Top Stories

Thursday Kickoff: Real Salt Lake hands Galaxy first loss

MoralesGetty

By AVI CREDITOR

Real Salt Lake is the thorn in the Los Angeles Galaxy's side.

The Galaxy's dream of an undefeated season came to an end Wednesday night in an MLS Cup rematch at Rio Tinto Stadium, but not without a little bit of controversy.

Salt Lake playmaker Javier Morales was clearly in an offside position before latching onto a ball inside the penalty area and slotting his shot past Donovan Ricketts in the 80th minute for the only goal in the defending MLS Cup champions' 1-0 victory.

Was the ball played forward to Morales by Salt Lake? Or was it played back by the Galaxy? You be the judge:

Nick Rimando robbed Juninho from distance late to keep the clean sheet, and Salt Lake secured three crucial points to chop the Galaxy's lead in the Western Conference down to nine points as the teams head into the World Cup break.

What did you think about the match? Should Morales' goal have counted? Expect these two teams to meet deep in the playoffs?

Share your thoughts below.

Comments

  1. The CR was no more than 3 yds away, in-line with Campos and Stephens in the replay. He was in decent position to see the play unfold.

    One can only assume the CR/AR felt like Stephens “played” the ball back, rather than Campos’ pass being deflected off Stephens.

    It all comes down to if you’re a LAG fan, it’s a deflection; if you’re an RSL fan, he played in back.

    Regardless, I hope we see it addressed in the USSF “Week in Review” so we all can definitively know.

    Reply
  2. wonderful article on soccer in 1915-1930 and how soccer was on the verge of making it “big” in the US before eventually destroying itself right before the Great Depression kicked in and ruined it all. a great read for USMNT fans. The ASL was soooo close:

    http://www.slate.com/id/2256165

    Reply
  3. after re-reading your statement, i see i misread what you said. i read that as you were saying the ball was not actually stolen and was played back. but what you actually said was the ball was not stolen and was not played back. my apologies.

    Reply
  4. 100% correct. Whether this is a correct or incorrect call all comes down to whether Stephens controlled and played the ball, or whether it was a deflection. It doesn’t matter what Campos’ intention was, whether the ball went forward, sideways or backwards.

    From the rules:
    “11.14 BECOMING “ONSIDE”
    A player’s offside position must be reevaluated whenever:
    1. The ball is again touched or played by a teammate,
    2. The ball is played (possessed and controlled, not simply deflected) by an opponent, including the opposing goalkeeper, or
    3. The ball goes out of play.”

    So it’s all about no. 2 — Did Stephens “possess and control” the ball, not deflect it.

    Clearly, Stephens did not “possess and control” the ball. It was a deflection.

    But I can see how the A.R. on the sideline, from his vantage point, could miss Campos kicking the ball and think that Stephens controlled the ball on his ownl, thereby meeting the condition of no. 2 above, but the referee should have seen that Campos kicked it into Stephens and that it was a deflection and corrected the call. But either he also missed it, or did and chose not to. We’ll never know why for sure.

    Calls get blown all the time and are part of the game. The Galaxy lost the game not just because of a blown call but because they played poorly and didn’t score enough goals to overcome a bad call.

    But anyone arguing it was the correct call is mistaken. It’s understandable HOW they could make the wrong call, but that doesn’t change the fact it was the wrong call.

    Reply
  5. “after review of replay, it looks to me that the ball was not actually stolen and played back by the galaxy, so it was the wrong call.”

    you mean it was the right call (if it was a back pass) or that it WASN’T played back by the galaxy, thus making it the wrong call? hahaha

    Reply
  6. This is exactly what the rules state:

    Offence
    A player in an offside position is only penalised if, at the moment the ball touches or is played by one of his team, he is, in the opinion of the referee, involved in active play by:
    – interfering with play or
    – interfering with an opponent or
    – gaining an advantage by being in that position

    The laws further state:
    “gaining an advantage by being in that position” means playing a ball that rebounds to him off a goalpost or the crossbar having been in an offside position or playing a ball that rebounds to him off an opponent having been in an offside position

    There is clearly no question that Morales was in an offside position. Basically you’re trying to argue that Campos’ pass did not rebound off of Stephens, but rather that Stephens was making a pass. That’s a very slim argument because you’re assuming that Stephens had control of the ball. From the replay it’s clear that Stephens attempted to block the pass and the ball deflected (or rebounded) off of his foot into a dangerous position in the box where Morales received it in an offside position.

