The Stones Goal

Was it right to give a goal?

  • Total voters
    866
BMR said:
Funny how Arsenal blocking our keeper and scoring against us was great tactics and perfectly legal goal with no crying and candle burning, but ours against Wolves is controversial and we have paid the Ref off again.
Click to expand...


I remember there being something in the rules about a player being able to stand his ground if he's already there (ie. doesn't have to get out of the way if the keeper), but it's a foul if a player runs into a position where they have no chance of getting the ball and blocks the keeper off.

That totally defines the differences between our goal yesterday and what Arsenal did to Ederson.

We should have made more of a fuss about that, but I guess it's not our style to winge and whine.
 
St Helens Blue (Exiled) said:
Absolutely brilliant how the online tarquins are crying about how the goal stood-Funny how they weren't moaning the other week when was it Gabriel or Saliba blocked Ederson "cleverly" to take the lead at the Etihad.

Never seen a clubs fans who lack so much self awareness.
Nothing wrong with the goal at all yesterday
Click to expand...
It was Martinelli who had his arm over Ederson’s shoulder as the ball was in playing distance for Ederson.

A very different situation to yesterday.
 
M23 Citizen said:
It was Martinelli who had his arm over Ederson’s shoulder as the ball was in playing distance for Ederson.

A very different situation to yesterday.
Click to expand...
Bernardo bumped the goalie but then moved out of the way. Martinelli and another literally blocked Ederson as he attempted to get the ball. Different yes but for me Arsenals was more of a foul
 
I genuinely, even in this mard arse world of over sensationalized selling, am slightly staggered at how the agenda of pretty much two or three clubs has got into the mainstream.

They started by screaming offside. Showing that they don't even know the laws of the game.

Then it was blocking the keepers sight. Except replays show he wasn't and the goalie saw it all the way.

Then it's a push. They say that with a straight face, at a push and shoving that goes on at every corner in every game in the land. When we have Arsenal literally pinning a goalie between two players to stop him jumping, and that is ok, in every other game it's shoving and pushing as part of the game.

And then it isn't. Because it doesn't help two or three clubs who see us as rivals. So they create a media narrative that we're cheats, we're lucky, the referee made a mistake. If that goal is scored not in the final minutes, nobody questions it. If it's scored by wolves, nobody questions it.

If they want a game where that is a foul, where every push and shove from a corner is a free kick or a penalty, then go ahead and put pressure to write that rule. But they have to write it into law, because it doesn't bloody exist right now!

But I think we all know that they don't actually want that. Not when other clubs benefit from this interpretation as well. It's only a problem when city do it, right? Because, um, history or something?

Suck it up. Legit goal. Move on. Want to beat us to the league? Then be better on the frigging pitch, or piss off. But for the love of all that is holy, stop whining!
 
halfcenturyup said:
It's never offside in a million years (the question is why the linesman thought he could give it as interfering from his position? It must have been the easiest VAR correction ever) but I wouldn't have a problem if it was disallowed for impeding the keeper as long as all the other instances of impeding the keeper were also punished consistently. It's a pet hate (that and wrestling in the box, and mm offsides)

Who knows. Now we have scored one, maybe the guidelines will be tweaked again .......

It's another example of how poorly VAR is communicated, though. Who thought the VAR was asking the referee to overturn the on-field decision, and not just rule out the goal? Come on, be honest.
Click to expand...
I presume everyone, even the commentators thought it would be ruled out
 
blueste41 said:
TBH the tittle of that pole might as well be "Do you support Manchester City?".
If we're honest had Arsenal scored the same goal we would have either voted no or not at all.
I'm actually surprised yes is as high as 29%.

View attachment 135684
Click to expand...
Like you say, imagine where those yellow "Yes or No" bars would be with different teams but identical circumstances, lol.
 
moomba said:
Letting the goal stand was the right decision, but I presumed they'd been harshly treated with the West Ham one O'Neil was talking about.

But watching in MOTD, two totally different situations, and both correct decisions imo.
Click to expand...
I thought this. At first I was prepared to give O’Neil the benefit of the doubt because as ours clearly should have stood, it’s the inconsistency that drives everybody mad and if they’d had a similar one ruled out against West Ham you could understand why he’s lost his shit over it. However, after they showed the West Ham one on Match of the Day, they’re two completely different scenarios, their player was stood directly in front of the keeper, clearly affecting his line of sight, whereas Bernardo was crouched down a good couple of yards to the side of the keeper.

They’re the ramblings of a man who knows his days at Wolves are numbered.
 
MCFC1993 said:
Separate from any analysis of the match and to get ahead of any 'it wasn't a goal' nonsense.

I've got to add a thread after the Micah Richards and Daniel Sturridge nonsense. It's a goal isn't it?

What Bernardo does before Stones heads the ball is irrelevant because he's onside when the corner is taken.

When Stones heads it he's completely ducked out of the way, nowhere near interfering with Sa. Obvious goal.

Regarding the officials, the linesman is right to stick his flag up from his angle, I think the referee should have overruled him on field, people are saying he did? But I'm not sure he actually did. Shouldn't need the monitor but well done to him and VAR for getting the right decision.

I'll add a poll but surely it's unanimous?
Click to expand...

What Bernardo does before Stones heads the ball is irrelevant because he's onside when the corner is taken.

He cannot be offside from a corner, as I remember the Law ?
 
I think it's a goal but let's be honest, loads of people on here would be complaining if it was given against us.
 
JCB001 said:
You may or may not be correct but there was no reaction from the players or the linesman until Wolves Manager came running onto the pitch screaming offside offside
Click to expand...
Not sure about the linesman as I was further along the stand, but the players all slumped to the floor and none of them complained.
 
BHsteve said:
What Bernardo does before Stones heads the ball is irrelevant because he's onside when the corner is taken.

He cannot be offside from a corner, as I remember the Law ?
Click to expand...
You can't be offside from a goal kick, throw in or a corner. It was laughable that the media were quoting parts of the offside law that weren't applicable to our goal. Remember where Arsenal went bat shit over the Aguero goal at Wembley, even though I think he was still in his own half when recieving the ball.
 
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