Media Discussion - 2023/24

Status
Not open for further replies.
Spurs quarter 69 said:
Can only say had that decision been given against City would have been pig sick. Also offside against rags on Sunday harsh as near level as could be, what happened to giving benefit of doubt to attacker. Mind you rags have many decisions the other way including an overturned penno in the same match can't say I'm sympathetic.
Click to expand...
Its a line decision. No “benefit of doubt” comes into it. Just like goal line decisions. Its a misconception from some fans.

“Oh it was nearly over the line, its United just give it anyway” is where we’d end up if that mindset was allowed to creep in.
 
Shirley said:
Strange article….

www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk

Premier League FFP charges for Man City could cause 'mutiny' as UEFA warned

Manchester City are preparing their evidence to refute strong accusations from the Premier League that could change the game
www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk
Click to expand...
I didn’t think it was strange at all. Just providing some expert opinion on the enormity of the charges and consequences……should the charges not be we’ll thought out and evidenced.

Personally, I hope we take the PL to the cleaners and bankrupt them in court. I also hope we dish the dirt on other PL clubs and ask at what stage their investigations are at……we all know the answer to that
 
Trevor Morley's Tache said:
Can someone please summarise, as I flatly refuse to give that Rag biased toilet paper, or any other Reach plc publication internet clicks?
Click to expand...
2 Liverpool fans who happen to lecture on law in Sheffield want the PL to be sure they have proper evidence to convict city. Their feeling is that the charges were brought to show that PL execs are hard cunts who take no shit…and prior to the govt bringing in an external body to take over PL housekeeping relating to regulating members.
 
Keeper! said:
It was clearly offside , any other interpretation is a crock.

VAR is superb IF used correctly.

Sadly the PL referees and execs are utterly and totally incompetent and VAR in this current format is helping to tarnish the spectacle of the beautiful game.
Click to expand...

So many pundits, fans and ex players saying Akanji was in the goalkeepers line of site of the ball. When Ake headed the ball Akanji was yards to the keepers right. That is why Leno had to dive to try and make a save. IMO whether Akanji was there or not he would not have got to the ball.

However, Akanji moved his legs to avoid touching the ball and it is this movement that seems to be the crux of causing Leno to instinctively adjust his dive thinking Leno was going to divert it.

How far does a player have to be right or left of a keeper to be deemed not interfering with play? I think Phil took the corner....if he had taken his cock out after crossing it would he be offside for distracting Leno during his dive?
 
Last edited:
halfcenturyup said:
That's a pretty literal interpretation of the LOTG tbf.

All we ask for is consistency in how the rules are applied. Either a player in an offside position can affect a keeper's decision making and become active, or he can't. They can't have one rule for Rashford and one for Akanji.
Click to expand...
Surely, laws should always be interpreted literally. There is no room for ambiguity in law making.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Unread Posts

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

SIGN UP
Back
Top
✖
  AdBlock Detected
Bluemoon relies on advertising to pay our hosting fees. Please support the site by disabling your ad blocking software to help keep the forum sustainable. Thanks.