Offside rule changed after Silva's goal against Villa

Will this mean an end to umpteen players purposely standing in an offside position for free kicks against us due to our high line? God I miss the days of teams charging out on masse with arms held aloft proclaiming offside
 
Pleased the goal stood but it's an odd one, no question - not sure what the right interpretation should be there
 
'In plain terms, that means that from now on, players repeating Rodri's trick would be penalised. However, goals such as that scored by Villa's Ollie Watkins, in which he came from an offside position to seize on an attempted clearance by Newcastle's Fabian Schar earlier this month, would stand as he did 'not impact Schar's ability to play the ball'.

However because the flag didn't go up Schar was forced to play the ball rather than just leaving it so whilst it didn't impact his ability it did impact his judgement and Watkins gained an advantage so what's the difference. Corruption of the highest order changing the laws when it doesn't suit. If we win tonight by say 3-0 are they going to say we will only receive two points as we didn't score from a free kick 30 yards out so we don't deserve all three points.
 
FCBarca said:
Pleased the goal stood but it's an odd one, no question - not sure what the right interpretation should be there
Click to expand...
Odd for all those thicko cunts who for ffs don’t even know a simple fucking school book rules of fucking sport they love . Speechless

Fucking disgrace
 
Eds said:
'In plain terms, that means that from now on, players repeating Rodri's trick would be penalised. However, goals such as that scored by Villa's Ollie Watkins, in which he came from an offside position to seize on an attempted clearance by Newcastle's Fabian Schar earlier this month, would stand as he did 'not impact Schar's ability to play the ball'.

However because the flag didn't go up Schar was forced to play the ball rather than just leaving it so whilst it didn't impact his ability it did impact his judgement and Watkins gained an advantage so what's the difference. Corruption of the highest order changing the laws when it doesn't suit. If we win tonight by say 3-0 are they going to say we will only receive two points as we didn't score from a free kick 30 yards out so we don't deserve all three points.
Click to expand...
THESE ARE THE SAME FUCKING THING.

Crooked FA at it again.
 
Eds said:
'In plain terms, that means that from now on, players repeating Rodri's trick would be penalised. However, goals such as that scored by Villa's Ollie Watkins, in which he came from an offside position to seize on an attempted clearance by Newcastle's Fabian Schar earlier this month, would stand as he did 'not impact Schar's ability to play the ball'.

However because the flag didn't go up Schar was forced to play the ball rather than just leaving it so whilst it didn't impact his ability it did impact his judgement and Watkins gained an advantage so what's the difference. Corruption of the highest order changing the laws when it doesn't suit. If we win tonight by say 3-0 are they going to say we will only receive two points as we didn't score from a free kick 30 yards out so we don't deserve all three points.
Click to expand...
yep makes sense an off side player can put a defender under pressure and force him to make a mistake by slicing his clearance and than score, that off side is allowed. A player coming back from an off side position and making no attempt to put the defender under pressure until the defender has taken 2 or more touches is off side !
 
Eds said:
'In plain terms, that means that from now on, players repeating Rodri's trick would be penalised. However, goals such as that scored by Villa's Ollie Watkins, in which he came from an offside position to seize on an attempted clearance by Newcastle's Fabian Schar earlier this month, would stand as he did 'not impact Schar's ability to play the ball'.

However because the flag didn't go up Schar was forced to play the ball rather than just leaving it so whilst it didn't impact his ability it did impact his judgement and Watkins gained an advantage so what's the difference. Corruption of the highest order changing the laws when it doesn't suit. If we win tonight by say 3-0 are they going to say we will only receive two points as we didn't score from a free kick 30 yards out so we don't deserve all three points.
Click to expand...
Sorry I'm missing something here, and I mean seriously why is rodri doing a trick and watkins seizing?

Fucking cunts make my blood boil.
 


was this offside too then? The rule change is a joke. That’s not the first time they’ve changed rules cos if the uproar after we benefited from the long-standing rule.
 
It’s not football or the law’s fault that players coaches pundits and fans are too lazy and thick to learn the laws of the game.

I can’t believe the power of low IQ has managed to create so much furore over a City incident that’s its ended up with the laws being changed.

And not a solid change across the sport, a change for just the Premier League referees interpretation. Ridiculous!

There was nowt wrong with this law as it was. The law’s been clear for years. Ruud van Horseface at the Swamp used to gain an advantage from this law all the time, but nobody ever said a dicky bird about it at the time. One, because it was the Rags but also, two, because there was nowt wrong with it.
 


Villa fans pointing to this. Even though THIS decision is wrong (or at least would be under FA's offside rules).
 
I wonder which ‘high ranking’ official is talking to the Mail about this, couldn’t possibly be a United or Liverpool exec could it? As predictable as shit falling out of a pig’s arse.
 
TheThirdDeano said:
Sets a dangerous precedent though that the governing body will take no time to think about it and change rules part-way through the season at the request of a few idiots.

Seriously, insanity.
Click to expand...
Not to worry, they already change the rules during a game to suit their agenda, doing during a season was already set last year.
 
TheThirdDeano said:
Would you look at that, they changed the offside rule for little old us after the outrage we caused.
Click to expand...
Its like how they be brought VAR into the Champions league the round after we got a penalty that shouldn't have been awarded.
The one where Sterling kicked the ground and tripped himself up.
 
I look forward to the "It's not OK to scream at a forward who is about to take a shot" rule change, and the "when the ball goes over the side-line (but we miss it) and a goal is scored, we are allowed to go back (after watching video replays) and disallow the goal, you know, like with penalties after the final whistle" rule change.

Hopefully "diving like a prick after backing into a defender, as long as you scream like a child" is still allowed, otherwise the game is ruined. ;)
 
Platt Lane 59 said:
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...
Click to expand...
There were enough murmurings that the pen shouldnt have been given. According to McPointy the header was off target so should be ok to handball in the box without a pen being given.
 
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