United (A) | Post Match Thread

Scott mcfc said:
Ian wright did a piece on it on motd,3 times haaland was in,not once in whole game did we even try an play a thru ball,thing is it doesent have to even be perfect ,just between lines,and haaland will do the rest,or at least put them under serious pressure,instead we just passed it too very slow wings,then utd had everyone behind and 2 or 3 defenders round haaland,its rearly not haalands fault ,this is our main issue,if we had fast wingers that actually beat a player it wudnt be a problem but at moment they dont even try to beat last man just past back inside,greelish was only one when he came on that was beating man and puttin them under it,it was poor play yday,summert needs to change,and quickly because it does look like were easy to play against

Bang on the buck. Haaland at City is being underused, anywhere else he'd be the main focus, currently he's working off scraps.
Click to expand...
 
Haarland is more than a tap-in merchant according to City fans and we gave the best coach in the world so why can't we get more from him?
We've spent a few seasons watching Jesus on the shoulder of defenders ready for a through ball that never comes and we've seen the same with Haaland. We have talented midfielders so why won't they play that ball? Haaland's second at West Ham on the opening day showed it worked and we need to try it more often.
 
failsworthblueboy said:
I'll try and break it down for the people who believe he was onside,

1) the ball was played to Rashford.
2) Akanji plays him offside.
3)Rashford runs with the ball within playing distance
4) Rashfords team mate shouts "Leave it"
5) he leaves it.

1) & 2) he's active when the ball is played to him and impacts on Akanjis decision making : Interfering with play.

3) He runs with the ball in playing distance because of this he impacts on the decision making of Ederson and the defenders: Interfering with play.

4) & 5) He gets the Instruction, Leave it, he is then part of the move, Active!! : Interfering with play.

The officials the pundits the Rags and any one who thinks it's not offside need to find another hobby and don't give me this Grey area shit It's a really bad decision.
Click to expand...

Rashford was offside,Fernandes wasn't.

Rashford never touched the ball so the rules don't cover interfering with play in the manner in which you claim.He didn't ACTIVELY obstruct Akanji,who waas 2 yards behind and never getting back,neither did he obstruct Walker or Ederson.

Rashfords presence most definitely affected the decisions of the our players,but seemingly that isn't against the rules and is the reason the officials came to their decision.

And just in case you are confused.....once again,i agree that it is bollocks and the game has gone if that is deemed a legitimate goal.
 
East Level 2 said:
Haarland is more than a tap-in merchant according to City fans and we gave the best coach in the world so why can't we get more from him?
We've spent a few seasons watching Jesus on the shoulder of defenders ready for a through ball that never comes and we've seen the same with Haaland. We have talented midfielders so why won't they play that ball? Haaland's second at West Ham on the opening day showed it worked and we need to try it more often.
Click to expand...
thats because west ham were starting to open up chasing the game leaving space at the back, at no time did utd do that yesterday even at 1 down they kept players back, its because of that very reason we would kill them if space is left in behind
 
FantasyIreland said:
That doesn't affect the law though.Of course he was interfering with play as common sense would dictate but he didn't affect an opponents ability to reach the ball.

The law is total bollocks.
Click to expand...
But is he affecting Edersons 'ability to reach the ball'?
Ederson cannot be expected to know he is in an offside position and therefore had to cover the angle of his run and a potential shot and also was unable to reach the ball without potentially fouling him and maybe getting sent off.
This allowed Fernando to run in from a different angle and score with the keeper's attention focused elsewhere.
 
FantasyIreland said:
Rashford was offside,Fernandes wasn't.

Rashford never touched the ball so the rules don't cover interfering with play in the manner in which you claim.He didn't ACTIVELY obstruct Akanji,who waas 2 yards behind and never getting back,neither did he obstruct Walker or Ederson.

Rashfords presence most definitely affected the decisions of the our players,but seemingly that isn't against the rules and is the reason the officials came to their decision.

And just in case you are confused.....once again,i agree that it is bollocks and the game has gone if that is deemed a legitimate goal.
Click to expand...
Had me worried for a minute.
 
tonea2003 said:
thats because west ham were starting to open up chasing the game leaving space at the back, at no time did utd do that yesterday even at 1 down they kept players back, its because of that very reason we would kill them if space is left in behind
Click to expand...
But we still had chances to pop the ball over the top to him. Perhaps not many yesterday but certainly in other games.
 
The lino should have simply put his flag up immediately.It wasn't even close. Even before fat faced thug touched it. When he touched it Rashford was 4 yards offside.
What transpired after that was a pure attempt to legitimise and therefore rectify a mistake. Problem was the lino had rat face and a baying mob all over him. Complete and total shithouse of an official. Atwell was looking for ANY possibility to give it hence they were in cahoots.
That's it..end of...corrupt or at the very least unduly influenced by the occasion and location.
 
