Tuesday, February 27, 2024
Stay in control of your digital finances with ledger live customizable portfolio views, tailoring your dashboard to fit your investment strategy.
FeaturedThe Definitive Angle

The Definitive Angle: MLS Week 30

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

Week 30 overview
There were five Video Reviews during Week 30.


MTL vs CLB: Review for penalty kick (foul challenge) – not given


What happened: George Campbell (MTL) challenged Cucho (CLB) for the ball inside the penalty area, and Cucho went to ground. The referee did not identify an offense in real-time and awarded a throw-in to Columbus Crew, believing the last touch came from Campbell.

The VAR analyzed the available angles and determined that Cucho had played the ball, and Campbell then kicked him in the leg. An on-field review was recommended, and after Video Review, the referee awarded a penalty kick.

On-field decision: Throw in.
Type of review: Penalty kick.
Final decision after review: Penalty.
Length of review: 1:58.

PRO’s opinion: Although Campbell does not play the ball and there is some contact to the leg of Cucho, this was not significant enough to warrant a review for a clear and obvious error.


CIN vs ORL: Review for red card (violent conduct) – not given


What happened: Wilder Cartagena (ORL) and Aaron Boupendza (CIN) were jostling for position before a corner kick. In an effort to break from Cartagena, Boupendza raised his arm and caught Cartagena in the face with his forearm.

The VAR determined that since the ball was not in play and the contact was made to the face with the arm, this was an act of violent conduct. An on-field review was recommended, and after Video Review, the referee issued a yellow card for showing a lack of respect for the game.

On-field decision: Play on.
Type of review: Red card (violent conduct).
Final decision after review: Yellow card (unsporting behavior).
Length of review: 2:17.

PRO’s opinion: While the contact was made to the face, it was done in an effort to free himself from the hold by Cartagena. This did not appear to be a deliberate action to the face; there was a low degree of force, and it lacked brutality. The referee was within his rights to only issue a yellow card for this contact.


DAL vs ATL: Review for goal (offside) – not given


What happened: A goal was scored by Marco Farfan (DAL) and awarded by the on-field officials.

The VAR analyzed the available angles and saw that when Farfan first crossed the ball into the penalty area in the build-up, Alan Velasco (DAL) was in an offside position. Velasco then interfered with play when he gained control of the ball near the corner flag. An on-field review was recommended, and after Video Review, the referee disallowed the goal and awarded an indirect free kick to Atlanta United for an offside offense in the APP.

On-field decision: Goal.
Type of review: No goal – offside.
Final decision after review: No goal.
Length of review: 2:12.

PRO’s opinion: The offside offence occurred in the attacking phase to the goal. This was a good use of the Video Review system to reach the correct outcome.


SJ vs MIN: Review for goal (foul in APP) – not given


What happened: A goal was scored by Teemu Pukki (MIN) and awarded by the on-field officials.

The VAR analyzed the available angles, determined that Emanuel Reynoso (MIN) had committed a handball offense in the APP, and recommended an on-field review. After Video Review, the referee disallowed the goal and restarted play with a direct free kick.

On-field decision: Goal.
Type of review: No goal – handball in APP.
Final decision after review: No goal.
Length of review: 3:40.

PRO’s opinion: Reynoso controlled the ball with his upper arm, which was away from his body. This was a clear handball offense, and the referee was correct to disallow the goal. This was a good use of the Video Review system to overturn a clear and obvious error.


PHI vs RBNY: Review for goal (offside) – not given


What happened: A goal was scored by Julián Carranza (PHI) and awarded by the on-field officials.

The VAR saw that Mikael Uhre (PHI) had touched the initial through ball by Alejandro Bedoya (PHI) that set up Carranza to score. At the moment of Uhre’s touch, Carranza was in an offside position. The VAR recommended an on-field review, and after Video Review, the referee disallowed the goal and restarted play with an indirect free kick.

On-field decision: Goal.
Type of review: No goal – offside.
Final decision after review: No goal.
Length of review: 1:58.

PRO’s opinion: This was a good use of the Video Review system to disallow a goal for offside.



Experience the excitement with bets not on GamStop, where the action is limitless and the opportunities are vast. Bet on a variety of sports and enjoy an enhanced betting journey.

online pokies real money