Offside rule changed after Silva's goal against Villa

[blue b4 the moon]

Haha. If a team in red had scored it there'd be no debate, let alone law change.

Incompetent on another level.

Law has been like that for decades, plenty of goals scored like that over the years, not a problem until we benefit from it! Ha!

A red shirt goal would have been spun as 'impish/cheeky/quick thinking' City just play within the laws of the game and we're cheats yet again.

 

[give it to gordon]

Personally I would want those classed as offside too, never felt right to me that it falls under the interpretation of “deliberately played”.

When I first saw that villa goal against Newcastle I thought it was off side ! Didnt understand how an attacker could gain an advantage by putting to defender under pressure from being off side to start with ! Rodri allowed Mings at least 2 touches before the tackle and he didnt score directly
So being off side and putting a defender under pressure to make a mistake is still allowed than like the villa goal.
Confused

 

[levets]

So at what stage can a player once back onside challenge for possession? When all is said & done, Rodri was ‘onside’ when he tackled Mings. Will a player now have to wait for a signal from the ref? F’ing nonsense

 

[Coatigan]

So if we were to go back to the point where Mings controls the ball with his chest,(if we use the new rules) how long before Rodri can be involved in play without being classed as offside?

After he has cleared it.

Or if Stones in the same position, as soon as he has made contact with the ball.

Up to the referee to decide.

 

[rickmcfc]

Are they really chalking off the goal against villa, so now we only won 1-0? If so im totally done with football. Never seen anything as corrupt in my life

 

[Leveblue]

I often wondered where the term "Making it up as you go along" came from.

 

[lancs blue]

Are they really chalking off the goal against villa, so now we only won 1-0? If so im totally done with football. Never seen anything as corrupt in my life

No.

 

[meltonblue]

When I first saw that villa goal against Newcastle I thought it was off side ! Didnt understand how an attacker could gain an advantage by putting to defender under pressure from being off side to start with ! Rodri allowed Mings at least 2 touches before the tackle and he didnt score directly
So being off side and putting a defender under pressure to make a mistake is still allowed than like the villa goal.
Confused

Yes because he didn’t challenge him for the ball, he didn’t need to take it off him - it was played to him by the defender. So the Mings one, if he’d headed the ball back to the keeper not realising Rodri was there, that would still be onside too.

 

[ancoats]

the game is bent right to the core and the rules are a joke anyway ??

the offside rule never should bow down to players or manager or media pundits ? its up to the laws of the game to write and then players follow the rules not the other way round ?

nothing wrong in what city and rodri did and the rule and laws played out in the right way ? now its changed makes it even more daft because VAR will now say you was coming back from a shoelace off side and interfering with play ?

 

[SidJames]

Same as when they 'clarified' the handball rules after we'd been f*cked over.

F*CKING C*NT'S!!!

That is all.

Forgot about that.

What they did there was ridiculous also.

Fucked us over, then reinterpreted the rules