Arsenal (H) Post Match Thread

BJL_City said:
if we were playing them when we played Stoke we would have won 5/6-1 easily, even just a couple of times at the end where KDB had the chance to put someone in 1-on-1 but was so tired he miscued marginally, showed that if we hadn't had such a hard-fought 3 weeks the scoreline would have been more flattering.

Never expected us to do the double over Napoli and win every league game so that's a mighty. Now hopefully a mental rest for our lads, tough slog over winter to come where the only break they'll get is through rotation, hopefully Pep manages it well and we don't burn out as we look capable of doing so if we try to keep the Stoke/Watford level up
Click to expand...
The score wasn't flattering, we could have had at least two more, perhaps as many as four.
No, the score was unflattering, it was the least we deserved.
 
Definite Penalty, Silva offside , could have had four or five, Sanchez would be a welcome addition, Wenger is a prick.
 
Neville Kneville said:
I thought Sanchez did really well in a team full of shites tbf. Never really wanted him but understand what he would bring to City.
Click to expand...

He did OK under the circumstances. I think he would be excellent for us and I still want him because we have one truly experienced striker and three kids who inevitably will lack consistency. I know we have other options if push comes to shove but essentially we have four players for three positions and that is risky when you are trying to compete for four trophies.
 
Dermot Gallagher on sky sports said that that was a pen, and argued that he could have even sent the Arsenal player off for denying a goal scoring opportunity. Having given the pen he decided that a booking was sufficient for that clash, with Raheem. he also said that David was offside, but was probably looking for the ball to be played and couldn't be sure where David was when the ball was played and so gave him the benefit of the doubt with that goal.
 
Prestwich_Blue said:
Was it though? I've freeze-framed it at the point I think Fernandinho actually touches the ball for the pass to Silva and it suggests he's level:

Ctfnq7i.jpg
Click to expand...

Great shot.

To my mind, the problem - this being a clear instance of it - is that 21st Century technology is being applied in relation to 19th century rules, and it doesn't quite fit.

The laws of football (Law 11) refer to offside in terms of being offside 'the moment the ball is played' - but when you have the ability to slow it down to the point where you can move it on at a speed of 25 frames per second, it becomes clear that 'the moment the ball is played' is actually an ongoing process.

When a player plays a pass, what happens is this. First, his foot makes contact with the ball. Then, the air inside the ball compresses momentarily on the impact. At this time, the player's foot is still in contact with the ball. Then the ball regains its normal shape. The player's foot is still in contact in the ball, moving in the direction of the pass. Then the ball travels on its way, finally ceasing to have contact with the player's foot. When you are using cameras with speeds of 20/25 frames a second, these actions will all told occupy two or three frames. In other words, the ball is in contact with the foot of the player making the pass for one, maybe two, maybe three frames. That is enough time for a player moving forward at speed to go from a position of being level to a position of being half a yard offside. If the defender is stepping up at the same time, it makes the offside margin even greater.

But what is the actual 'moment' that the ball is played? The rules do not say. Is it at the point where the foot of the player who makes the pass first comes into contact with the ball? Is it when the ball ceases to have contact? A player can be offside or not depending on which interpretation of the rules you apply. The law was drawn up at a time where it was technologically not possible to have the sort of debate we are having now, and 'the moment the ball is played' was clear enough for all. But now that we do have that technology, and now that we can slow it down to the exact point at which the through ball is played, we may have to be a bit more precise about what we mean by 'when the ball is played' - especially if VAR is introduced in this country.

In the real world of course, the linesman makes a judgment on a split-second basis and sometimes they will (judging their decisions with the benefit of slo-mo moving at 25 frames a second) they will get it wrong. If VAR is going to be introduced, the result may be to replace one contentious, fallible means of deciding if a player is offside with another.
 
Grassland Blue said:
Maybe I misunderstood what you said.
It reads like a score of 5 or 6-1 would have flattered us.
Click to expand...

think there's a distinction between a scoreline being "more flattering" ie. more pleasing/looks better, and that the scoreline "flattered us" ie. we got lucky and didn't deserve it.

I certainly meant the former. 5-1/6-1 would have looked better but there were other factors at play which meant it didn't happen, still deserved to win comfortably.
 
blue ranger said:
Disagree m8. Thought he was very wasteful at times and wasn't overly impressed with his piss poor attitude, sulking around and throwing his arms about.
Click to expand...
This is because he's made it perfectly clear he doesn't want to be at Arsenal. He tried to leave respectfully, but Arsenal chose to make a car crash of an issue out of it. His attitude was highlighted yesterday when he was trying to press City high and looked around and there wasn't another Arsenal player within 30 yards of him. Wenger decided to concentrate on the non-penalty and the the offside for the third goal. Sanchez's issues with Arsenal are more fundamental & run deeper than that.

