Ref Watch

[ganganvince]

Judging by Rashfords actions on Saturday, he could even do a few feints and the odd Norwegian jig over the ball and it’d be ok.

Is a Norwegian jig similar to an Irish jig?
Edit
just googled it and it would appear to be something to do with fishing.

 

[Dirty Harry]

Is a Norwegian jig similar to an Irish jig?
Edit
just googled it and it would appear to be something to do with fishing.

Let’s call it a Halling then , Halling Haaland ;-).

 

[mcfcphil]

I'd love the City players to work out a routine in training where they pass the ball to an obviously offside Haaland who just stands in front of the ball until a nippy player like Foden sprints in and scores just to show the present offside rule as the farce that it is.

I think we absolutely should do. If that's now deemed to be within the rules then it's a fantastic tactic.

 

[halfcenturyup]

when a player is through or going to hit the ball the keeper will watch the feet, is the player going to smash it ,slide it in ,chip it , i'm sure edison was thinking hes going to try and curl it in right footed with the outside of his boot , angles dictate how the player is going to hit it,to allow that goal is nothing short of corrupt, because im 99% sure if that had been haaland closing in he would of been given offside .

Here is another thought.

Ederson comes out and intercepts the ball without Rashford touching it. A less than perfect touch from Ederson, so that the ball slices behind him. Rashford goes on and taps the ball into the empty net. What is the decision then? I am pretty sure the touch from Ederson plays Rashford onside. Good goal.

These laws are insane. Made by people who don't think things through from a players' perspective. Made by referees, basically.

 

[Gazza]

It was a case of getting 'the best' young refs. There were two of them - can't remember who the other one was, but I thought at the time that he had nowhere near the experience required to handle games, and it has proved correct. The fact that he is still whistling away or, in most cases, not whistling, tells us much we suspected from the bunch malfunctioning as officials.

Did I actually see the FIFA badge on his chest? He must be really corrupt to get that one.

 

[Gazza]

Can someone extend the video and put the Benny Hill music to Rashford running behind the ball?

 

[mcfcbill91]

Dermot Gallagher did a good job of explaining the thought process and possible conversation between the officials, but PGMOL have to provide clarity on that conversation. Firstly on why it led to an instant decision of goal and whether it truly led to VAR unable to intervene.

It now feels like had the offside stood, VAR could then truly get involved and provide the referee with sufficient angles to make an informed decision.

Seems like he rushed to give a goal and VAR remit is too narrow, it was left unable to actually help the fucking idiot.

Having now read Dale Johnson's article, which contains the below line

'Information provided by the Premier League and PGMOL was used in this story'

It appears Atwell gave the goal alone and the wording of the law gave VAR no opportunity to intervene.

I'm now keen to see how this information being made widespread knowledge will effect set pieces etc, especially as there's now a clear example that the law means you can be clearly offside, cause a distraction etc, but provided you don't make physical contact with a defender or the ball, it's irrelevant.

Certainly worth trying it once or twice.

 

[Blue Maverick]

Here is another thought.

Ederson comes out and intercepts the ball without Rashford touching it. A less than perfect touch from Ederson, so that the ball slices behind him. Rashford goes on and taps the ball into the empty net. What is the decision then? I am pretty sure the touch from Ederson plays Rashford onside. Good goal.

These laws are insane. Made by people who don't think things through from a players' perspective. Made by referees, basically.

How about Rashford touched the ball but Eddy cleans the fucker out ending his career, that’s what’s going to happen to someone soon, it wouldn’t be a foul as he has touched the ball but was offside.

 

[Stephen230]

Here is another thought.

Ederson comes out and intercepts the ball without Rashford touching it. A less than perfect touch from Ederson, so that the ball slices behind him. Rashford goes on and taps the ball into the empty net. What is the decision then? I am pretty sure the touch from Ederson plays Rashford onside. Good goal.

These laws are insane. Made by people who don't think things through from a players' perspective. Made by referees, basically.

Then it would move on to whether Ederson had made a deliberate play at the ball. Which by your description sounds like he would have. So play would have been reset and it would be a goal. That’s assuming the referee is still sticking with his decision that Rashford hasn’t interfered with an opponent.

 

[solley attwell]

The offside law is fucked but whats worrying and what has come out of this debacle is that officials can now hide behind 'subjective view' and they will be backed by the PGMOL.
So next weekend if the same incident occurs with 2 different teams the referee can basically call it how he likes.
If ever you were in doubt about corruption in football , subjective is the new buzzword used to bend the rules