Fastest Red Cards in MLS

[@Katzenjamer1]

Totally not prepared for the Zakuani leg breaker.

[@anandravi712]

Thank you MLS for the videos. We don see soccer here. It's like watching just for laughs

[@MoviesUnderTheSurface]

1:43 seems like a clean tackle?

[@paulstewart8324]

It was a high kick inside the penalty zone, not necesarily a dirty tackle but typically in soccer if your foot goes anywhere near a player's head or even chest height its considered a high kick. it's only amplified considering that it interfered with a goal scoring opportunity and it was inside the PK zone.

[@MoviesUnderTheSurface]

@@paulstewart8324 high kick is not a foul. the infraction you are referring to is 'dangerous play' and not all high kicks are dangerous plays. This one definitely wasn't. Even if it was, the restart would be an indirect free kick, not a penalty kick

[@paulstewart8324]

@@MoviesUnderTheSurface while it might be true that a high kick is not inherintley dangerous or technically a foul typically any high kick that is anywhere close to a player is called a dangerous play, i have been playing soccer for 13 years and am a certified referee. That kick stopped a goal scoring opportunity and it was dangerous to both players. especially considering that it was from behind. that wouldve 100% been a PK, it was inside the 18', It stopped a goal scoring opportunity, and it was a dangerous play. either one of those would've been a PK, you can see that in other clips where a play that stopped a goal scoring opportunity no matter how small inside the 18' resulted in an immediate ejection with a PK as a result. idk what you are smoking but no certified ref, especially not at MLS level would say that wasnt a dangerous play

[@paulstewart8324]

@@MoviesUnderTheSurface not to mention that the Referee is directly behind the two players involved, making it look like 6 kicked 22 in the face even though he didn't. not to mention soccer referees cannot go back on their calls no matter what, even if they believe them to be incorrect. which means if the main ref sees that play, assumes 6 kicks 22 in the face and red cards him for it, EVEN IF he didn't get kicked in the face and EVEN IF the ref saw that footage after the fact. the main ref CANNOT go back on his calls. tell me this if you are the referee of a game and you see a player kick another one in the face inside the penalty box and during a play that has an opportunity to score a goal, you would 100% eject 6 and give 22's team (didn't catch the name of the team) a PK. if you didn't it would show that you have a disregard for players safety and most likely would've been punished by the MLS/PRO for that. it might be easy to say the refs an idiot while your watching from 3 different camera angles on repeat on a large screen, but when your'e a main ref in the middle of a game that can't see from different angles the decision gets much more difficult to make.

[@MoviesUnderTheSurface]

@@paulstewart8324 Refs can 100% go back on a call if it is incorrect. This happens all time with VAR, and can also happen with communication between the center and an AR. It can also happen when the "fouled" player himself says he wasn't fouled, or when the center ref realizes on his own that he made an incorrect call. The only call the center cannot go back on is a goal after the following kick off has been taken. That's it. Also, I think you're being quite dramatic when saying the kick in question was near the opposing player's face. It was barely above his waist. A dangerous play? Debatable. I think it wasn't, and I know a ton of refs would agree. And it is absolutely not true that "any high kick that is anywhere close to a player is called a dangerous play". For numerous examples to the contrary, simply watch a Zlatan highlight reel. You are correct that if this was a dangerous play, it still would be a penalty due to DOGSO. I didn't think DOGSO applied to indirect free kick offenses, but I reviewed the law and it simply says DOGSO applies to free kick offenses, not specifically direct free kick ones. But to say that either DOGSO or a dangerous play would result in a penalty kick is incorrect. Dangerous plays result in indirect free kicks, not free or penalty kicks. I agree that the center ref probably saw the play wrong based on his viewing angle. That's a big reason why the ARs are there, to see the play from a different angle and help the center make the correct call. And because you brought it up, I have been playing soccer for 30 years and reffing (certified) for 10.

[@Bier-money]

Joe Nasco lived in Birmingham Alabama until a few weeks ago. Was a goalkeeper coach at a few colleges in the area, and also worked at Costco changing tires. As a ref always heard he was attributed with the fastest red card in mls history. Super nice guy!!!

[@MrRoztoc]

Maybe not all, but some red cards are clearly justified.

[@dmitriifirsov1940]

If Sergio Ramos will play here, he would get send off at 1st second

[@diegoaceves5254]

More like 0.01 seconds

[@UncleBenda]

Unlikely

[@monikashori1809]

😅right!

[@colerosenbalm4]

#3 isn't a red it's almost a flop. Yeah there's contact but still a dive

[@JoshMon21]

Cole Rosenbalm agreed. He was in a natural running motion

[@lancecampbell4323]

Maybe a yellow. Bad call

[@Heathen.Deity.]

Deliberate or not, he’s tripped the attacker and there was no other defensive cover. It’s a red card all day long (though very unlucky).

[@gavinbrown7336]

The challenges at 0:50 and 1:48 would no longer be classified as a Red Card with today's Laws of the Game but at the time on the videos they were valid sending off offenses. Now, Denying an Obvious Goal Scoring Opportunity or DOGSO while making an attempt at the ball inside the 18yd Penalty Area is downgraded to a Yellow Card and the game is restarted with a Penalty Kick; the change was made to avoid the double punishment of a RC and a PK if a defender was actually trying to win the ball. If the DOGSO is done outside of the 18yd, it is still a RC no matter what and so is a DOGSO inside the 18 if there is no attempt at the ball, like a defender sticking his hand out to prevent a ball going into the goal or pulling the attacker down by the shirt.

