, but my goodness, man. Are you running a high fever?

I call the bull's waste again. Part Deux!!

Posted by: Kosh2 | June 18, 2010 4:32 PM | Report abuse

I think you all are missing the point of the article. Throw out the Bocanegra factor -- those scrums have become ridiculous.

Posted by: Reignking | June 18, 2010 4:33 PM | Report abuse

Good result from the Algeria game. The game against Algeria certainly won't be easy but as it stand all US has to do it win and we are through.

JkR the author is just guessing.

Posted by: grubbsbl | June 18, 2010 4:34 PM | Report abuse

The general point of the article is valid: the scrums have become ridiculous, with blatant fouls by both offenses and defenses on most of them. However, this is a terrible case to use as an example of that. In many of the goalfront battles, both teams are similarly at fault. In this case, replays showed that the US players were being surprisingly clean. Calling a foul against any of the US players in this case was exceedingly harsh - if anything, it should have gone against Slovenia.

Posted by: zeledonia | June 18, 2010 4:39 PM | Report abuse

@Kev29

Do you think they care about what the success of England? They must giddy at all the possible headlines they'll print out tomorrow and how much they will sell. That's what they care about.

Posted by: RedDevil1 | June 18, 2010 4:41 PM | Report abuse

Yeah King the scrums are ridiculous, but they are the nature of the game until FIFA does something to change that. As it is, call a straight and decent game for Pete's sake. This ref wanted to make that call the whole time. If the scrum is unruly stop the play and call the wrestlers out. Flash a card or two and take charge. You don't impact the balance or nature of the game negatively like this so called ref did.

It is what it is, but but there was no foul and the ref...I mean "writer" should step up and just admit it.

Posted by: Kosh2 | June 18, 2010 4:44 PM | Report abuse

kosh, agreed. The ref had been calling phantom calls in the box all day like that -- but usually there was a Slovenian on the ground for embellishment's sake.

Posted by: Reignking | June 18, 2010 4:46 PM | Report abuse

ReignKing and Kosh2:

There are only "scrums" in rugby.

What you have in association football is a bunch of whiny Nancy-boys who dive and get their lacy little knickers in a twist anytime someone touches them.

Enjoy your 0-0 ties.

Posted by: professor70 | June 18, 2010 5:03 PM | Report abuse

Was it an offsides call? Was it a foul? WHAT THE FFFF was the call for? That was ridiculous. Game 3-2 to the USA. Let me repeat the key point here:

THERE WAS NO FOUL.

Posted by: Shadow9 | June 18, 2010 5:04 PM | Report abuse

I just watched the replay for what feels like the thousandth time. The Slovenian had his arm firmly around Bocanegra's neck and Boca ended the play having been forced to the ground as a result. If the Malian ref was that close to these two players, he should have seen what each of them were doing. FIFA loves of the unpredictability of human error and resists change and technology, much like MLB, but at least in baseball umpires have to explain themselves afterward.

Posted by: Louise9 | June 18, 2010 5:06 PM | Report abuse

I can't "throw out the Bocanegra factor" and see any other point in that article because I can't get past the third and fourth paragraphs, which truly are bull's waste.

Third should say "just about every other [Slovenian] player in the penalty area was holding, grabbing, pulling or pushing as the U.S. free kick sailed in to the 18-yard zone" because the US played it clean.

The fourth contains a complete fallacy: that Bocanegra somehow fouled a man while trying to free himself from a headlock.

Posted by: Truckr | June 18, 2010 5:11 PM | Report abuse

Louise9, The referee did explain himself in the match report and he said Edu committed the foul. FIFA does question the referees and review their performance. His match report also probably would have included the fact that Slovenia got 4 yellow cards and the US got 1. Not sure if FIFA will ask the referee why he didn't issue Dempsey a yellow after he elbowed a Slovakian in the head at the beginning of the game.

Posted by: csd1 | June 18, 2010 5:18 PM | Report abuse

Hmm... When I saw the play, I knew it wasn't off-sides (unlike Darke and Harkes), and rewinding on the DVR I saw 3 fouls--two on the US, one on the Slovenes (by Bocanegra on Pecnik). I figured it was on Bocanegra like Haydon. But I've since heard the ref claim that the foul was actually committed by Edu. I'll have to go back home and look for that on the rewind.

