Ref Watch

[PabZabb]

The question is, has anybody seen that type of infringement ever given? I know that in my time I’ve never seen anything like it.

Similar scenario to that Salah goal v Wolves the other night, as soon as the cross goes in he’s offside (or should be)

 

[Stephen230]

Have you been sussed yet? Or are we letting you play a little longer?

I’m not sure what you mean mate but I do hope you’re accusing me of been a United fan.

 

[Stephen230]

The question is, has anybody seen that type of infringement ever given? I know that in my time I’ve never seen anything like it.

I don’t recall ever seeing a comparable incident to start with. Although it would only have really been possible in the last couple of years since the delayed flag became a thing.

 

[The Future’s Blue!]

I don’t recall ever seeing a comparable incident to start with. Although it would only have really been possible in the last couple of years since the delayed flag became a thing.

And that’s the point, whether it was then or now, the offside is always called.

Simple really.

 

[HypnoticBlue]

Rashford was the furthest player on the pitch so the ball was obviously played for him to run onto, so the flag should have been raised the second he ran towards the ball, it’s that simple, and we know full well that’s what would have happened at the other end, just like any of the penalty shouts we had would’ve been given at the other end. The full back fouled Mahrez about 6 times but still didn’t get booked, and Casemiro got away with nudges and fouls all afternoon. It f*****’ stinks !

 

[The Future’s Blue!]

We are told week-in/week-out that what happened is offside, and that has been proved by the actions of every refereeing team who have disallowed a goal, if not just the movement.

Then, one day, that all changes. The game changes beyond all recognition from every game before.

 

[Bluearmy]

... whilst going on to say 'but by the letter of the law the referee was 100% correct'. And then the panel will accept his superior knowledge of the LOTG as gospel, and subtly move on to just how brilliant the Rag's were and how they genuinely deserved to win the game, and in three days time it will all be forgotten and everyone will move on.

Fair enough, only saw a few seconds clip of it originally. Having watched it all now he does indeed say that. He also says rashford never touched the ball (so that's in his favour). Which totally ignores the actual laws of the game which state he doesnt need to touch it to be deemed active… he also omits the part of law around line of sight being compromised quite handily for him. Cheating clueless twat

 

[Kippax77]

Rashford was the furthest player on the pitch so the ball was obviously played for him to run onto, so the flag should have been raised the second he ran towards the ball, it’s that simple, and we know full well that’s what would have happened at the other end, just like any of the penalty shouts we had would’ve been given at the other end. The full back fouled Mahrez about 6 times but still didn’t get booked, and Casemiro got away with nudges and fouls all afternoon. It f*****’ stinks !

I think the worse foul of the game was by the rat from behind on someone (can't remember who as i was too busy looking at the ref to get his card out). He didn't book him, probably cos he didn't want his ear bending for the rest of the game, but then booked Erikson as a good will gesture to make up for not booking the rat

 

[richards30]

Absolute joke!

 

[Stephen230]

And that’s the point, whether it was then or now, the offside is always called.

Simple really.

If this had been a League Cup game with no VAR ( and therefore no delayed flags ) he would have flagged as soon as Rashford made a movement towards the ball and it would never have even got as far as Fernandez getting involved.

 

[cleavers]

I think the worse foul of the game was by the rat from behind on someone (can't remember who as i was too busy looking at the ref to get his card out). He didn't book him, probably cos he didn't want his ear bending for the rest of the game, but then booked Erikson as a good will gesture to make up for not booking the rat

Strange as it may seem, he should have been booked twice, so when Erikson was booked I was actually annoyed, as it wasn't a booking for me.

The whole refereeing "game" was dodgy for me, there was a foul very early on that should have been a straight booking (see everton game also).

We've now been subject to 3 out of 4 games of terrible (dodgy) refereeing, I'm sure it'll continue on Thursday night as spurs currently need a lift.

 

[cleavers]

If this had been a League Cup game with no VAR ( and therefore no delayed flags ) he would have flagged as soon as Rashford made a movement towards the ball and it would never have even got as far as Fernandez getting involved.

