By Paul Gardner
I am not one of those who feel that the refereeing in MLS is inferior. We hear from time to time -- quite often, from Brit imports
-- that MLS referees are incompetent and not in the same class as the English Premier League refs. What those critics forget -- or, more probably, haven't the wit to realize -- is that we have by
now seen years and years of English Premier League games and we know quite a lot about the standard of English referees. It is good, certainly, but not perfect by any means.
This is just
about what you would expect for a high-speed human activity that involves so much instant judgment. The level of achievement will vary from ref to ref -- and even with the same ref, from game to
What the Brit critics mean is that the refereeing here is rather different
from what they're used to. That may, by their narrow thinking,
make it inferior. Not by mine, it doesn't. In one crucial respect -- that of handing out punishment for violent play and rough tackling -- I see the Brit refs as palpably inadequate. MLS refs do a
better job in applying the rules in that area.
Having said all of that, having, I hope, established that I am not a serial criticizer of MLS refs, I shall now do just that: criticize the
performance of two MLS refs this weekend.
I'm not sure how to explain Kevin Stott's performance in the Houston-Los Angeles game. It's best described as EPL style reffing at its most
lenient, with Stott repeatedly allowing all sorts of fouls to go unpunished. Mostly these were not violent -- but they were certainly fouls that altered the complexion of the game. Granting a team
possession when it should have been penalized is the sort of decision that changes games -- and there were plenty of those decisions from Stott.
This was not an easy game -- I suppose it
would be termed chippy. The fact that Stott called 31 fouls, but should have called probably a dozen more, tells the tale. Stott's cards should have come out a lot earlier -- he did eventually give
five, but all came in the final minutes of the game.
With his laxity, Stott gave us a game that was tailor-made for the likes of the Galaxy's Dema Kovalenko. Not highly watchable, I
As I happen to think that Stott is normally one of the best refs in MLS, I shall assume that he just had a bad day ... and pass on to the action of referee Jorge Gonzalez in the
New England- Chicago game.
This all boils down to about one minute of play: A breakaway by Chicago's Chris Rolfe in the 62nd minute. Rolfe was clean through when Revs goalkeeper Matt Reis
confronted him -- in the Revs' penalty area. Rolfe went down.
Now: ref Gonzalez was well behind the play -- as much as 40 yards. But that was hardly his fault, the ball had been played
quickly upfield and reached Rolfe in an instant. So Gonzalez was not in the best position to see what happened. We waited for a second or two for Gonzalez to arrive on the scene and give the
obvious penalty kick to Chicago and the obvious red card to Reis.
Reis's foul could hardly have been more clear, one didn't need the replays to confirm that -- which they did (even the
MLS web site admits that Reis "appeared to make contact to haul the Fire striker to the ground"). But to the amazement of everyone I've spoken to -- and of the FSC announcers -- Gonzalez stood over
Rolfe ... and gave him a yellow card for diving.
A decision so bad that one can only laugh. An obviously vital call, in a vital game. So the Revs' Steve Nicol got lucky. Well OK -- he's
been on the end of bad calls, that's life. And one can say the same, in reverse, for Chicago's Denis Hamlett.
But there is another aspect to this ludicrous call that MLS should look at.
Chris Rolfe is one of the best, most inventively skillful forwards this country has yet produced. I have watched him closely for five seasons now. He has repeatedly impressed me with his ability to
create goals with unlikely moves.
And more: his stats show what I have always felt -- that this is a very sportsmanlike, very clean player. In five seasons, he has never been ejected,
and has received only nine yellow cards.
I have never seen him dive.
But referee Gonzalez has now labeled Rolfe a cheat, which I think is an enormous injustice. So enormous, that
Gonzalez owes Rolfe an apology. Gonzalez could do that, should he wish to.
This spectacularly absurd decision from Gonzalez underlines the problem with the anti-diving witch hunt. There
must be a strong suspicion that the call was made by Gonzalez to justify not giving giving a PK and red-carding the goalkeeper. And, if you like, "deciding the game" -- something refs admit they do
not like to do, even though it is not them, but the players doing the fouling, who are the guilty ones.
With a diving call, the sport's rulemakers have provided referees with a convenient
escape route. We're almost asked to believe that any
collision must either be a foul or a dive. Most soccer collisions involve incidental contact. Many are
fouls. Very few involve outright simulation.
This was not one of them. Instead we were treated to a classic punish-the-victim scenario, whilst the perpetrator of the foul went unpunished.
A farcical travesty of justice, and a calumny against a fine player.
That was one of the worst calls that I have ever seen. He didn't even check with the linesman. There was no reason for him to dive because he was by the keeper when the keeper grabbed his leg.
It was a penalty. Thank you Mr Gardner for pointing out the injustice of this play! Maybe one day we will have less of these because of the trouble stirred by this one! I heard 2 casual fans at the US vs Costa Rica match say this was why they have trouble getting into MLS ^ BECAUSE POOR OFFICIATING INFLUENCES THE GAME TOO MUCH! LISTEN UP MLS!
I did not see the game so cannot comment. I agree whole heartedly with what you write about Chris Rolfe. After 10 minutes of watching him at Giant's Stadium in his rookie season I knew he was for real. Exciting & unpredictable - two rare qualities for an American player.
Well written article. Good insights. Chris Rolfe displayed his class and depth of character when he swallowed any anger and accepted the referee's incredulous call without making a big scene with dissent. Contrast that with Brian Ching's temper-fueled ejections and Matt Reis' post-game sneer that Rolfe went down easy in what looked like a deliberate play for Rolfe's foot.
If the CR was trailing a breakaway 40 yards away, the lead AR may have had a better view and been responsible for advising yea or nay on whether the Chris Rolfe incident merited a penalty and send-off or a caution for diving (or neither). With the electronic communications utilized by MLS officials, I would be surprised if the CR's decision was not based on the AR's advice.
One point Mr. Gardner neglected to mention is that most refs will not consult an AR because they don 't want to be second guessed and want full control of the game. I watched the incident and Rolfe was indeed brought down by Reis; a clear penalty. Ref Gonzalez was too far away to make the proper call and his assumption inexplicably led to the dive call. Rule one of refereeing is to be 100% sure about a call, any doubt should let play go on. Gonzalez was totally delinquent in his duties by not consulting the AR and for this particular reason he needs to get a few games off to include retraining. Refs are human and make mistakes, but in this situation the mistake was not to consult the AR.