Make-up call gives KC equalizer against Galaxy

It wasn’t a hand ball.

It wasn’t offside.

End of story.

*For more: Game story

*The Kansas City perspective

Watch:

Facebook Twitter Plusone Digg Reddit Stumbleupon Tumblr Email
This entry was posted in Video by Nick Green. Bookmark the permalink.

About Nick Green

South Bay-based Los Angeles News Group soccer columnist and blogger Nick Green writes at the 100 Percent Soccer blog at www.insidesocal.com/soccer and craft beer at the Beer Goggles blog at www.insidesocal.com/beer. Cheers!
  • Ramiro

    SKC’s “second goal” was not a goal. Very good work by the linesman on that play. It was offsides. However, I could only see if after watching it in slow-motion on their slow-mo replay on my DVR.

    And it’s difficult to determine whether it was or was not a handball. Judging by Hejduk’s reaction, it highly likely could have been.

    If you have it DVR’d, watch it again in slow-motion. You’ll see.

  • UCLABZ

    I don’t know, if you are measuring millimeters on your DVR then he is not offsides. The benefit of the doubt goes to the offense… and there was plenty of doubt in mind watching the replay.

    As for the make up call, I didn’t see any conclusive replays. I did see Hejduk trying pretty hard to get his hand on the ball. After the offsides it was an easy call for the Ref.

    I referee and people never seem to accept two off-setting blown calls as a well called game. :(

  • studs and elbows down

    definite handball, cruel offside decision. LA got way too many favorable calls for an away team. Donovan’s touch let him down again on the break away. He is also getting very physical in a stupid way like Beckham. Terrible field condition, fair result over the 90 minutes.

    Comedy relief being provided again by Saunders diving hard for balls that going 5 yards wide.

  • shelbo

    See the second post in this thread. He was offside.

    http://www.bigsoccer.com/forum/showthread.php?t=1814797&page=2

  • studs & elbows down

    the assistant went for the body lean for the call which makes it a creul decision. they need to adhere to “daylight” between the players before they raise the flag. gotta give the attackers some advantage in the pit.

  • studs & elbows down

    the assistant went for the body lean for the call which makes it a creul decision. they need to adhere to “daylight” between the players before they raise the flag. gotta give the attackers some advantage in the pit.

  • studs & elbows down

    the assistant went for the body lean for the call which makes it a creul decision. they need to adhere to “daylight” between the players before they raise the flag. gotta give the attackers some advantage in the pit.

  • studs & elbows down

    the assistant went for the body lean for the call which makes it a creul decision. they need to adhere to “daylight” between the players before they raise the flag. gotta give the attackers some advantage in the pit.

  • RG Mr.Soccer

    Come on, Nick. Please…

    It was a hand ball. Frankie’s arm clearly moved into the ball’s path and contact was made. It was admittedly unlucky though.

    And it was offside. Look at the video in your own post. You can pause it at the moment the ball is played by Collin’s teammate and see that he is in an offside position then he becomes involved in active play by heading the ball – clearly, objectively, by definition offside.

    It’s all laid out in Law 11.

    Here’s another opinion: http://www.ussoccer.com/News/Referee-Programs/2011/09/Referee-Week-in-Review-Week-25.aspx

    And Studs Down, there is no “daylight” rule to adhere to. Pause the video and you can see the scenario exactly as defined by FIFA and reinforced by USSF.

  • studs, elbows and flags down

    my “down” name is expanding.

    Just the upper body is leaning beyond the defender. That is not taking an advantage of the situation with a defender right next to him.. Omar Bravo behind him is offside. Maybe the 2 player light blue combo blurred the linesman’s vision.

    The “daylight” was an interpretation of the offside rule that was being suggested if not tried in the EPL a few years back as I recall. I think that is a positive enhancement of the rule and can make life somewhat easier on the flagmen on a very difficult call.

  • RG Mr.Soccer

    Sorry about abbreviating the name. No disrespect intended.

    While I can’t argue the fairness of the result, I have to say that this AR amazingly got this very difficult call exactly right, despite the speed of the play and his distance from the players in question.

    From the current FIFA LOTG (Interpretation and Guidelines for Referees section) p102:

    “In the context of Law 11 Offside, the following definitions apply:
    nearer to his opponents goal line means that any part of a players head, body or feet is nearer to his opponents goal line than both the ball and the second-last opponent. The arms are not included in this definition ”

    And from the 2010 USSF Advice to Referees:

    “11.1 OFFSIDE POSITION

    Measure relative position by players’ torsos, heads, and legs. No part of the attacking player other than
    the arms may be nearer the opponents’ goal line than the torso, head or legs of the second-last defender.
    It is not necessary to “see daylight” between them for one to be considered nearer than the other.”

    Look here: http://tomlitch-referee.s3.amazonaws.com/Library/2010-2011AdviceToReferees.pdf

    If you look at the drawings in section 11.1, you’ll see exactly this situation, where Collin is the player that is past the defender.

    Offside position + Involved in active play = Offside.

  • studs, elbows and flags down

    RG,

    I did not call this a wrong decision. I called it a cruel decision and went on to express my opinion on what I think is a flawed law.

    You are absolutely correct of the letter of the law as it is stands. To further prove you correct look at the USSF illustration of this call from their referee week in review video:

    http://www.ussoccer.com/News/Referee-Programs/2011/09/Referee-Week-in-Review-Week-25.aspx

    Now let’s move on to the Crapids non-goal in last night’s game in Nick’s posting from the game. later