So "offside" in one game, but not in another, what a mess they've made of it.

Oh and apparently this couldn't be referred to var for some reason, it had to be an on field decision, what an absolute farce.

 

[Stephen230]

Oh and apparently this couldn't be referred to var for some reason, it had to be an on field decision, what an absolute farce.

Who says this? If we’re talking about what should happen rather that what did, then the VAR should review every single goal. It doesn’t need referring.

 

[Bluearmy]

Who says this? If we’re talking about what should happen rather that what did, then the VAR should review every single goal. It doesn’t need referring.

Richard Keys (i know) was quoted saying they asked the question and VAR didnt get involved…

I think Dermot Gallagher also said subjective decision so VAR cant get involved. Which is a crock of shit in itself. Loads of “subjective” decisions go to VAR. In fact everything that isnt a line call is subjective. The twats make it up as the go along… YCMIU, but they do!!

 

[Stephen230]

Richard Keys (i know) was quoted saying they asked the question and VAR didnt get involved…

I think Dermot Gallagher also said subjective decision so VAR cant get involved

Well I suppose there’s slightly differing definitions of “getting involved”

He certainly would have reviewed it as it was a goal. I suppose it’s feasible he might have said as it’s not an a line call but a subjective call on interference then the on-field decision should stand. But that’s not really what I’d describe as ‘not getting involved.’

 

[cleavers]

Who says this? If we’re talking about what should happen rather that what did, then the VAR should review every single goal. It doesn’t need referring.

Dunno, it was one of the pundits on BT that said it, so no idea, but as someone is saying it was also said on another channel, it's hard to doubt it.

Why that would be the case, unless things are twisted, I've no idea.

I've also no doubt had we "scored" that goal at OT, the offside would have stood, with out any question from the media.

It's why I'm suddenly feeling what is the point of me wasting my money travelling as far as I do to watch games, when they seem so obviously "fixed".

 

[Bluearmy]

Well I suppose there’s slightly differing definitions of “getting involved”

He certainly would have reviewed it as it was a goal. I suppose it’s feasible he might have said as it’s not an a line call but a subjective call on interference then the on-field decision should stand. But that’s not really what I’d describe as ‘not getting involved.’

I dont think VAR checked it. The time was to tight between the goal/offside flag and the change of decision. Theres so much to review (initial pass/rashford starting position/did he touch it/is he interfering/did his action interfere with Akanji/Walker/Ederson decision making/did he block the line of sight/did he feint to shoot/etc/etc)

Neville has also said on his podcast it should never have stood and intimated at least VAR should have got involved in it….

There is no way they can possibly have checked it……. IMO

 

[HypnoticBlue]

Neville has also said on his podcast it should never have stood and intimated at least VAR should have got involved in it….

If a die hard rag like Neville says it shouldn't have stood, then you know we have been cheated, it needs to investigated by City and the whole house of cards needs to be blown up.
Enough is enough.

 

[trotsky]

If a die hard rag like Neville says it shouldn't have stood, then you know we have been cheated, it needs to investigated by City and the whole house of cards needs to be blown up.
Enough is enough.

This is the moment that we should go after the obvious corruption in the sport. Wether it is down to individual referees or something bigger and more sinister, we now have an incident that no right-minded football person can defend.
City must take a stand now or else more and more of their loyal fans will walk away from a ‘sport’ that is no longer ‘sporting’.

 

[Dirty Harry]

I dont think VAR checked it. The time was to tight between the goal/offside flag and the change of decision. Theres so much to review (initial pass/rashford starting position/did he touch it/is he interfering/did his action interfere with Akanji/Walker/Ederson decision making/did he block the line of sight/did he feint to shoot/etc/etc)

Neville has also said on his podcast it should never have stood and intimated at least VAR should have got involved in it….

There is no way they can possibly have checked it……. IMO

Reading some of that as you’ve wrote it, it seems there is so much to review, almost like a forensic examination (didn’t they say they wouldn’t do that, or has that changed ?) but, more importantly, whomever made the decision, it seems they’ve given Rashford/the rags the ‘benefit of the doubt’ when each and every one of those questions is posed.