Was the Red Card to Johnny Russell correctly given

I mean, it's a hard tackle. It's a nasty challenge. I mean, it's hard, don't get me wrong, but I don't think it's nasty in the sense of dirty. The question is going to be, does our video assistant referee, Dana Raffer, think that Russell goes over the ball too much? Welcome to Instant Replay for MLS Match Day 34. I'm your host, Andrew Wiebe, and as always, we're taking a closer look at the most controversial refereeing decisions in Major League Soccer. The playoff push is on, and that means every moment, every goal, every referee decision is under the microscope. So let's start in Orlando with Miami in town. No Lionel Messi, but you knew that already. Miami up 1-0 in the 54th minute when David Ruiz, the young homegrown, goes into this tackle on Mauricio Pereira. The referee, Armando Villarreal, immediately issues a yellow card. But as I watched this one back, I was surprised the VAR, Caroline Chouinard, didn't recommend a review for serious foul play and a clear and obvious error. Why? As you watch this tackle, I'm going to take you through the serious foul play verbiage. Quote, any player who lunges at an opponent and challenging for the ball from the front, from the side, ding, ding, ding, or from behind, using one or both legs, again, ding, ding, ding, with excessive force or endangers the safety of the opponent, is guilty of serious foul play. Ruiz leaves both feet, challenges with both legs in a scissor motion, isn't anywhere near the ball, and goes through the planted leg of Pereira. For me, there's excessive force in this tackle, and it is certainly endangering the safety of Pereira. I was surprised not to see Caroline Chouinard send Villarreal to the monitor and a red card given to Ruiz. All right, to Portland we go, 39th minute, Felipe Moura chasing down a ball in the Rapids 18. Moura launches into a tackle, Andrew Gutmann, the Rapids defender, attempts to clear and, oh boy, car wreck. This is an ugly challenge, folks. Jorge Gonzalez, the VAR, sent him to the monitor, again, for serious foul play. Gonzalez watched the play and decided, no, reckless, I'm sticking with my yellow card decision, and that baffles me. For me, this is a clear red card for serious foul play. Watch Moura at full speed, lose control of his body, and go straight through the leg of Gutmann. And as far as endangering the safety of your opponent, I'm just going to leave you with this view. Watch the studs of Moura with the straight leg go straight through Gutmann's ankle. That is the definition of endangering the safety of an opponent, and I think this should have been a red card and a sending off. To Kansas City we go, and the call to head sport in Kansas City, really frustrated. 36th minute, Johnny Russell on the inline defending against Nelson Quinonez. Russell's putting in a tackle to stop the momento of Quinonez and, oh yes, that is very ugly. There is not a foul called on the play, however, by either the assistant referee or Pinto, the referee. Pinto sees the play, sends off Russell, and I agree with the decision. Russell was frustrated in his quotes afterwards because he said he got the ball, claiming this was not a foul at all. That's hard for me to understand watching this play. Russell may have got the ball, but it's his heel on top of the ball, a full eight inches over the ground. And look at the leg, extended with studs exposed into the side of the shin of Quinonez. Watch Quinonez's foot, it's planted. Watch the force of Russell's tackle into his shin, which pushes his shin to the side. Quinonez is lucky not to be seriously injured in my opinion. So for me, all of those ingredients equal serious foul play and a red card. Interesting play in Minnesota. Start of the second half, Hassani Dotson in the 18, ball bouncing around, and Roman Berkey may or may not have fouled him. There's a little pause, and referee Victor Rivas makes his decision. Foul, penalty, yellow card. Now many of my Loons friends on the internet were yelling at me, hey, this is an obvious denial of an obvious goal scoring opportunity. And I can understand why they would think that. Berkey's not attempting to play the ball. He is grabbing Hassani Dotson to stop his momentum. Dotson is in a position where he may have an opportunity to get a shot on goal. But may is the key word for me. As always with dog so, you have four buckets, and you need to check the box in all of them. The bucket I'm focused on is, quote, the likelihood of keeping or