Offside rule changed after Silva's goal against Villa

[I'm Blue]

Funny how Villa’s goal against Newcastle will still stand though, which in my opinion is much worst.
Rodri is clearly offside, Mings is looking right at him before he turns and controls the ball, so he could have quite comfortably left the ball completely.
Whereas the Newcastle defender had no idea the Villa player was offside cos he was behind him and the offside was a much tighter decision, so he’s forced to try to intercept or clear the cross.
“Interpretation” that’s us fucked then : )

 

[meltonblue]

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?

Im assuming with the Mings one they mean more he’s been allowed to control the ball fully and had the opportunity to release it on the ground.

Makes the second part of it very subjective, but then the overall law is currently now anyway, it’s so inconsistently applied. I get the logic in doing it.

 

[meltonblue]

Maybe ive missed it in the "conversation"...but whats the difference to intercepting a back pass, for example?

An attacking player can be in an offside position and a defender can pass it back to the keeper, the attacker can intercept and score.....why is one allowed and not the other?

Because the attacker hasn’t received the ball from his own player. There is no “unfair”advantage on the other team as they’ve given the advantage themselves from the pass back.

 

[Platt Lane 59]

Wait for the clamour for Bernardo's goal to be chalked off.
Which journalist or manager will push for this first ?
City's 2nd goal will be conveniently forgotten and brave little old Villa will have been robbed of the well-deserved point.
The incessant diving and cheating is the big issue not Rodri's offside goal in my opinion.
Why not have a 2nd VAR official to look solely at the cheating with a retrospective yellow card e.g. Donny the Beek on Sunday. It will continue if the serial offenders carry on NOT getting punished.
When amatuer and junior football starts again, no doubt many more scallies and kids will dive as there is no current deterrent...

 

[kaz7]

The funny thing is the prem put out statements to explain why the goal was given but now they change it , why , hmmmm

 

[failsworthblueboy]

Would you look at that, they changed the offside rule for little old us after the outrage we caused.

insanity!

They could have changed it years ago, when Dibble had it headed out of his hands at Forest.

 

[stan bowles]

Wankers. How can you change the ruling mid-season ? All this hysteria because City scored a perfectly legal goal. Fuck 'em. Hope we win the league level on points with a better GD by 1.

 

[Barcon]

Does anyone have a clip of the Villa goal?

 

[Norbiton]

And now refs are left with interpreting "immediately". You could certainly argue that Rodri's intervention wasn't immediate as Mings had time to chest the ball down and rather ineptly bring it under control at his feet. What was needed was some ruling on how soon a player in an offside position could involve himself in challenging for the ball again.

I remember a few seasons ago, pre-VAR, when Sterling scored a far more questionable goal when in an offside position at the far post. A defender in front of him took a swing at the cross and deflected the ball straight to him. The linesman had his flag up, everybody assumed the goal wouldn't count, but the ref went over and had a word, then awarded the goal. This change in the law would still let that goal stand though it seems more dubious to me. Swansea was it? Anyway, first goal of the game when were struggling to break the opposition down.

 

[AlexWilliamsGloves]

Because the attacker hasn’t received the ball from his own player. There is no “unfair”advantage on the other team as they’ve given the advantage themselves from the pass back.

And Rodri didnt recieve it from his own team...he won it off Mings

I still dont get it :-/