Media Discussion - 2023/24

[Vic]

Sorry but I don't agree with that at all.

The very best forwards don't assume a defender is going to cut out a pass when making an attacking run and sometimes if a defender fails to cut out a through ball and the attacker scores, they are praised for anticipating this.

Whether Leno dived late or not is a moot point anyway, if you read the offside law Akanji is not making an obvious action or blocking Leno's line of sigjt.
As a highly paid professional he should also play to the whistle and the very best goalkeepers will do this.
Leno's failed to play to the whistle and there is also an argument that he wouldn't have reached the header anyway.

The Rashford/ Fernández "goal" is completely different for reasons already outlined previously debated in depth as an obvious was made by Rashford to impede his opponents.

What Webb actually said was his opinion but the fact remains that nobody has come up with a valid reason to disallow the goal based on the laws of the game.

Webb apologised to Wolves but hasn't apologised to Fulham.
Fulham have not complained either.

You don't think jumping out of the way of the ball is an obvious action?

 

[mancboy]

I think this can be debated till the end of time and there will be different viewpoints depending on what stance you want to take but the overriding viewpoint is that there is an absolute multitude of questionable decisions across every game, why is this the only one that has been deemed necessary for so much debate?

If there had been the same level of debate for the onana challenge, the rashford penalty, the worrall sending off, the luton non penalty, the not giving a second yellow to twent, the 2 non penalties for the rugby tackles on haaland, the lack of a second yellow given to gordon and they are the just the few that spring to mind id say fair enough but the fact that this singular decision has caused so much need for debate and that it has been deemed necessary by the powers that be for webb to throw his officials under the bus stinks to high heaven.

 

[FantasyIreland]

If they hadn't unnecessarily fucked about with the rule.....and offside was simply offside.....then we'd have none of this nonsense.

As the old saying goes.....if youre on the pitch,youre interfering with play.

You always have some **** who wants to fix what ain't broke.

 

[Centurions]

You don't think jumping out of the way of the ball is an obvious action?

An obvious action means attempting to play the ball or interfere with an opponent, not attempting to avoid contact with it when it's heading your way.

How long before a goalie see's someone in an off side position and deliberately hesitates pointing at the off side player as an influencing player?

 

[Prestwich_Blue]

If they hadn't unnecessarily fucked about with the rule.....and offside was simply offside.....then we'd have none of this nonsense.

As the old saying goes.....if youre on the pitch,youre interfering with play.

You always have some **** who wants to fix what ain't broke.

The problem used to be that a left winger could be in an offside position and never get near a ball out on the right, yet still be flagged as offside. That's as daft as the current interpretation.

Pundits used to say that offside is back or white, you're either offside or you're not, there's no subjectivity. But offside is subjective.

 

[Maly]

Sorry but I don't agree with that at all.

The very best forwards don't assume a defender is going to cut out a pass when making an attacking run and sometimes if a defender fails to cut out a through ball and the attacker scores, they are praised for anticipating this.

Whether Leno dived late or not is a moot point anyway, if you read the offside law Akanji is not making an obvious action or blocking Leno's line of sigjt.
As a highly paid professional he should also play to the whistle and the very best goalkeepers will do this.
Leno's failed to play to the whistle and there is also an argument that he wouldn't have reached the header anyway.

The Rashford/ Fernández "goal" is completely different for reasons already outlined previously debated in depth as an obvious was made by Rashford to impede his opponents.

What Webb actually said was his opinion but the fact remains that nobody has come up with a valid reason to disallow the goal based on the laws of the game.

Webb apologised to Wolves but hasn't apologised to Fulham.
Fulham have not complained either.

You wanted a quote from Webb & when you get one, it makes no difference as it’s only his opinion? Lol

If you don’t think jumping out of the way of a ball when you’re 3-4 yards in front of a keeper isn’t making an obvious action & doesn’t impact on Leno diving late (which is EXACTLY the point, nothing moot about it), then I think we have different opinions on what an obvious action is

Here’s the law again mate, with regards to interfering with play making an obvious action which clearly impacts on the ability of an opponent to play the ball

Is it open to interpretation? Yes

However, is it a fact that Akanji jumped, which is an obvious action? Yes

Is it also a fact that Leno dived too late, due to Akanji being offside? Yes (which you have acknowledged in an earlier post:

(As a top level keeper Leno should know Manu couldn't play the ball therefore if he is blaming his slow reaction on Akanji's position it's his own fault.)

Those are the valid reasons it’s offside in my opinion bud.

How are you interpreting the law so as it’s allowed?

Are you saying Akanji jumping isn’t an obvious movement or are you saying Leno wouldn’t have saved it if Akanji wasn’t there as he still would’ve dived as late & conceded the goal?

 

[Maly]

An obvious action means attempting to play the ball or interfere with an opponent, not attempting to avoid contact with it when it's heading your way.

Didn’t Rashford ‘avoid contact’ with the ball vs us last season?

Was that an obvious action or should the goal have stood?

& you can’t have it both ways mate ;)

 

[hammocity]

The problem used to be that a left winger could be in an offside position and never get near a ball out on the right, yet still be flagged as offside. That's as daft as the current interpretation.

Pundits used to say that offside is back or white, you're either offside or you're not, there's no subjectivity. But offside is subjective.

Do you remember Danny Tiatto running from his own half v Boro at their ground? He made a great run, dribbled/ran past about 5 opposition players and buried the ball into the net only for a team mate (can’t remember who) to be flagged offside even though he played no part in the goal. I think the rule has changed for the better but VAR can definitely be used much more effectively.