    Reply
  7. To guys like Martin Blank and chupacabra who argue that it has nothing to do with stevens, all that matters was that the player gained advantage, that is simply not correct.

    “a player in an offside position is only penalised if, at the moment the ball touches or is played by one of his team…”

    So the whole question is, was the ball played by RSL and deflected backwards, which would disallow the goal, or was the ball actually stolen by the galaxy and then passed back. If the play was initiated by the galaxy, then the player is not penalized by being in offside position, becuase the whole rule comes into play only when/if the play is initiated by the attacking team.

    In the heat of the moment I can see how the ref made the decision he did. After review of replay, it looks to me that the ball was not actually stolen and played back by the galaxy, so it was the wrong call.

    Announcer’s comments made no sense and confused the issue more.

    Reply
  8. haha i actually did the same thing. to be honest though, a still photo doesnt really help me. seeing it in slow motion does. just need a program that can loop it…

    idk dude, i think this will be one of those things that come down to opinion and how someone looks at something.

    Reply
  9. I have a very clear screen shot I can email if you’d like. I still think the ref got it right even if he questioned himself right after the game.

    Reply
  10. stephens, however, is the one in question. some say he back passed, most say it was a deflection. it sounds like everyone is in agreement about what the rule is. now it is a matter of deflection vs. back pass.

    but seriously, someone should update the commentator on the rules. “Here’s why I think the flag doesn’t go up…it defelcts off the defender”. if only he knew that would mean it was offsides…

    Reply
  11. and ive been saying that i think it was deflected. when i look at this replay, i don’t see it how you do. and for the record, im impartial. i just didnt think it was a backpass. it’s okay, the refs already admitted it was the wrong play. we’ll just have to agree to disagree.

    Reply
  12. I can see the linesman making the mistake on this – both touches from his angle look as though they were taken by the Galaxy. Referee did not disagree with the call from his angle. My second take was that the ball was played by Stephens but my third take was that it was a deflection.
    We’ll take the call though, we are still in the whole 2 points on the season do to calls going the other way.

    Reply
  13. The reason it isn’t offsides is because Campos CLEARLY kicks the ball backwards, or at the very least sideways, meaning it wasn’t a forward pass and is therefore NOT offsides.

    Reply
  14. Look at slide 27 first.

    “What does gaining an advantage by being in that position mean?

    The International Football Association Board defines it as

    – playing a ball that rebounds off a post or the crossbar after having been in an offside position, or

    – playing a ball that rebounds off an opponent after having been in an offside position.”

    If Stevens, the LA defender, plays the ball rather than having it deflect/rebound off of him, then Morales didn’t gain advantage.

    Reply
  15. This one is a little tricky…
    There are two conditions that apply here as per the flash vid. Position and in this case advantage.

    From the FIFA paper version
    A player in an offside position is only penalised if, at the moment the ball
    touches or is played by one of his team, he is, in the opinion of the referee,
    involved in active play by:
    – interfering with play or
    – interfering with an opponent or
    – gaining an advantage by being in that position

    Any deflection teammate or opponent means the player if offside.

    The only way it counts is if the refs determined that Stevens tried to clear it and squonked the kick.

    Campos put the heavy touch which Stevens and he converged on. From the MLS replay it looks like Stevens got the last touch. If it deflected off of Campos or Campos was the player who kicked it last then yes Javi was offside.

    Sometimes you get the wrong end of the stick as cited above by my fellow RSL fans regarding situations in previous matches. I would have preferred a more definitive and less controversial manner of victory, but what can you do?

    Reply
  16. That Stevens played the ball and it wasn’t “deflected” or “rebounded” off him has been my point this whole time. Stop the video right as the ball and the LA defender, Stevens come together. He clearly plays the ball with the inside of his right foot. His right leg is open and extended and his left leg is bearing the weight of his body. This position is the “natural” position you’d expect from a player who is playing the ball.

    The ball didn’t “rebound” off Stevens so Morales was not judged to have been gaining an advantage. See slide 27 of the FIFA tutorial you continue to refernece. Stevens played the ball with the inside of his right foot. End of story.

