Seattle Sounders vs FC Dallas 2010-04-22

It looks like I spoke too soon. While this seems to have turned into a pick-on-Harkes blog, it is true that after I complemented John Harkes for his professional restraint one game, the very next game he shows his true colors. He and J. P. Dellacamera announced the Seattle Sounders vs FC Dallas match on April 22nd. Here’s what I heard.

In the 20th minute of the match during a replay John Harkes said, “Tyrone Marshall. Not sure he did much damage there. I don’t see a lot to deserve the yellow. Terry Vaughn, I think, throwing the yellows out early. Once you do that, as a referee, you have to be consistent throughout the match.” Actually this is arguably a goal scoring opportunity since two defenders are not quite between the attacker and the goal but more even and off to the side of the attacker. Distance to the goal plus the possibility of these nearby defenders being able to become involved in active play must have been the factors that kept the referee from sending off Tyrone Marshall for denying an obvious goal scoring opportunity by a committing a foul (DOGSO-F). So if it’s not a DOGSO-F but still reckless then the next level down from a DOGSO-F is a tactical foul, which is a caution for unsporting behavior, a yellow card.

In the 21st minute again during a replay John Harkes said, “That’s a handball from there. Yeah. Not sure if Terry Vaughn had his whistle ready, but it looked like he was to get it. (chuckle) Anyway, play on.” Play continued. There was no announcement by the referee to “Play on! Advantage.”

In the 43rd minute of the match during a replay John Harkes said, “Here’s the late foul from . . . Alonso. And there’s another one right there from Montero from behind. Yeah. Very reckless challenge. Good call by Terry Vaughn.” Mr. Harkes got this one right.

In the 45th minute of the match Mr. Dellacamera used the term Stoppage Time and then, worse than that, ESPN posted “STOPPAGE TIME: 1 MINUTE” below the score on the screen. This is another misnomer. Instead, this is called Added Playing time for lost playing time during the match due to cautions, injuries, substitutions, etc. Perhaps this is a little pedantic of me. But wrong terms are wrong and correct terms are correct. I would like announcers (and now the network) to stop their miseducation by using incorrect terminology. While I’m picking on the network, did you notice after the score by Seattle in the 55th minute, “SEA: OFFSIDE” was posted below the score momentarily? What was that about? Then seconds later the Seattle score was properly increased to 2. Later in the second half, I heard J P Dellacamera correctly use the term “handling” the ball and I heard John Harkes correctly say, “offside” (singular). Thank you!

In the 82nd minute of the match Mr. Harkes said, “I didn’t see the foul there.” If Mr. Harkes had his eyes open he would have seen both the tug on the shorts by Dallas player #17 and afterwards the simulated tug by the referee on his own shorts to tell the players on the field what had happened. This foul occurred in front of the benches, a frequently contested area.

In the 85th minute of the match, Mr. Harkes said, “I’m not really sure what’s going on there, what Terry Vaughn sees.” So, why does Mr. Harkes continue to comment? Mr. Harkes continues, “But he’s given the foul against Seattle but the yellow card to David Ferreira. And, he really . . . it was a dangerous play and Ferreira, he had the ball stuck between his legs while he was on the ground. How’s he supposed to play the ball?” The original foul was a push by Seattle which put the Dallas player on the ground. But the Seattle player continued to try to play the ball while the Seattle player had the ball between his legs. Per the USSF Advice to Referees (available on ussoccer.com) a dangerous play is an act that places someone in danger of harm AND disadvantages the opponent by causing him/her to cease playing. The Seattle player never ceased playing. So the foul was for the original push. The card was for something that happened after the foul. In this case we had to be on the field to see and/or hear what the Dallas player did. Imagine that, if you would, please. We may not understand 100% of the referee’s calls. There is no requirement on referees to communicate to spectators – only to players for the management of the match.

In the 90th minute of the match, Mr. Harkes, talking about the Seattle attacker, said, “Looks like he looses possession, there, on the ball and makes the most of it. Terry Vaughn seems to be, for me, a little bit far away to make that decision. I don’t think it’s a good one.” Terry Vaughn was around the 28 yard line, about 18 yards away, when he made the call for Seattle player #34 (Hurtado) tripped Dallas player #31 (Yeisley). It was visible five times when you count all the replays. The defender’s left knee stopped the attackers left leg, a hard trip. The attacker confirmed it by holding his left leg afterwards on the ground. But Mr. Harkes exemplifies the misconception that sitting announcers off the field can see better than active referees only yards away.



Well that’s all. A lot to point out in one game. So please take this perspective into consideration when trying to understand what American announcers mean by their comments.