Sunday, August 13, 2006

Chivas 2 Fire 1


It's official: Dave Sarachan's hot seat makes Dusty Baker's look like a throne of ice. The Fire's winless streak at home reached five games last night with a 2-1 loss to Chivas (and six if you include a friendly with Club America.) Yp, it's a good thing the Fire doesn't get scrutinized as much as the Cubs in this town. Otherwise, the howls of discontent aimed at Sarachan and GM John Guppy would be deafening. As they should be. This is a team that is not only bad, but getting worse. The results were better during the neverending road trip to begin the season. Is there any worse sign of poor coaching than a team that regresses during the course of a season?

To be fair, the game was lost when Chivas was awarded a penalty kick in second half injury time. It's never fun to see a ref control the outcome of a game like that.

The only positive was that the crowd of 17,066 was the largest since the stadium opener against NY Red Bull. Of course, many of those "fans" were a Mexican contingent there to see Chivas.

4 Comments:

Blogger Tottito10 said...

To be fair, the game was lost when Chivas was awarded a penalty kick in second half injury time. It's never fun to see a ref control the outcome of a game like that.

I don't get this comment. Was it a deserved penalty or not? More importantly, if it's a legitimate penalty, why does it matter what minute the alleged foul occurred in? If the penalty was warranted, then it makes no sense to argue that the ref controlled the outcome of the game by making the appropriate call.

6:24 PM  
Blogger UnknownColumn said...

First, the call was questionable at best. It wasn't obvious, which is exactly why I think it's best to not make that call in that situation. Unless a guy is blatantly mugged or it's a blatantly intentional hand ball, you let it slide and let the game dictate itself. (In fact, there was a call a few minutes earlier in the game in the Fire box that was let go without a call. Afterward the game, the Fire coach said that the penalty that was awarded looked like a "makeup call" for missing the first. If so, that's bullshit. You cant decide a game on a "makeup call.")

Second, it figures that an Italian would question this. Yes, it was very much like Italy-Australia. Perhaps it was a light foul, but not enough to be awarded with a penalty kick that essentially decides the game. Much like Italy-Australia, it would have been best to leave it a no-call, IMHO.

6:50 PM  
Blogger UnknownColumn said...

By the way, just kidding about the Italian thing. I'm just giving you a hard time.

What Italian club do you root for?

6:53 PM  
Blogger Tottito10 said...

If the call wasn't obvious, then I guess I see your point. However, hypothetically speaking, I still think a penalty is a penalty regardless of when it occurs.

I root for Roma. Unfortunately, I expect another slightly better than mediocre season even with the help they've been given with Calciopoli. They chose not to sign Fiore because he used to play for Lazio. Lame.

10:32 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home