Podcasts
A reality check for Sporting KC
This week on Shades of Blue, we talk tactics, complain about referees, and hear what Peter Vermes thought after the 4-0 loss in St. Louis.
Just in case you started having positive feelings about this season for a brief moment, the soccer gods made sure to give Sporting KC a dose of reality during the 4-0 loss to St. Louis City SC. This week on Shades of Blue, we talk tactics, complain about referees, and hear what Peter Vermes thought after the match.
After showing signs of life, we were hoping for four points out of the two matches last week. In hindsight, that was quite optimistic. But things were on track after an impressive 1-1 draw in the midweek match away at LAFC. Who could blame you for starting to find hope?
Erik Thommy came on for Gadi Kinda at the half, but Robert says he would have been the better choice to start. What else went wrong in St. Louis against the Allcaps? Is SKC really that much worse than our new rivals?
David tests out a new character – David in the Chat.
There has yet to be a widely accepted name for the KC-STL rivalry, but we have a few new suggestions.
Apologies for not getting the show out on Monday. We were traveling back from the ugly side of the state on Sunday and couldn’t record. Just a heads up, next week might be different as well with the holiday weekend.
Find the KC Soccer Journal wherever you get your podcasts. Please subscribe, rate, & review! You can follow Cody @ThatCodyTho, Thad @TheBackpost, and Robert @SpKCLife.
Spotify | Apple
KC Current Lose Late to AFC Toronto in World Sevens
KC Current Win Over Tigres in Dramatic Fashion at World Sevens
2026 FIFA World Cup draw: Who is in the USA’s group? Who is coming to Kansas City?
KC Current Lose World Sevens Opener to Flamengo
Preview: Women’s College Cup in Kansas City
Sporting KC Part Ways with Interim Coach Kerry Zavagnin
KC Current Playing for $5 Million in World Sevens this Week
More on Rumored Sporting KC Coaching Candidate Raphael Wicky
2026 FIFA World Cup draw: Who is in the USA’s group? Who is coming to Kansas City?
The capital conflict for the rivalry name
The penalty was… meh. There just wasn’t enough to overturn it. Was it a clear and obvious error? No. The other angles did not definitively demonstrate an error was made on the field.
The second goal was a clean tackle on Gadi. It was all ball and Kinda didn’t expect the tackle. There wasn’t any contact on the follow through.
The rotation (lack there-of) is what created that match. Earlier subs in Minnesota and LAFC was the single-most controllable factor that vermes blatantly ignored. When combined with failing to change tactics and trying to play to their strengths it is almost entirely on vermes. Highlighting is arrogance and failure to adapt to the modern league.
Respectfully, what on earth are you talking about? I just rewatched this like 8 times from different angles to see what you’re talking about. Blom comes in from the side/back. He gets ball but also wipes out Gadi. You can’t go through the man to get the ball. That gets called a foul at least 50% of the time.
Moreover, given how soft the PK was, this should have been a foul. OR the PK shouldn’t have been a PK.
There’s a clear angle of Radoja getting the ball in the box. The sole of his boot hits the ball before there’s any contact in the box.
What about the lack of a red card for Blom’s tackle on Ndenbe?
Kinda is “wiped out” because he falls from the contact on the ball. The trailing leg from st Louis doesn’t go through kinda. The contact comes after kinda fails to maintain his feet, not because he received contact from the player. One of the angles on apple tv showed it about perfectly.
There were multiple merits for yellows and you could argue that salloi got lucky to avoid a red card with his tackle from behind on a planted foot. Celia? Should have gotten at least a yellow for sliding on kinda early on (had kinda’s foot been touching the ground it should have been a red card) and repeated infringement was definitely present for more yellow cards. Blom’s tackle was a definite red.
I get the point about consistency. I am there every game. But the focus on the ref, the factor we cannot control, is ignoring the larger problem. We came out dead in the water, running out a tactic that st Louis excels against, with no apparent desire to win. If one goal makes us fold like this (thinking about how LAFC should have had 2 more goals before we woke up), then we have a larger problem than the ref. Especially when we cannot form a consistent offense.