 

[Vic]

The problem used to be that a left winger could be in an offside position and never get near a ball out on the right, yet still be flagged as offside. That's as daft as the current interpretation.

Pundits used to say that offside is back or white, you're either offside or you're not, there's no subjectivity. But offside is subjective.

Even that was misinterpretation (by referees). It was never an offence in the law just to be in an offside position.

 

[Blue Pete]

In my opinion he was offside, as were players in both Liverpool and Spurs games, all three impacted on the keepers decison making and positioning.

Only ours gets coverage. That should be the issue. This decision went in our favour, but the medias decision to only talk about this one is part of a larger issue. The few times we get a decision in our favour the media go to town on it. The 30 decisions that go against us get barely mentioned and are airbrushed out the next day. This impacts on how fans, clubs and referees see us. This has more of an impact than getting one decision right or wrong.

The bit about the Italian scandal a few years back that the media don't mention (for obvious reasons) Is the influence certain clubs had on the media and what incidents got shown or not on TV - this is still going on here and now in premier league and this coverage of one out of three similar incidents shows it.

 

[bluemanchester]

Time to drop this was he wasn't he offside. We won, move on. Can we get back to discussing media please;-)

 

[Jesus H Gabz]

Even with my bluest of glasses on, that goal was offside, it’s been offside since the inception of the law in 1863 (who knew?) I was fuming at the time, mainly because our first goal was sent to VAR and it just felt like we where being over analysed, the first one wasn’t even close really (compared to some) and could’ve been cleared up without anyone in the stadium knowing a check was going on, and ruining the celebration of a perfectly good goal, the linesman never flagged. It just seems every goal we score is forensically analysed, I could do it with the Fulham one and say Wilson is interfering with Ederson’s eyeline/decision making, it’s killing the game

 

[Vic]

An obvious action means attempting to play the ball or interfere with an opponent, not attempting to avoid contact with it when it's heading your way.

How long before a goalie see's someone in an off side position and deliberately hesitates pointing at the off side player as an influencing player?

It really would help if you knew law 11.

Attempting to play the ball or making an obvious action are what it means to interfere with an opponent.

Making an "obvious action" is separate from "clearly attempting to play a ball which is close when this action impacts on an opponent".

An obvious action means an obvious action - like jumping over the ball.

The only issue is if that impacted on an opponent's ability to play the ball.

 

[Vic]

Do you remember Danny Tiatto running from his own half v Boro at their ground? He made a great run, dribbled/ran past about 5 opposition players and buried the ball into the net only for a team mate (can’t remember who) to be flagged offside even though he played no part in the goal. I think the rule has changed for the better but VAR can definitely be used much more effectively.

That was appalling. The laws had a diagram of exactly that situation saying it wasn't offside.

Mistake by the assistant and the ref who should have waved down the flag. And no VAR.

 

[Centurions]

It really would help if you knew law 11.

Attempting to play the ball or making an obvious action are what it means to interfere with an opponent.

Making an "obvious action" is separate from "clearly attempting to play a ball which is close when this action impacts on an opponent".

An obvious action means an obvious action - like jumping over the ball.

The only issue is if that impacted on an opponent's ability to play the ball.

And yet the officials disagree with you, I wonder who may be right?

 

[Gremlin]

Can we move on from all the VAR talk yet? OK, so there are comparisons with the Rashford goal but both were given so there is at least a modicum of consistency there. For those that said 'yes, but the Rashford goal changed the game', it did, but it didn't change the season as we won the Treble - that'll do for me!

On to West Ham.

 

[Centurions]

Didn’t Rashford ‘avoid contact’ with the ball vs us last season?

Was that an obvious action or should the goal have stood?

& you can’t have it both ways mate ;)

No because he chased the ball down and pretended to take a kick at it before stopping. I'd have thought that was obvious so it appears I can have it both ways after all.

 

[waspish]

Why don't they just make in that Whiteline square off is offside

 

[tweety]

All we know is that if this was one of the red shirt teams it wouldn't be up for discussion. It's a clear agenda to put doubt in the referee's and Var's mind for the next time.

 

[bobbyowenquiff]

You wanted a quote from Webb & when you get one, it makes no difference as it’s only his opinion? Lol

If you don’t think jumping out of the way of a ball when you’re 3-4 yards in front of a keeper isn’t making an obvious action & doesn’t impact on Leno diving late (which is EXACTLY the point, nothing moot about it), then I think we have different opinions on what an obvious action is

Here’s the law again mate, with regards to interfering with play making an obvious action which clearly impacts on the ability of an opponent to play the ball

Is it open to interpretation? Yes

However, is it a fact that Akanji jumped, which is an obvious action? Yes

Is it also a fact that Leno dived too late, due to Akanji being offside? Yes (which you have acknowledged in an earlier post:

(As a top level keeper Leno should know Manu couldn't play the ball therefore if he is blaming his slow reaction on Akanji's position it's his own fault.)

Those are the valid reasons it’s offside in my opinion bud.

How are you interpreting the law so as it’s allowed?

Are you saying Akanji jumping isn’t an obvious movement or are you saying Leno wouldn’t have saved it if Akanji wasn’t there as he still would’ve dived as late & conceded the goal?

It was offside. If Akanji had reacted more quickly (perhaps impossible to do) and moved himself to the side (taking himself out of an active position) it would have been ok. Jumping over the ball is not enough if the goalie's view is affected. The Rashford offside at he swamp last season remains a scandalous decision because Rashford moved towards the ball, shielded it from the City defender for 30 yards, and prevented Ederson from making a challenge. This is all interfering with play according to the existing long-standing rules. Nothing subjective about it as some claimed.