gaining control of the ball for Hassani Dotson. The fact is, Dotson never has control of the ball. So what's the likelihood of him keeping or gaining control of it? I think very low. You can see the touch that takes it away from Dotson and toward the recovery run of Josh Yarrow. Again, another bucket, the location and number of defenders. So for me, it's not a clear and obvious error that this is an obvious goal scoring opportunity when the ball is running away from Dotson and there is a defender there to clean it up. Had the ball been sitting at Dotson's feet, I would be singing a different song. For me, then it would be dog so. But in this case, I agree with the refereeing crew. Another week, another case of, hey, did that ball cross the line? 82nd minute, RSL Vancouver, tight game with big playoff seating implications in the West. So you tell me, did this ball cross the line? Zach McBath paws it away and Malik Badawi and his referee crew say no goal on the field. Going to be honest, again, I have no idea if this crossed the line. I do think it is possible that it did, but there is no angle that would give me certainty in this case. Therefore, you got to stick with the call on the field. It is what it is, Vancouver. And this one is pretty darn complicated in second half stoppage time. It looks like this is a handball from a Ryan Gould shot on Brian Vera. Watch these first couple replays and try to formulate a decision. No PK was a call on the field, but Alejandro Mariscal, the VAR, sent Malik Badawi to the monitor. Badawi said no PK after a long review, and I think I understand why. Initially, I was saying clear penalty. Watch it hit the right hand of Vera. And it may have hit the right hand, but it probably hit his chest first. And I'm not 100% sure it does hit that right hand. And without it being clear and obvious, jumping off the page, I don't think you can reverse the call on the field. A couple borderline plays and difficult decisions for this refereeing crew. Let's go to D.C., Red Bulls in town, 42nd minute. Did John Tolkien go down too easy on this challenge from Chris Durkin? My answer is absolutely not. Watch closely from the angle behind the inline. Tolkien beats Durkin, and Durkin's just a little clumsy coming across the back of the Red Bulls' left back. He catches Tolkien's foot, and that contact on Tolkien throws that leg into the other one, taking down the Red Bulls' defender. That is, while I will grant, unfortunate for D.C., still a foul. Good PK decision by Alex Chilowitz, in my opinion. I am, however, a little wary of the call on Andres Reyes just a few minutes later. Now, is this a foul on Andres Reyes? Oh, absolutely it is. But rewind it back. My question is whether or not Christian Benteke fouled Kyle Duncan in the buildup, and I think he did. Watch Duncan, completely focused on recovering this ball in behind. Now watch Benteke, who's initially chasing the ball, but then changes his focus to the defender. Duncan begins to lunge for the ball, and Benteke straight up clears him out, in my opinion. He is not attempting to play this ball, he is playing the man. I also see, thanks to this angle, that in my opinion, Benteke is not just going shoulder to shoulder, he's also extending the arm and pushing Duncan down. For me, all of this is enough for a clear and obvious error and a foul on the attacking player. I don't think this PK should have stood. We ended Atlanta with an example of deliberate play by a defender. We've talked about the offside law a lot this year, and this is a great example to help you understand at home what deliberate means, and why, when there's a deliberate play, a player in an offside position would be considered to not have gained an advantage. And that is the case for Yorgos Yakoumakis, and scores a beautiful goal, his 15th of the season. Here is the portion of Law 11 in question. A player in an offside position receiving the ball from an opponent who deliberately plays the ball is not considered to have gained an advantage. The Montreal defender is on the ball, trying to take touches to evade pressure. This is a deliberate touch on his part. Therefore, Yakoumakis, despite being in an offside position, can receive this ball and score, and not be punished. The more you know about the laws, the better, folks. Big thanks to my editor, Phil Levanco, who helps me out more than anyone could possibly know, and my producer, Richard Hernandez, who keeps me as honest as he can. I'm Andrew Weeby. We'll see you next time.