Maurice

Avid SAFC supporter.
USSF-Licensed Referee.
UConn Biomedical Engineering grad. Trivia enthusiast.
Amateur investor.

[Maurice @stevesy80]

https://t.co/CgoINkGZgy "Is Free Speech Threatened on Campus?" .. very cool debate

[Maurice @stevesy80]

@impersonator999 @huskyjayhawk @MegEBrock Lol yes I went to comment similar to the OP-- happened again to England and this was a clear example that an obvious red card can be wholly missed.. giving the red today was absolutely the correct call and nobody (besides imbeciles) are saying otherwise

[Maurice @stevesy80]

@JSPittMET12 @liabinkin I understand that but as I said in another reply, I haven't seen a VAR transcript.. they are able to look at slowmo in certain instances. And even when they're not, it's a "generally" or "should" not an explicit violation that would lead to clear overturning lol

[Maurice @stevesy80]

@NEKR1D @Nicocantor1 3. Believe me, I can see an argument this is a yellow (or a red). I've seen tons of borderline plays in my life. I don't see how this is the most egregiously wrong that it gets the treatment that it is getting.

[Maurice @stevesy80]

@NEKR1D @Nicocantor1 2. Ive read LOTG many times- it says things like "generally" and "should" etc- not smoking guns that should lead to an unprecedented decision reversal mid-tournament. At the end of the day, a red card would be defensible- if a referee gave a red live it would not be clearly wrong

[Maurice @stevesy80]

@NEKR1D @Nicocantor1 1. I tried looking for a transcript of the VAR back and forth and could not find so idk how everyone can be some adamant about the extent of slomo used. It is not illegal for stills and slomo to be used to show where contact occured (at first I thought it was heel, incorrectly)

[Maurice @stevesy80]

@TLDAcademy @stuholden I understand the calls were not exactly the same, but they fall in the same category of VAR intervention when no foul originally called. And by the letter of the law it CAN be argued Flo's was SFP

[Maurice @stevesy80]

@TLDAcademy @stuholden What? Stu literally said Flo's was the first instance where the ref didn't do much as call a foul on the field and then VAR intervened to say red card. I replied initially that was not true and then literally 12 hours later there was an example that just occured to show him.

[Maurice @stevesy80]

@PickleProMac @AdamCrafton_ Do you know what you are saying .. the "protocol" says a lot of "should" and "in general".. what black and white rule was so incontrovertibly broken? You are just spewing this statement and probably don't understand it lol

[Maurice @stevesy80]

@justinalt574 @Nicocantor1 There is no official statement saying that (as far as I can tell). There are considerations for how to make these calls-- there is no black and white requirement that was violated here

[Nico Cantor @Nicocantor1]

Even if Americans are happy that Balogun can now play (myself included), FIFA has just set an insane precedent:

Any interpretable red card at the World Cup can now come under scrutiny in hindsight. The referees judgment isn’t final. It hints at the fact that FIFA can do as they please, even if it means disagreeing with the subjective decisions of their own referees.

Imagine how Rafael Clauss (referee) and Juan Soto (VAR) are feeling right now? FIFA just undermined their credibility.

This isn’t overruling something objective, a decision that’s based on fact. They’re rescinding a decision based on opinion. For as much as I believe Balogun didn’t deserve the red, it’s an interpretable decision.

Anything can now be questioned after the fact. And it’s up to FIFA’s “judicial body” – whoever that is, wherever they are – to call make critical decisions as they see fit.

[ESPN FC @ESPNFC]

"They're not allowed to do this. ... This is moving the goal posts on the players."

—@herculezg on FIFA suspending Folarin Balogun's red card and allowing him to play vs. Belgium ⚽️

[Maurice @stevesy80]

@stuholden Stu I always like your takes but 1. I don't think it's close to unprecedented that a player was sent off for SFP after there was no initial call, and 2. Based on current LOTG a red card is not clearly wrong here. I love the Flo can play now, but this is a very strange situation

[Maurice @stevesy80]

@Breeesteel @IcoldgameI True, still doesn't excuse Clattenburg's wildly incorrect take (although his final outcome is right, his reasoning was completely wrong and experts misexplaining the rules like that is partly why so many people don't understand them lol)

[Maurice @stevesy80]

@ThisOldSID @FOXSports Except he was blatantly incorrect on one of the most important things I've seen him called on for (Argentina second goal vs Cape Verde), and this wasn't the first time

[Maurice @stevesy80]

@IcoldgameI This was a wild statement for him to make. It is blatantly incorrect, and the average fan will now understand the rules even less now (because they will think he's correct since the goal actually was disallowed-- not bc of what clatts said but bc the player was onside)

[Maurice @stevesy80]

@Chris_Roat @PFTCommenter You're wrong on 2 counts- 1. It's not a "16 yard box" (lol) and 2. You certainly still can get a red inside the box for DOGSO