Ref Watch

[JewelZee]

Linesman called offside. Rabid animals surrounded ref and lino. Decision changed by onfield ref in 10 seconds with no actual review of whst happened

Spot on!!!

 

[radcliffe1309]

No its not the same at all...
Standing infront of the keeper so he cannt see, therefore cant react etc is not the same as running next tot he ball.....all the players around rashford can still see the ball and can still react

What it does do (which is where the rule is wrong for me) is afffect the desision making of Akanji and Walker ......but thats not physically stopping them

If its affecting the decision making of our two defenders then he's interfering end of .....not to mention the fact that our keeper is also thinking Rashford might be getting a shot away, he can't tell if Rashfords offside from his veiw.

 

[RobinHood]

Just been on the BBC HYS and the majority, including United and Arsenal, agree that it was offside. They‘ll take it though, of course.

Yes. It's easy for  them to agree it's a wrong decision when we've lost. But i take your point.

 

[BamberBridgeBlue]

Irrelevant as your point cant be proved...you stated that if we scored it it would have been disallowed.....you cannot prove that just like I cannot prove it would have stood

Doesn’t make it irrelevant does it. It’s a reasonable hypothesis based on historical experience. Not irrelevant.

 

[Trevor Morley's Tache]

Linesman called offside. Rabid animals surrounded ref and lino. Decision changed by onfield ref in 10 seconds with no actual review of whst happened

But aren't we told VAR checks ALL goal decisions?

 

[SebastianBlue]

The whole of the ball? No chance, it also effects Akanji’s decision making, in his mind he now has to decide if he makes a last man challenge & possible red card offence

This is another aspect to this that is not being talked about.

We knew immediately that Rashford was obviously offside by virtue of watching on TV but Akanji, Walker, and Ederson didn’t know for sure. Which means everything they did whilst play continued had to be based on the assumption he was onside, because if he was, and the went in for a challenge based on the way Rashford was shielding the ball, they could give away a penalty and/or be sent off.

Only people that have never actually played football will think Rashford isn’t influencing (obstructing) the play of the defenders and keeper in that situation.

All of the uncertainty and risk was with the defenders in that scenario, meaning allowing that sort of offside play further disadvantages the defending team (who is already inherently disadvantaged).

 

[Deleted member 81382]

Rashford was clearly influencing play by chasing after the pass and attempting to control it.

The referee goes to ask the linesman who he flagged offside for and because it wasn't Fernandes he seemed to make his mind up based on that. VAR should be telling him to look at the screen to see Rashford's involvement but for whatever reason they don't.

The cynic in me thinks that now that they finally look like a side capable of challenging for the title they are going to start getting a little extra help.

 

[Vienna_70]

To paraphrase Bill Shankly ‘ 'If a player is not interfering with play or seeking to gain an advantage, then he should be.’

As Scudamore said a few years ago, a ‘successful’ man united is good for the premier league.

I think that was Danny Blanchflower.

 

[sutty66]

silly simon

 

[simon23]

Doesn’t make it irrelevant does it. It’s a reasonable hypothesis based on historical experience. Not irrelevant.

Its not a fact though....its a belief..which in this case is not what we are talking about

Apologies for the use of the word irrelevant as that was wrong