[@maumor2]

the one @0:50 was and its still a red card

[@brianliu0412]

@@maumor2 You are incorrect. If it was intentional attempt to play the ball, DOGSO is downgraded. Basically ask yourself, is it a "soccer" foul. If yes, then we don't need to double punish

[@callpress12]

Who else is just shocked Baldomero Toledo actually got a decision correct?

[@kiernansmith472]

Christopher Allpress yeah I’m very shocked, he’s without a doubt the worst ref in mls

[@namehere4451]

1:34 is it me or did he trip on himself

[@pirtdirksen7318]

I don’t see the foul.

[@corytoews5222]

It was the right call, but it's still hilarious that Baldomero Toledo is the first face we see in this video.

[@vika0194]

All calls were correct.

[@PDXurbia]

Victor false. All fouls against Seattle should be given a medal. There is clearly one incorrect call in this vid

[@vika0194]

Derek Espinoza time stamp the one you are talking about....

[@jensaguilar5919]

1:32 I dont understand. red card? just because its a free way path or what ?

[@gavinbrown7336]

They class this as "Denying an Obvious Goal Scoring Opportunity" or DOGSO under Law 12

[@SpookeHD]

It's because he's the last defender, and it's a goal opportunity.

[@gavinbrown7336]

The 4 considerations are Defenders (last defender), Direction (path to goal and angle), Distance (reasonable shooting range), Control (does the attacker have a reasonable chance to control the ball). If you check off all 4 of these, it's a an automatic red for denying a goal, unless it's inside the 18, then if the player is at least trying to play the ball it gest downgraded to yellow and a PK.

[@HHh-ej4rl]

1:10 Zelarayan tripped himself.

[@seamus1956]

H H Chanot clipped his trailing heel which caused him to trip himself. A definite foul and as such a DOGSO red card.

[@FormulaMeme]

That's not Nat Borchers. He doesn't have a beard!

[@kanifuker721]

Last one should have received a lengthy ban, his intention before coming on was to try and break that guy's leg.

[@Binda1122]

I think which you talked about is last second…

[@Buddha-2505]

The first red card is extremely shock, stunning and unbelievable 💯💔😵‍💫😱

[@henrizimenoff8626]

BRUH... Why does this keep happening in a rare way?

[@charlessmith263]

Learned a new lesson--a goalkeeper can not impede an attacking player with any part of the opponent's body or grab that opponent intentionally. This would be called intentional interference and the goalkeeper will be sent off (red-carded). A replacement goalkeeper will be replaced, keeping the team from being shorthanded, unlike what would happen if the player was sent off red-carded (in this case, the team cannot substitute a red-card-ejected player at all).

[@granthenderson5912]

If goalie gets a red you sub the goalie and you have to take out a field player leaving you with 1 fewer men

[@sunnywilliams3992]

This guy is my goalkeeping director

[@Otaviosmpinheiro]

Whats up with colorado and red cards

[@FavreianVengeance]

3:56 We need more of this.

[@markusvienna231]

what? 1:49 not even a foul, 2:15 was a hard tackle ok, but red card stright? Same at 2:25.

[@djus42]

The foul at 2:16 against Steve Zakuani broke the tibia and fibula and he had to be airlifted to a local trauma center to have surgery. Compartment syndrome nearly caused his to be amputated and this tackle marked the begining of the end of Zakuani's carrer, he wouldn't play a match till 15 months later in 2012, and by 2014 he had retired due to issues with his leg. I watch the game live and I'll never unhear the leg breaking sound or his wailing. The short clip the used cut out his leg flopping around in the air before he hit the ground. That foul deserved the 10 game ban.

[@strike-blox1908]

Some of these don’t really deserve a red card smh

[@Felix-nj8xx]

Oh, are you a professional referee too?

[@michaeldunn1754]

Which ones?

[@sebastianaraque354]

We need 2020 bloopers

[@indianadoggovitch]

What the hell is the MLS?

[@thomasvelthuis2989]

1:33 what a joke. The defender isn't even Looking at the opponent but towards the ball. Afterwards the attacker immediately asks for a card and falls way too easy.

[@GamingHubPubgm]

1st one 💀💀💀

[@skyshatter3633]

the 2nd one is a penalty but no red lol even yellow would have been abit over the top

[@clipcoug1139]

The 2nd one was a red for DOGSO.

[@MoviesUnderTheSurface]

@@clipcoug1139 it was a red for DOGSO. Today it would be a yellow for DOGSO because the law changed.

[@christophedethier8580]

@@MoviesUnderTheSurface . With the new law I give also red. The ball is too far to be played. But it is my point of view.

[@michellewaters9971]

GK takleing by putting your arms around someone’s legs is not okey. But I don’t think that should of Ben a red card

[@aymeric2340]

red card and no review

[@deathcheatersguild4266]

We all know this MLS ref is the worst and should NOT be allowed to referee anymore!

[@alexisgutierrez3135]

Death Cheaters Guild then I guess there wouldn’t be MLS. Don’t matter what you think, you need referees to have a football match.

[@QPRTokyo]

Most of these offences deserve a booking not a sending off.

[@vika0194]

The timer should be stopped when the referee actually shows the card. Not when he blows the whistle...

[@happylarry7533]

you should have edit the video as a countdown suppose your american so do things the wrong way round as usual