Regardless, listening rather than watching the reply, I can clearly hear the whistle before Edu puts the ball in... that's an important point I haven't seen mentioned much. And at the 85th minute, most refs are not going to stand there and explain every call, good or bad. That's why you see a Chelsea player chasing down a ref every time they exit the Champions League. I wonder if anything will happen to Bradley for berating the fourth official?

Posted by: prokaryote | June 18, 2010 5:23 PM | Report abuse

"The referee's job is impossible in these situations." -- So what's the solution? Only allow two field players from each team inside the 18-yard box, with the rest of them 20 yards away? FIFA's gotta come up with a better solution.

Posted by: Juan-John1 | June 18, 2010 5:41 PM | Report abuse

Is it really controversy if the only person who says it wasn't a goal is the ref?

Posted by: UnitedDemon | June 18, 2010 5:50 PM | Report abuse

I find it interesting the csd1 has apparently read the referee report but apparently as of 5:52 pm, none of the national (world?) media has.

And prokaryote, not one player stopped playing when the whistle was blown (in error) so I don't see the importance.

Posted by: Truckr | June 18, 2010 5:54 PM | Report abuse

Is it really controversy if the only person who says it wasn't a goal is the ref?

Posted by: UnitedDemon

I believe your math might be a little off I am thinking the number is at least 2,000,001

1 (Ref) + 2 Million (Slovenians)

Posted by: csd1 | June 18, 2010 5:56 PM | Report abuse

I find it interesting the csd1 has apparently read the referee report but apparently as of 5:52 pm, none of the national (world?) media has.

Posted by: Truckr

Here you go

Posted by: Reignking | June 18, 2010 5:58 PM | Report abuse

Absolute unadulterated bullpoo. And I can't believe more people aren't talking about the ridiculous Peter Pendergrast-esque handball call and yellow card on Findlay, which sidelines him for the Algeria match (not that it's a huge loss). This guy was either crooked or incompetent. Either way, he shouldn't have been on that field today.

Posted by: VamosUnited1 | June 18, 2010 6:04 PM | Report abuse

@csd1

They got the result but I'm sure even they would agree that there was nothing to see.

Posted by: UnitedDemon | June 18, 2010 6:04 PM | Report abuse

Reignking, I'm sorry, where am I suppose to go to find the referee report? I was reading that pretty quickly but the only thing even close to that is the mention of the FIFA play-by-paly, which however "official" is just some FIFA bloak's guess at what the ref called. All other media I've seen says the ref does not have to give a reason in his ref report but not one source has quoted from it or said if it actually did contain an explanation or not. So if you have a better link, or can point it out to me more specifically in this one, I'll look again. But until then, I have to call BS. Not that I much care what the damn ref thought he saw... he was wrong.

Posted by: Truckr | June 18, 2010 6:19 PM | Report abuse

Bocanegra was caught in a headlock. Any call should have gone against Slovenia, but the Ref should have waited in order to play the advantage to the victim (USA)...In other words, it should have been 3-2 USA!

Posted by: akin365 | June 18, 2010 6:26 PM | Report abuse

Reignking,
The official match report from FIFA shows that Edu committed 2 fouls, Bradley 1 and Bocanegra 1.

Bradley - 45th minute
Bocanegra - 22' minute

That leaves Mr Edu who by the FIFA play by play says he committed the foul and prior to that he only had one foul. You can see all of this information on FIFA's website.

FIFA match report:

http://www.fifa.com/worldcup/matches/round=249722/match=300061463/report.html

The referee is in constant communication with the radio attached to his face. FIFA is the official source of information for these matches. FIFA says Maurice Edu committed the foul. It will say it in the referees report since he is the one that is calling the fouls telling FIFA what to put on the play by play and the official report via the gear attached to his face.

Posted by: csd1 | June 18, 2010 6:27 PM | Report abuse

Who cares about soccer? It doesn't matter a damn. US, Slovenia, whatever. For goodness sakes! But the planet is going down the drain because of overpopulation. Please get with the program, folks! http://www.favstocks.com/the-voices-of-a-new-clean-energy-future-–-june-18th-2010-2/1818183/

Posted by: henry6 | June 18, 2010 6:28 PM | Report abuse

It seems to me that the Ref was looking to call a foul on the US instead of looking for fouls. If he'd been looking for fouls, then he would have addressed the headlocks, pushes, etc. earlier in the match.

Posted by: carnack | June 18, 2010 6:33 PM | Report abuse

Like most folks, I think Coulibaly botched the call but I disagree with anyone that thinks Haydon's assesment is wrong.

