Ref Watch

[Gordyola]

According to the A to Z of quotes, it was the great Brian Clough.

And @MikeF, what’s pedantic about it?

It was Shankly who said it first I recall hearing him and also remember Clough quoting Shanks

 

[cheekybids]

No because he could still do it...he isnt physcailly impeded from putting in a challenge...

how many times have you seen a player commit a deliberate foul with little orno attempt to play the ball...Ferna was a master of the challenge that never actually happened and looking innocent about it.

You are tying yourself in knots. What you are saying is only the master of this situation can get the ball from a sprinting Rashford who isn’t interfering with play.

That makes no sense.

The linesmen knows the rules & believes it is offside. The ref over ruled him having given the benefit of the doubt all game.

 

[Dave Ewing's Back 'eader]

If a player sheilds the ball out of play and the ball is in playing distance he is deemed to be active Rashford affected opponents in his actions there is no denying that therefore according to the LAWS of the game he’s offside the actions do not need to be physical just running with the ball in playing distance m teams he is active, he then reacts to the shout from fernandes to leave it therefore he is active
The interpretation in the LAW is there for when a play is offside but doesn’t receive the ball then his team mate or opponent makes an action which then creates a second phase of play Atwell misinterpretation of the LAW won the game for the rags He has history of major cock up giving a goal when the ball went wide

I think Attwell didn't give a tuppenny fuck for the written Law - it was a Rag equaliser and by fuck or by crook it wasn't getting chalked off.

I honestly don't know what they think about after a game. Perhaps they feel they just cannot make a mistake, or bend the Laws as they see fit, or just ignore them, knowing full well that a City concession is met with almost universal acceptance, despite the LotG being mangled beyond recognition.

 

[Gordyola]

Like I say, if you are going to cheat, make it look like a good mistake, so you can brush it under the carpet and not look like fools, NOBODY can come out and say it was not offside ? NOBODY can defend the match officials and referee for cheating, WHY was VAR not used, WHY did the linesman flag after the goal was scored,

Think VAR confirmed the offside they then left Atwell to check if Rashford touched the ball as he clearly decided that if he didn’t he could give the rags a goal and get an assist

 

[acton28.blog]

Please tell me you're being sarcastic.

I like people to guess. It's the equivalent of using VAR to clear up doubt.

 

[levets]

When var was first introduced they told us that it would only be used in a case of ‘obvious error’. They Further said there is no ‘obvious error’ with an offside decision as it is factual; offside or onside and no subjectivity. However this is not the case as subjectivity creeps in where interpretation of the (factual) offside law is permitted/applied. Rashford by running with the ball becomes ‘active’ and as he is the ‘Target’ for the pass he should have been called offside. If this is not changed/challenged then the whole method of a defending high needs to be re-assessed. Akanji moved up and played him offside. What happened next was totally against the spirit of the law. Of course he was interfering with play, just by running with the ball towards goal he is interfering, as his actions absolutely influenced our defenders

 

[bluesince76]

Thanks for that. I wasn't aware of that. Mine was the common sense interpretation, which we all know doesn't exist in certain games.

Common sense went a long time ago and that's before they put Howard Webb in charge of referees...

 

[CityFan1970]

Previously, when the ball is passed to a player in an offside position, and he knows he is offside, we've seen that player stop moving, or move away from the ball and put his arms in the air to tell the ref, "I'm not interfering". What happened today has changed all that and set a new precedent - the player can now follow the ball, without touching it and be deemed to be not offside.

 

[Roachy]

Previously, when the ball is passed to a player in an offside position, and he knows he is offside, we've seen that player stop moving, or move away from the ball and put his arms in the air to tell the ref, "I'm not interfering". What happened today has changed all that and set a new precedent - the player can now follow the ball, without touching it and be deemed to be not offside.

This is the crux of it. You will see similar all season in other games where the player is offside and moves towards the ball, ref or linesman straight away stops play which in turn makes a mockery of that decision this afternoon.

 

[Chak19]

Previously, when the ball is passed to a player in an offside position, and he knows he is offside, we've seen that player stop moving, or move away from the ball and put his arms in the air to tell the ref, "I'm not interfering". What happened today has changed all that and set a new precedent - the player can now follow the ball, without touching it and be deemed to be not offside.

You forgot one crucial thing, that player has to wear a red shirt.