LMFAO what the hell just happened. Ref CLEARLY blocks vancouver player who was about to get to the ball.... didn't stop play, LAFC got a counter and scored. Ref gives goal. Weirdest sequence I've seen in a long time
2023 Audi MLS Cup Playoffs
- Thread starter LionNYC
- Start date
AND now get this - he calls it back....... not because he interfered, but because it was offside.
LOL
LOL
NWSL Playoffs: I just watched Gotham FC beat Portland in Portland 
On to the final vs. the winner of San Diego v Seattle (on right now)!
On to the final vs. the winner of San Diego v Seattle (on right now)!
I complete opposite, I have only streaming apps on my tv so this is better, I’m not watching playoffs because nycfc is not in it
But I do agree this will make the league even more niche and irrelevant to general audiences.
Thanks!So, at the very top of the MLS home page in very small type it says
"See the Live 2023 MLS Cup Playoff Bracket-->" and links here
MLS Cup Playoffs | MLSsoccer.com
All the latest on Leagues Cup, Campeones Cup, Concacaf Champions League, U.S. Open Cup, Canadian Championship, and morewww.mlssoccer.com
It's not easy to find.
I'd file that under - easy to find if you catch it, otherwise miserable. As you said, small print. Located in a place that is often some kind of spam like info. And nowhere to be found if you don't land on the homepage.
Anyway, the bracket answered my question. 75% of 3 game matchups are done after game 2 (so far). Was kinda hoping for the laugh if no pairs went to game 3. Alas, Dallas spoiled my fun.
Consensus on reddit is that it's a dead ball if the ref touches the ball but a ref/player collision is just part of the game, per the Laws of the Game. Of course, the ref caused that collision through bad positioning and nonexistent spatial awareness and it's pretty much unforgiveable.
PS I love the Vancouver coach. He's insane in all the best ways. It's even great that his name is Vanni and he coaches Vancouver.
Last edited:
Just curious, what would be the pros and cons of doing this 3 game series instead of a normal home and home series? As
mgarbowski had mentioned before this all has to do with scheduling so that’s the reason they went with this format. But what is the benefit of this over home and home?
mgarbowski had mentioned before this all has to do with scheduling so that’s the reason they went with this format. But what is the benefit of this over home and home?
Oh I'm aware this is the case. I think the rules of the game also have context, and in this case that context should have been clear that this was an unfair advantage given to LAFC due to referee interference. It's super unfortunate but was hilarious to see.
I implore you to watch the game back from the moment that happens and watch the camera as it follows some of the players and Vanni himself, and then after you can skip to when the game ends and he comes back out (He got a red card for the outburst) and the camera just follows him for like 5 or so minutes and he's just going around talking to LAFC/Vancouver personnel and it's quite funny
One thing I think is a massive fail, is that as I scroll through the "Scores" section on the MLS app, it doesn't tell me what the current standing is for the series.
I don't recall everyone who won the first match, so I would need to scroll back up to the previous match to understand what the series is at for the upcoming one.
Just curious, what would be the pros and cons of doing this 3 game series instead of a normal home and home series? As
It may be a simplistic answer but it's really easy nothing more than $$$$$$$.
Just like the Big 4 leagues (and for that matter feel free to toss in the NCAA, too) MLS is going to do everything they can to expand playoff teams and games.
There isn't an owner of any professional sports team that's going to pass up the revenue from higher ticket prices, parking, concessions etc, because a nonsensical 1st round playoff format messes with the integrity of the game.
This has been discussed all over for years. The case against is they create situations like our loss to Toronto in 2016 that was over a few minutes into the second game. Or completely weird and unsatisfying results like when we "won" a game but were eliminated against Columbus. Of course we didn't actually win a normal game because the score means nothing taken as a stand alone game. We in fact scored more in the second half of a single contest played a week apart in different locations. Except it was treated a stand-alone game for purposes of roster, lineup, YC accumulation, RC suspensions and substitutions. It's a hybrid with multiple built in compromises. In BTOT you have to win the last contest to win. It's clear and satisfying.Just curious, what would be the pros and cons of doing this 3 game series instead of a normal home and home series? As
This year the SKC-STL set had a second game that was exciting and went down to the final seconds with extended added time. Under the 2-game system the result would have been 97% certain after SKC won 3-0 on the road in the first game, then even more clearly over when SKC scored just before the half of Game 2.
I don't think there's a consensus on what is the best option after single game elimination. I think best two of three was worth trying.
Last edited:
I just want them to play extra time in all 3 games. I hate the shootouts determining postseason advancement if you haven't tried extra time first.
Under the current system, a team can go 0-1-2 in the three games and advance because they won two penalty shootouts. At least do first to five points in a three-game series, which is the same thing as a best 2 of 3 except you don't use shootouts to determine winners. The only way you'd need a shootout is if the teams draw all 3 games.
One idea I've been kicking around is still going to PKs right away, but it's a tiebreaker instead of a "win".
So for example, first game ends tied and goes to PKs. Team A wins the PK shootout. They then have "advantage".
If Team A then wins Game 2 in regulation, they win the series.
If Team B wins Game 2 in regulation, Game 3 decides it in regulation or in PKs.
If Game 2 ends tied and Team A wins in PKs, then Team B HAS to win Game 3 in regulation, Team A only needs to draw or win.
If Game 2 ends tied and Team B wins in PKs, then Game 3 decides it, whether its in regulation or in PKs.
That seems so complicated and fans will have no idea what's going on. That's why I think the first to 5 system works. It keeps some part of the regular season (3 points for a win, 1 for a tie) and is easily digestible.
My 7-YO has an odd obsession with brackets. He loves to print them out and keep track of playoffs. He couldn't do it for the MLS playoffs because all the brackets had black where the team's name is supposed to go.
Or how about this? Play the 3 games just as regular games, including draws. If after 90 minutes of the third game, the series is tied, go to extra time and then penalties.
Yeah, in a first to five format this works. The new system this year is terrible.
The quality of the refereeing is bad enough in this league... but to have the labor organization in charge of refereeing put a statement out that is already being debunked, let alone about a player on the Supporter's Shield winning club, puts the integrity of the league's championship into doubt. Miazga's yellow was soft enough, but lying and saying stadium security needed to forcibly remove him from the locker room is just bizarre.
This is really absurd.
This is really absurd.
Last edited:
Similar threads
