Saturday, June 15, 2024
Ищете честное онлайн-казино? Вавада – идеальный выбор! Простая регистрация, удобное зеркало для обхода блокировок и щедрые бонусы. Наслаждайтесь азартом и честными играми в Vavada казино. Казино вавада предлагает своим пользователям простой доступ через зеркало, чтобы вы всегда могли наслаждаться любимыми играми. Регистрация занимает всего пару минут, а бонусы порадуют новичков. Честные игры и высокие выплаты – вот что ждет вас в Vavada. keybank login page
FeaturedThe Definitive Angle

The Definitive Angle: MLS Week 10

The Definitive Angle is PRO’s analysis of the week’s Video Review use in MLS.

Week 10 overview
There were three Video Reviews during Week 10.


CIN vs TOR: Review for red card (serious foul play) – not given


What Happened: The referee issued a yellow card to Ralph Priso-Mbongue (TOR) for what he perceived in real-time to be a reckless foul challenge on Obinna Nwobodo (CIN).

Immediately recognizing that this was a poor challenge, the VAR saw that Priso-Mbongue had lunged into the challenge with a raised left leg and studs exposed, which made contact into the right knee of Nwobodo while the ball was low on the ground. The contact on Nwobodo’s right knee caused his leg to buckle.

The VAR formed the opinion that the challenge was red card-worthy and recommended a Video Review. Having viewed the images at the RRA, the referee concurred with the VAR and changed his original yellow card decision to red.

On-field decision: Yellow card (reckless challenge).
Type of review: Red card (serious foul play).
Final decision after review: Red card.
Length of review: 2:02.

PRO’s Opinion: This was a good, efficient use of the Video Review system to rectify a clear and obvious on-field error.

The referee was unable to properly assess the point and mode of contact, as he had no viewing angle in between the players. However, the nature of the challenge endangered the safety of Nwobodo and was correctly penalized after review with a red card.


MTL vs ORL: Review for goal (offside in APP) – given


What Happened: A goal was scored by Joel Waterman (MTL) but was disallowed by the on-field officials for offside. In real-time, they believed the ball had been touched through to Waterman in an offside position by teammate Mathieu Choinière (MTL).

Because the flag had been raised and whistle blown after the ball had entered the goal, the VAR was able to check the footage in order to establish whether the disallowing of the goal was a clear and obvious error.

The VAR saw that Choinière did not actually touch the ball and that the last touch prior to that was from Benjamin Michel (ORL), who had chested the ball towards his own goal. While it could be debated whether this action by Michel should be considered a deliberate play or a deflection, it is immaterial. Waterman was in an onside position when the ball was last touched/played by a teammate, which was when Romell Quioto (MTL) flicked the ball on with his head towards Michel as it came into the penalty area from the initial corner.

As such, there was no offside offense in this situation, and the VAR correctly recommended a Video Review, after which the referee awarded a goal to CF Montréal.

On-field decision: No goal – offside.
Type of review: Goal.
Final decision after review: Goal.
Length of review: 1:52.

PRO’s Opinion: This was a very good use of the Video Review system to rectify a clear and obvious on-field error.


VAN vs TOR: Review for penalty kick (handball) – not given


What Happened: Toronto FC appealed for a penalty kick when the ball made contact with the left hand of defender Ranko Veselinovic (VAN) in the Vancouver Whitecaps penalty area as Alejandro Pozuelo (TOR) had tried to touch the ball past him.

The referee did not identify an offense in real-time and allowed play to continue. On checking footage of the incident, the VAR saw that Veselinovic’s left arm was raised into a position which was making him unnaturally bigger, and the ball had made contact with his left hand because of that unnatural position, preventing it from going past him and, therefore, not allowing Pozuelo to move onto his own touch.

As such, the VAR recommended a Video Review for a penalty kick to be awarded to Toronto FC. The referee looked at the images at the RRA and agreed with the VAR and awarded a penalty.

On-field decision: Play on.
Type of review: Penalty kick – handball.
Final decision after review: Penalty.
Length of review: 2:00.

PRO’s Opinion: This was a good use of the Video Review system to rectify a clear and obvious on-field error.



1Win Casino'daki slot makinelerinde şansınızı denemeye hazır mısınız? Şanslı bir kazanan olun ve sadece birkaç tıklamayla hesabınıza gerçek para aktarın.

online pokies real money