There's a lot going on and the ref has to call what he can see. Unfortunately he may have seen one minor infringement among a bunch of bigger fouls being committed.

I don't know what the answer is. The ref can blow the whistle before an incoming freekick and warn all the players to stop grappling and shoving, but once he has whistled for the re-start and the ball is kicked he has to call it as he sees it.

I don't know if Bocanegra was the culprit / victim on the occasion, but the ref should call the first non-trifling foul he sees in the sequence. Non-trifling should mean a foul that prevents an opponent from fairly playing the ball.

Any subsequent fouls in the sequence can be dealt with using cards and warnings if necessary.

I don't think the right call was made but who knows whether further video evidence or a photographic sequence will prove the ref right. Optimally, a soccer game should flow and not be constantly interrupted by stoppages. But it's hard to do that in a hardfought game where both teams are determined to play physically.

Posted by: Joel_M_Lane | June 18, 2010 6:39 PM | Report abuse

"The referee did explain himself in the match report and he said Edu committed the foul."

v.

"The referee is in constant communication with the radio attached to his face. FIFA is the official source of information for these matches. FIFA says Maurice Edu committed the foul. It will say it in the referees report since he is the one that is calling the fouls telling FIFA what to put on the play by play and the official report via the gear attached to his face."

Yeah, some explanation.

Posted by: Truckr | June 18, 2010 6:43 PM | Report abuse

I agree with this article and with that I am out...

http://www.mlssoccer.com/news/article/commentary-talking-about-refs-blown-call-useless-us

I'll take a few days off and then I'll start working on the ulcer worrying about the Algeria game.

Posted by: csd1 | June 18, 2010 6:48 PM | Report abuse

The players and the fans have to move on. If Coulibaly had sent Dempsey off early, we would be ecstatic with a tie.

Posted by: I-270Exit1 | June 18, 2010 6:49 PM | Report abuse

@Joel_M_Lane

I watched the replay several times and there is not way in hell that Bocanegra was the culprit. If you make that arguement you are flat out wrong. He was tackled by the neck by the Slovenian player and it is disgraceful journalism to put out an article like that without knowing the facts. Event the players on the field did not know what the call was during the game. Plain and simple the ref is either corrupt or incompetent. FIFA made a major mistake today and the USA had to pay for it. It is a shame because it happens all to often in sports in general. I guess the author of the article also felt like the non-call on Henry's handball was correct also. Give me a break! Bad officiating is bad officiating and there is not excuse for it at this level. There is nothing left to interpretation here. It is black and white. The ref made an erroneous call and now we all have to move on with a bitter feeling in the pit of our stomachs. However there are positives to take from this. Our team has tremendous heart, we still have a chance to get to the round of 16, and the players seemed upbeat after the game.

Posted by: no_recess | June 18, 2010 6:50 PM | Report abuse

also, did anyone notice on the replay that the ref had the whistle in his mouth as the cross came in? he WANTED to blow the whistle before he even saw what happened. the US usually gets the "wrong end of the stick" on these calls in the WC.

Posted by: birdynumnum | June 18, 2010 7:01 PM | Report abuse

csd,

you did not provide a link to any ref report. Probably because there is no such link. The ref report is not the same as FIFA's game reports. I'm guessing it won't become known to the public but, even if it was released, would not contain info about which players committed specific fouls unless those fouls earned a card from the ref.

No Recess,
I am not "flat out wrong" - first of all, I was defending the article not the call.

IF, as the author surmises, the ref saw a foul from Bocanegra (even if he was retaliating for an unseen earlier foul) that prevented a Slovenian player from fairly playing the ball - then the ref should call that foul. Even if there were later fouls by the Slovenian players in that sequence.

As the article points out, there was a lot going on in the box. Unless Coulibaly steps forward to explain his call none of us will know for sure.

Posted by: Joel_M_Lane | June 18, 2010 7:02 PM | Report abuse

Great article. Makes alot of sense and obviously the man understands the game.

Posted by: saranda9193 | June 18, 2010 7:53 PM | Report abuse

Posted by: RedDevil1 | June 18, 2010 8:36 PM | Report abuse

Posted by: sacole13 | June 18, 2010 8:51 PM | Report abuse

Simon Haydon, you're an idiot. Bocanegra's in a headlock, yet he somehow commits the foul? It's somehow our players' fault? Oh, boy.

Post, Goff, please take this lying filth of the site. Haydon's ignorant, blind ramblings have no business being run by a respectable news outlet.