Len Rum said:
But is he affecting Edersons 'ability to reach the ball'?
Ederson cannot be expected to know he is in an offside position and therefore had to cover the angle of his run and a potential shot and also was unable to reach the ball without potentially fouling him and maybe getting sent off.
This allowed Fernando to run in from a different angle and score with the keeper's attention focused elsewhere.
Click to expand...

He was affecting Edersons decision making,he did not affect his line of vision.
 
jim tolmies perm said:
A shame Eddy didn't just go for rat face and smash his teeth down his neck...
Would Rashford have touched the ball then?
An interesting scenario nevertheless..
Click to expand...

I don't understand why our players just didnt stop when Rashford initially went through,and was clearly offside.The fact we played on gave opportunity for this craziness to develop.
 
Len Rum said:
But is he affecting Edersons 'ability to reach the ball'?
Ederson cannot be expected to know he is in an offside position and therefore had to cover the angle of his run and a potential shot and also was unable to reach the ball without potentially fouling him and maybe getting sent off.
This allowed Fernando to run in from a different angle and score with the keeper's attention focused elsewhere.
Click to expand...
Fernandes was allowed to run because Walker wasn’t switched on. If he defended to the whistle this would have been a non event. You can’t put faith in the officials because they’ve shown incompetence for years.
 
Bernardo had the ball in midfield, about to launch an attack, then Rashford pulled up with an injury, the ref didn't stop play, Bernardo bayed by the crowd played the ball into touch so Rashford could get assistance.

3 minutes ticked by, when the extra-time was added, we got 1 minute back for good sportmanship.
tu3xhUI.gif
 
Bobby the blue said:
Of course he did . What are you talking about. It’s like you know you’ve made a mistake in what you are talking about but rather than hold your hands up and admit you’re wrong you’re banging on with a load of rubbish.
Click to expand...
The problem with trying to have a law for offside, just like handball, is that it is impossible to make it fair. You rely on the interpretation of the referee.

We used to flag for offside if anyone was off and this caused some unfair decisions. We have ended up now with this mess. By trying to right a wrong we have just created another wrong.

The goal using common sense should not stand unfortunately common sense, the laws of the game and referees will always be found wanting.
 
eyalluvitt said:
Spoke to lots of fans from various clubs and everyone is unanimous we got shafted, while the giddies are laughing, hardly believing their luck
Click to expand...
Ditto
My wife is from Bolton, all of her family support Wanderers.
Asked a good mate who's a Chelsea fan and very objective.
All said it shouldn't have stood.
 
Lovebitesandeveryfing said:
Almost certainly been posted on the thread, but should be posted over and over, a hundred times, till the thread is closed or abandoned:

"If a player isn’t interfering with play then he shouldn’t be on the pitch."
— Brian Howard Clough

to be complemented that other great manager (I think, to Ian St John):

"If you’re not interfering with play then you should be."
— Bill Shankly
Click to expand...
Great quotes but complete bollocks
 
cookster said:
Keep hearing this arguement without people actually acknowledging that most teams put 10 behind the ball against us.
Brighton were great yesterday because the Dippers came to attack, not sit back for 90 mins and try the odd counter.

The football is fine, we need more tempo and intensity.
Click to expand...
Agreed, but how do we get the tempo and intensity back? Im no coach or tactician but Too me it seems like Pep has told everyone to just keep the ball at all costs. With kev being the only exception, hence why he seems to be the only one who attempts the killer balls and crosses. And at the moment a lot of his balls are just not quite hitting the mark. Are we too reliant on kev too feed erling?
I don't know, maybe I'm just talking shit :-)
 
adr2.8i said:
Agreed, but how do we get the tempo and intensity back? Im no coach or tactician but Too me it seems like Pep has told everyone to just keep the ball at all costs. With kev being the only exception, hence why he seems to be the only one who attempts the killer balls and crosses. And at the moment a lot of his balls are just not quite hitting the mark. Are we too reliant on kev too feed erling?
I don't know, maybe I'm just talking shit :-)
Click to expand...
We need to get back to good game management, nothing has changed we've always passed sides into submission.

What's changed is the periods in the game where we increased the intensity have declined significantly, some games like Southampton it doesn't happen at all.

It could be a number of factors, I trust Pep will find a solution.
 
Petetheblu said:
No worries, I'm just frustrated at having a big beautiful fast striker and not utilising his strengths. Maybe it's Kevs form or that no one gets to the line and crosses it anymore or maybe it because Peps just to good and teams won't open up as much and leave the spaces for a thorough ball. Sorry can't do sentences with you a massive jumble up of words.
Click to expand...
It's utterly ridiculous how for so long whenever we found ourselves struggling to break teams down we had a habit of resorting to lofting high crosses into the box for non-existent munchkin false 9's to not get on the end of.

Now we have a monster of a striker upfront we no longer seem to ever send in any high crosses.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Unread Posts

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top