There was absolutely contact on the Kinda tackle. And he couldn’t have made the tackle without making contact from that angle.
If the PK is a foul, the Kinda tackle was a foul, and Blom should’ve been sent off for the 2 scissor tackles he made that weren’t even called fouls.
I agree there wasn’t a clear and obvious error on the PK. But that foul was inconsistent with the standard of physical contact he had already allowed in the tackle on Remi that led to the move. Which is why Penso was incompetent. He clearly had a 2-tiered standard for contact in the game. And he obviously had zero interest in carding for persistent infringement, despite St Louis committing 3x as many fouls-despite his lax standards towards them.
Penso isn’t in the top of the issues why SKC lost that game. But he definitely contributed to the margin the game was lost by.
This. This exactly is where I’m at.
If penso is competent we probably still lose but the game is totally different. Once we were down 2-0 it was fundamentally over. He emboldened StL to make a lot of dangerous and violent tackles.
SKC should have also been up a man for what? 40 minutes?
Yes, we were tactically inept but pretending like Penso didn’t fundamentally alter the game is just dishonest.
Skc being up a man for 40 minutes isn’t a winning argument (hello Houston game).
Penso is a factor that cannot be controlled. Each official impacts a game and part of being a professional is knowing how to deal with crap officiating. I don’t agree with the emphasis on this. It detracts from the core issue that has been demonstrated consistently by vernes and an inability to adapt.
Yes, professionals can adapt their play to how the ref is calling the game. When the ref allows dangerous plays to happen without calling fouls, it encourages players to be more reckless. You could also just remove the ref and the players would be more reckless. So really the bare minimum a ref should be doing is calling reckless fouls to protect players from injuries. Did Penso consistently do that?
I think you’re ignoring where both Shawn and I said that SKC still would have lost and the performance was still bad.
But pretending like Penso didn’t materially alter the game is a take.
David Gaas from mls soccer also said not a PK but probably not enough to overturn.
Yea I’m not ignoring it, I think people don’t have a visible and easy outlet for frustration and the officiating has provided that. But it isnt where our frustration should lie. Match management created an environment that made our team ill equipped to handle st Louis.
They’re not mutually exclusive. And even if sporting had played well we should STILL criticize Penso for creating a dangerous environment.
You can be mad at the tactics and at the officiating. But one also has a lot more objectivity: Blom fouled the shit out of Logan and should have been booked, arguably red carded.
David in the chat, I agree with what you’re saying. If Sporting had won or drawn, I think SKC fans would still be frustrated with Penso’s officiating.
We all agree that Sporting did not play well, and that’s why we lost. However, his officiating altered the game. If he had given yellow cards to players who deserved them, they may have changed their tactics, which could have affected how we played. We will never know because that didn’t happen. I think it’s fair to be frustrated by Penso; it’s not fair to blame him for the loss. Perhaps if the score had been closer, but his lack of calls isn’t the reason we lost the game.
We can blame Penso, but most of the blame falls on PV because the line-up between LAFC and STL was the same, with three changes. I’ll never understand why he decided to start Leibold, who played his first game since like week 2 or 3 (I don’t remember when he was injured, but it’s been a minute since he’s played).
We were unprepared, and it’s PV’s fault for not having a clear understanding of how STL plays, or if he knew, for ignoring it. Also, the injury list has grown to include Pulido and Rosero. They played in both games last week. I hope he reconsiders his strategy for the next three-game stretch, which starts Saturday and ends the following Saturday. Otherwise, we will continue to lose and probably pick up more injuries along the way.
Very much enjoyed that David was consistently called “David in the chat” the whole episode. Seeing that the comments are like a chat and we can just change our names whenever, David should definitely change his name in the comments to “David in the chat”
Done.
Now I’m gonna like all your comments just because of the username.