He just wants out and to be part of a better team who he feels match his skill set. Whether that be City, Bayern, Juve or PSG remains to be seen, but whichever way he chooses to go, is there anyone willing to place a bet that Sanchez will still be an Arsenal player past June 30th 2018?
 
Prestwich_Blue said:
Was it though? I've freeze-framed it at the point I think Fernandinho actually touches the ball for the pass to Silva and it suggests he's level:

Ctfnq7i.jpg
Click to expand...
Looking at that picture certainly suggests Silva was on side.
In any case I think that in 99 out of 100 cases an off side would normally have been given, and I don't think many would have complained. Glad things went our way this time.
 
has sterling been charged for simulation yet after the trial by ssn or they just putting doubt in ref's mind when in charge of our games cause there still going on about it
 
The question of the validity of City's third goal is reaching ridiculous lengths. Wenger NEVER accepts any goal against his team unless it is clearly offside to a 68 year old standing 50 yards away in the technical area. He never questions a decision given in his own team's favour. His sole aim is to deflect criticism from a team that was outclassed, outplayed and humiliated by a vastly superior team, and the measure of his desperation this time is shown by the extent of his ignorant and unsporting abuse hurled at anyone who had any part in the game. Maybe this is why the constant theme of the later Wengerian period is that every year Arsenal will be worse than the previous year.

The replays show that the assistant probably called a very close decision right, but anyway we were dealing with the position of a leg at most. It is always dangerous to rely on the human eye being infallible in such cases, even more dangerous to rely on a back line to make a correct decision collectively but chronically stupid to stop playing and moan when they try to take the assistant's decision for him and find he doesn't agree. But that isn't a problem for our smarmy friend. What no-one has pointed out is that the assistant is bang in line with the play, which is on the near side of the pitch to him, and that he was thus better placed than anyone to make a judgement. He may have been right or he may have been wrong but Wenger has no grounds on which to question his integrity or competence. And as for his comments about Raheem.... suspension? By a very painful part?
 
Kris_Musampa said:
And don't the rules say the benefit of doubt goes to the attacking player? In which case the lino (sorry; assistant ref) got it bang on.
Click to expand...

Prestwich_Blue said:
I think they've removed the element of giving the benefit of the doubt. It's either offside or not now.
Click to expand...

It's never been in the rules. Nearest was an instruction to assistants to flag only if sure that the attacker was in an offside position.

Chris in London said:
Great shot.

To my mind, the problem - this being a clear instance of it - is that 21st Century technology is being applied in relation to 19th century rules, and it doesn't quite fit.

The laws of football (Law 11) refer to offside in terms of being offside 'the moment the ball is played' - but when you have the ability to slow it down to the point where you can move it on at a speed of 25 frames per second, it becomes clear that 'the moment the ball is played' is actually an ongoing process.

When a player plays a pass, what happens is this. First, his foot makes contact with the ball. Then, the air inside the ball compresses momentarily on the impact. At this time, the player's foot is still in contact with the ball. Then the ball regains its normal shape. The player's foot is still in contact in the ball, moving in the direction of the pass. Then the ball travels on its way, finally ceasing to have contact with the player's foot. When you are using cameras with speeds of 20/25 frames a second, these actions will all told occupy two or three frames. In other words, the ball is in contact with the foot of the player making the pass for one, maybe two, maybe three frames. That is enough time for a player moving forward at speed to go from a position of being level to a position of being half a yard offside. If the defender is stepping up at the same time, it makes the offside margin even greater.

But what is the actual 'moment' that the ball is played? The rules do not say. Is it at the point where the foot of the player who makes the pass first comes into contact with the ball? Is it when the ball ceases to have contact? A player can be offside or not depending on which interpretation of the rules you apply. The law was drawn up at a time where it was technologically not possible to have the sort of debate we are having now, and 'the moment the ball is played' was clear enough for all. But now that we do have that technology, and now that we can slow it down to the exact point at which the through ball is played, we may have to be a bit more precise about what we mean by 'when the ball is played' - especially if VAR is introduced in this country.

In the real world of course, the linesman makes a judgment on a split-second basis and sometimes they will (judging their decisions with the benefit of slo-mo moving at 25 frames a second) they will get it wrong. If VAR is going to be introduced, the result may be to replace one contentious, fallible means of deciding if a player is offside with another.
Click to expand...

FIFA has recently issued a note that "when the ball is played" means when the player playing the ball first makes contact with the ball (not when contact ends). Aparently the video assistant ref can make that judgment.
 
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