    Reply
  17. wait, what?

    “‘Oh it deflected off of Stevens, so it’s not offside’. Bullsh*t. It doesn’t matter” – Actually, it DOES matter. you should read the rules of the game. I posted the link above, feel free. However, you then say:

    “It’s not like Stephens played a backpass.” – This implies that you agree it was offsides because did NOT play a backpass. If he had, no offsides.

    I have no idea if you think it was or was not offsides.

    Reply
  18. Lol at everyone “Oh it deflected off of Stevens, so it’s not offside”

    Bullsh*t. It doesn’t matter. Check the laws of the game. It’s not like Stephens played a backpass.

    Reply
  19. RSL got screwed by bad calls against Houston and Columbus early in the season. Luckily, we were on the other side last night. The officiating was terrible, probably the worst I’ve seen at Rio Tinto this year.

    Reply
  20. i 100% disagree. Stephens was going to block the pass across the face of the 18. he jumped with his foot out, he blocked it, and the deflected block, instead, fell to morales. look at where the RSL player is trying to pass it. he’s looking to his right, across the 18. stephens saw this and stuck his foot out which caused the pass to change directions.

    Reply
  21. i think that is where the debate is coming from. whether or not the ball was deflected or if it was passed back. i just can’t see how it can be argued it was a back pass. he just kind of sticks his foot out and jumps hoping to block the pass across the top of the 18. he hits it, but it deflects (IMHO) to Morales instead, who was offsides, thus giving an unfair advantage.

    Reply
  22. For all of you who think the right call was made just read the following:

    “I couldn’t believe it,” Dunivant said. “Morales was 10 yards behind our back line. It’s really no different than if they were to take a shot and it deflects off one of our guys and goes to Morales who is standing 10 yards behind our back line. It’s still offside. The linesman saw it and makes a judgment that it went off one of our guys, and that’s why it was not offside. After the game he admitted that he was wrong. What else can you say? He missed a call.”

    one word: “HA!”

    Reply
  23. also, the above comment was solely used to show that the commentator has no idea what he is talking about. he said:

    “Here’s why I think the flag doesn’t go up…it defelcts off the defender”

    That statement clearly suggests that the commentator is under the impression that if there is a deflection (or as FIFA says, rebound) off the defender, then there cannot be an offside. This is not the case, however. As stated in Law 11 it would be an offside position:

    “- Playing a ball, that rebounds to him off an opponent, having previously been in an offside position.”

    we can probably sit here and argue whether or not it was a deflection or a backpass all day. but i just wanted to point out the commentator being a moron.

    Reply
  24. No. You do not understand the rules of the game. Maybe you should actually read the rules they show on the flash tutorial rather then just looking at the cute little animated figures.

    It absolutely matters if he played the ball because gaining advantage is defined as playing a rebound off a player not as playing a pass from a player.

    Reply
  25. Offside. No doubt. Rules of the game are simple. Morales “gained an advantage” from being in an offside position. There is no stipulation about it being okay if the defender is clumsy. He gained an advantage from the offside position, which is still offsides after deflecting off an opponent. The ball was passed to Warner, deflects off Stephens, and ends up with Morales, who was offside.

    My initial reaction was that he was onside because he was not the intended target of the pass. But reading the rule, that doesn’t matter. Only thing that matters is gaining an advantage from being in the offside position.

    It sure seems like there have been A LOT of blown offsides calls (both missing them and calling too many) in the MLS this season.

    Reply
  26. It did not deflect (or “rebound” off the defender as the tutorial calls it) off of Stevens. Stevens played the ball!

    Reply
  27. wrong. stephens did not pass the ball. playing the ball is irrelvant when, in this situation, playing the ball means he jupmed to try and block the pass from the RSL player. it’s clear as day in the highlights and the tutorial i posted spells out the rule from all angles very well. even has a visual aid.

    Reply
  28. Once again, Stephens doesn’t matter. Morales is the player that matters. He was in an offside position and gained advantage. End of argument.

    Reply
  29. no. the point is stephens did NOT pass the ball. it deflected off of him, which means the guy is offsides. click the link i posted above, it spells it out so a 2nd grader would understand.

    Reply

Leave a Reply to SJ Cancel reply