Ref Watch

[simon23]

Given you acknowledge that the LoTG, are sufficiently vague to allow interpretation, can you not accept that you are very much in the minority, who think him not interfering, and therefore onside (referee, rags & YOU), probably akin to less than 1%.
Irrespective of the laws you seem to delight in quoting, the general opinion of most is that he WAS interfering with play, WAS offside, and the "goal" should have been disallowed, even within your quoted laws!

Absoluely accept that Im in the minorty..

I agree that he was interfeering with play as he affects the decision making if the defenders - said it loads if times - but my opinion on that isnt in line with the rules and what they say

Do you accept that its not cheating on the officals part but their interpritation of the rules which we both agree are a bit vague(and therefore need changing)

Games are not ref'd by the opinions of fans - but by the LOTG and how the ref interprets them and the ref in his interpritation has allowed the goal....the LOTG allow him to do that.

I have zero delight in all of this is as we lost.

 

[ancoats]

Do you have a refeering qualification as coaching quals mean little here

The board is for opinions...you think mine are bollocks...thats ok...

Go check out the KDB thread for my other posts since the derby since you were asking.

matey, your winding people up ?

even the bald build egg scum manager has said Rashford is interfering with the city defenders and would not be happy if city was given the goal ?

its offside ? it's not a mistake in the heat of the moment ? clearly the referee and match officials cheated,so because they did not make it look like a mistake they will be punished by demoted to the EFL

 

[bluesince76]

once the linesman but his flag up and the referee blows his whistle, then VAR should be called for ?
but I am putting my defending hat on here ? clearly, defenders train for holding the line to catch players offside with the ball being played, so you are interfering with play if you're in an offside place,

I'm very much in the 'if you're not interfering with play, what are you doing on the pitch' camp.

To take the emotion out of it, the one that **** Salah scored last week should clearly have been offside, yet, according to the law, it wasn't. It's mental, the defender only tried to clear it because Salah was there and, by doing so, played him onside. If he'd have ducked, Salah would have been offside.

The current law is a mess and, if the goal last week had been against them, and if today had been against the rags, all the media would be trying to get it changed.

I still don't get the VAR not getting involved though. There's mention of a subjective decision, but surely everything other than whether the ball has crossed the goal line is subjective, as it's all a matter of opinion of the officials

 

[HelloCity]

 

[Bluearmy]

Quite sure Phil was given offside today more than once without touching the ball. Different rules for Different teams in same game

Tis a good point. All very close (not saying they werent off) but flag up straight away and ref blows.

Can anyone do a montage of fodens offsides? The contrast would be stark!!

 

[Jam Tomorrow]

I have heard this said but since when did something being subjective stop VAR getting involved in reviewing a goal? They review every goal for infringements like fouls and handballs which are subjective. They've also been banging on about how offside is objective, which they also review.

So...
If it's an objective element of the offside rule (the player's positioning) they get involved
If it's a subjective element that isn't offside (handball or foul) they get involved
If it's a subjective element of this one specific part of the offside rule, they... don't get involved? Why? Sounds literally fucking insane, am I going insane?

Somebody show me where it says in the rules that VAR only reviews subjective decisions with the exception of the elements of the offside rule which are subjective.

This! Exactly, every fucking decision is subjective, in reality every decision should be objective, but let’s go with the excuses they have trotted out. As you say, is there a rule that says offside decisions are open to different interpretations? Is there fuck. It’s a stitch up.

 

[ancoats]

Why should Akanji risk trying to tackle him, he knows he’s yards offside

defenders should be saying to their managers, WHY train all week in holding a tight line, if forwards can be onside by 5 yards in front of them and not interfering with play

 

[simon23]

• preventing an opponent from playing or being able to play the ball by clearly obstructing the opponent’s line of vision- are you telling me Akanji cant see the ball - of course he can. He can also make a tackle at any point.

• making an obvious action which clearly impacts on the ability of an opponent to play the ball - when does rashford stop the defender from trying to tackle...answer - he doesnt

 

[simon23]

matey, your winding people up ?

even the bald build egg scum manager has said Rashford is interfering with the city defenders and would not be happy if city was given the goal ?

its offside ? it's not a mistake in the heat of the moment ? clearly the referee and match officials cheated,so because they did not make it look like a mistake they will be punished by demoted to the EFL

I agree he is interfeering...Ive said it all along. He affects the decision making of both city defenders and also the keeper

But not by the LOTG he aint

 

[the-ecstacy-of-eight]

Fernandes in post match interview said he didn’t give Rashford a shout.

...so it was because he's shit then :)