The flag is the reason the game is stopped in those circumstances(because that does affect players), under VAR the flag stays down, hence why people think this is some new loophole City found when it's not.I’ll try and find one. It happens a lot though, people just don’t notice it as it tends to be flagged immediately and doesn’t lead to anything.
Who are you? Everton?I demand full disclosure.
and they had two balls on the pitch, should have had a goal disallowed, v lutonbut what about the corner kick chelsea player i think took twice just coz he miss hit the first time?
Where is the law ?
No the flag is the reason the game is stopped in those circumstances(because that does affect players), under VAR the flag stays down, hence why people think this is some new loophole City found when it's not.
This.If united or Liverpool had scored that perfectly legitimate goal there would have been no outcry and, hence, no controversy and hence no "guidance" handing yet more discretion for the referee/VAR to meddle with. What a shambles.
Here’s the new rules:This.
If we had someone who could take throw ins like that Cheltenham guy, there be a rule change to say can only throw it 5 foot or something.
Why not actually manage the current rules before making new ones, book players for diving and if something was to come in, use VAR for dives for free kicks just outside the area
Yes but unless I've interpreted you incorrectly, the reasons for the flag going up are not the same as you were suggesting. Which was coming back from an offside position to challenge after a player has deliberately played the ball. The flag often goes up in anticipation of it reaching the attacker/them challenging the defender for the first ball, which is probably what happened with Laporte.Yes I agree, they’re still interpreting it as offside when they are flagging though.
It’s not a loophole, it’s interpretation as it’s always been.
Because Spurs played the ball in. Keeper caught it and Robbie came from 5 yards behind the keeper with the defenders pushing up for the kick out. My take is he wasn’t offside cos the opposition controller and then out the ball back in play. But if we scored it, it would be another rule changewhy would that be offside?
Yes but unless I've interpreted you incorrectly, the reasons for the flag going up are not the same as you were suggesting. Which was coming back from an offside position to challenge after a play has deliberately played the ball. The flag often goes up in anticipation of it reaching the attacker/them challenging the first ball, which is probably what happened with Laporte.
If its a city player yes, the ref can argue by being there he put pressure on the defender to pass the ball back, if the attacker is in red the goal will stand.So now if you play a back pass to an opposition player in an offside position is he offside??
Then I disagree, it wasn't already part of the rules. I'm not really sure what the rules are in Italy's cups but that's a different country, rules can differ from league to league domestically as I understand it. Even that could have a been a mistake though/letter of the law not followed. The latter doesn't always happen, they will always find an excuse in these circumstances.No, the second ball. It was just like the Ronaldo one posted earlier in the thread.
Will the rule be applied differently for players of differing ability. Lesser players may take several touches to control the ball immediatelyThing is, Mings did (or should) have the ball under control after his first touch / chest of the ball with Rodri 5 yards away. How many touches are deemed for a supposed professional to have the ball under control ?. Shouldn't be playing for England if he and all these so called experts are saying it takes him more than one.
No then, you're incorrect it wasn't already part of the rules. Nor did the ref blow the whistle for the challenge on Laporte for that reason.
They will always be given and not given, he was 3 yards away when from the defender when the ball was played so it was marginal either way if he was interfering/active. If he was 3 ft away it should be offside, if he was 30 yards away of course not.
The officials gave it so of course it was 100% correct, if they didn't give it they would have backed themselves too. It will be an entirely different set of circumstances each time it happens and some will go either way.
I mean I knew this fucker was thick just by the way he looks and talks but oh my god this is gold.