Posted by: DEFPOTEC1 | June 18, 2010 9:06 PM | Report abuse

Koman Coulibaly is pure hot garbage as a ref. FIFA as much as it is corrupt and under European control should have a hearing on all the conducts of match officials during this world cup. This game only comes every four years and for some players this is their last. The US soccer team deserved the win but someones incompetence took that away. I have every confidence in the team to beat Algeria and move on to the elimination stage.

Posted by: glensch21 | June 18, 2010 9:17 PM | Report abuse

Oh, and you people implying Dempsey should've been sent off for the elbow 15 seconds in. I doubt you've ever played the game before. There's ZERO swing there. None. He went up for a header, was up higher, and his elbow happened to go into the Slovenian's ugly face. But a red there would've been absolutely CRIMINAL. De Rossi in USA-Italy, 2006, or Leonardo in USA-Brazil, 1994, now those are red cards offenses, where the offender sizes up the opposing player and actually swings the elbow into the head. Dempsey didn't do that. Frankly, that's not even worthy of a yellow. Period. If you think otherwise, you need to get out on the field and play more, because you don't know the game for crap.

Posted by: DEFPOTEC1 | June 18, 2010 9:27 PM | Report abuse

At least couple of comments said that referees can only called what they see. Of course! However, I wondered if any noticed that in one of the published pictures after the match, wherein the Malian ref was ignoring one of our players' complain, his left eye was half opened. Could he had been like that throughout the match and saw only three fourths of it and, therefore, the bad call? In that case, how could those stupid FIFA officials picked a handicapped ref? Just kidding!!

Posted by: chug1 | June 18, 2010 10:23 PM | Report abuse

Something else I noticed during the game is that the ref was frequently right in the middle of the play almost to the point of obstructing the players. I hate when refs do that.

Posted by: ldmay | June 19, 2010 12:01 AM | Report abuse

Of course, if the USA defenders had done their job in the first half, this discussion might not be taking place...

Posted by: Juan-John1 | June 19, 2010 12:05 AM | Report abuse

Goff, please remove the Haydon article. It is an Opinion piece that tries to pass itself off as fact. It is not worthy of the Post.

Posted by: Golden_Child | June 19, 2010 1:51 AM | Report abuse

If you want to express your displeasure on the quality of refereeing from Koman Coulibaly and the lack of Fair Play you can contact FIFA at:

http://www.fifa.com/contact/form.html

Choose the "Feedback on National Team's Fixtures and Results" option.

Let's let FIFA know what we think! Don't Tread On Me!

Posted by: Golden_Child | June 19, 2010 2:16 AM | Report abuse

Why does everyone assume the call was incompetence? Has no one considered that it could be corruption? Huge amounts of money are wagered on these games. A payoff to a ref is certainly a possibility. This applies to the Germany game as well.

Posted by: Shortpump | June 19, 2010 7:53 AM | Report abuse

My question is this - isn't there some rule about where the refs for each game can come from. FIFA tries for "geographical balance" which I'm all for, and there are plenty of refs to go around. Our group has teams from North America, Europe and Africa. Shouldn't refs from those confederations be in charge of other games. Aren't there enough refs from South America, Oceana, Asia to handle our group? Not only was this guy from Africa, but he's from Mali, which borders Algeria. I know, Algeria wasn't in this game, but they're in the group. It's still a question.

Posted by: harkes4ever | June 19, 2010 8:28 AM | Report abuse

I hadn't watched a soccer game in 30 years, and after watching this one, I remembered why. The officiating is ridiculous. The outcome of the game depends more on luck than skill. I won't watch another.

Posted by: ploverinn | June 19, 2010 9:14 AM | Report abuse

I hadn't watched a soccer game in 30 years, and after watching this one, I remembered why. The officiating is ridiculous. The outcome of the game depends more on luck than skill. I won't watch another.

Posted by: ploverinn | June 19, 2010 9:14 AM | Report abuse

as they say: "don't let the door hit ya, where the good lord split ya".

Posted by: birdynumnum | June 19, 2010 10:36 AM | Report abuse

Thinking about how much better the referees were during the first round. Reminds me of how they arrange comedy acts in a club. The ones in the middle are always the worst, the first ones are good, and the comic to finish off the evening is always the best. I'm assuming FIFA will discontinue the service of the Malian referee as well as a couple of the posers we saw in round 2.

Posted by: paulkp | June 19, 2010 12:05 PM | Report abuse

The comments to this entry are closed.

 
 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company