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 27

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

Week 27 overview
There were six Video Reviews during Week 27.


RBNY vs MIA: Review for red card (serious foul play) – not given


What Happened: The referee issued a yellow card to Alejandro Pozuelo (MIA) for a high foot contact on Andrés Reyes (RBNY). The referee deemed the contact to be reckless, not reaching the level of serious foul play. However, when the VAR checked footage of the incident, he saw that the studs of Pozuelo’s left foot had made heavy contact into the chest of Reyes, moments after Reyes had chested a dropping ball.

The contact from Pozuelo involved excessive force and was a clear red card offense, so the VAR recommended a Video Review. Having looked at the footage for himself at the RRA, the referee concurred and changed the yellow card to red.

On-field decision: Yellow card – reckless foul.
Type of review: Red card – serious foul play.
Final decision after review: Red card.
Length of review: 2:25.

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


DAL vs RSL: Review for penalty kick (foul challenge) – given


What Happened: The referee awarded a penalty kick to Real Salt Lake for what he perceived in real-time to be a foul by goalkeeper Maarten Paes (DAL) on Justin Meram (RSL) as they both converged on a long ball over the top towards the FC Dallas penalty area.

The referee believed Meram had arrived to the ball first and was fouled late by Paes, hence the award of a penalty kick. However, when the VAR checked footage of the incident, he saw that Paes had made a very good challenge, reaching the ball first by punching it clear using his right fist before the players came together.

There was no foul by Paes, and the VAR recommended a Video Review for the penalty kick to be rescinded. The referee looked at the footage at the RRA and agreed with the referee, replacing his original penalty kick decision with a drop ball restart to FC Dallas.

On-field decision: Penalty kick.
Type of review: No penalty.
Final decision after review: No penalty.
Length of review: 1:11.

PRO’s Opinion: This was an excellent and efficient use of the Video Review system to rectify a clear and obvious error arising in an important moment of the game.


SKC vs SJ: Review for goal (offside in APP) – not given


What Happened: A goal was scored by Nicolas Isimat-Mirin (SKC) and awarded by the on-field match officials. As always, the VAR checked footage of the goal to ensure there were no clear and obvious reasons to disallow it and, on doing so, saw, using the right 18-yard camera, that Isimat-Mirin was clearly and obviously in an offside position when the ball was crossed into the San Jose Earthquakes penalty area towards him.

As such, the VAR recommended a Video Review, and the goal was disallowed by the referee after seeing the images for himself at the RRA.

On-field decision: Goal.
Type of review: No goal – offside in APP.
Final decision after review: No goal – indirect freekick.
Length of review: 2:10.

PRO’s Opinion: This was a good, efficient use of the VAR system to rectify a clear and obvious error.


VAN vs NSH: Review for penalty kick (foul challenge) – not given


What Happened: Jacob Shaffelburg (NSH) went down under challenge from Tristan Blackmon (VAN) in the Vancouver Whitecaps penalty area. The referee believed Blackmon had played the ball, but when the VAR checked the incident, she could see that only Shaffelburg had touched the ball, after which Blackmon had made foul contact on Shaffelburg.

As such, she recommended a Video Review for a penalty kick to be awarded to Nashville. After looking at the images for himself at the RRA, the referee agreed and awarded a penalty.

On-field decision: Play on.
Type of review: Penalty kick.
Final decision after review: Penalty.
Length of review: 1:40.

PRO’s Opinion: This was a very efficient and effective use of the Video Review system to rectify a clear and obvious error.


ORL vs NYC: Review for goal (offside) – given


What Happened: A goal was scored by Júnior Urso (ORL) but disallowed by the on-field match officials for offside. The whistle was blown after the ball had entered the net, so the VAR was able to check whether disallowing the goal was a clear and obvious error.

On doing so, she could see that Urso was clearly being held onside by defender Anton Tinnerholm (NYC) when the ball was played forward. At that moment, another Orlando City player, Ercan Kara (ORL), was in an offside position. However, he was not interfering with either play or an opponent. As such, the VAR recommended a Video Review, and after seeing the footage for himself at the RRA, the referee awarded a goal to Orlando City.

On-field decision: Offside.
Type of review: Goal – no offside.
Final decision after review: Goal.
Length of review: 1:50.

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


ORL vs NYC: Review for red card (serious foul play) – given


What Happened: A red card was issued to Antônio Carlos (ORL) for what the referee deemed to be a serious foul play challenge on Nicolás Acevedo (NYC) in midfield. In real-time, the referee judged that the contact on Acevedo was high and involved excessive force.

The VAR checked footage of the incident and saw that the contact was primarily foot on foot, with Carlos’ right foot coming down onto the right foot of Acevedo. The nature of the was consistent with a reckless act and, therefore, only yellow card worthy rather than serious foul play.

The VAR recommended a Video Review, and after looking at the footage for himself at the RRA, the referee concurred and changed his red card decision to a yellow card.

On-field decision: Red card – serious foul play.
Type of review: Yellow card – reckless challenge.
Final decision after review: Yellow card.
Length of review: 2:55.

PRO’s Opinion: This was an appropriate use of the Video Review system to rectify a clear and obvious 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