Ref Watch

Just seen Gakpo for Liverpool have shot blocked and the ball has gone to Trent who was standing in an offside position but let the ball go off for a throw in without touching it or attempting to touch it. Linesman put his flag up and ref blew his whistle. So inconsistent. Can't make it up really.
 
Cambo said:
The linesman did flag for offside - from what I can gather the refereee overruled it (not VAR).
Click to expand...
Interesting…..I haven’t read the entire thread but did it go to var? I thought the ref over ruled the Lino, thus rendering var nowhere to go
 
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.
 
daztrueblue91 said:
I couldn’t disagree more.

The moment Rashford goes towards the ball he is impacting the decision making of our defenders and goalkeeper. I mean his run gets him within 30 cm of the ball, he practically shields it towards Fernandes.

How a linesman doesn’t flag for a player who is three yards offside running towards the ball is beyond me.
Click to expand...
Absolutely agree that he impacts the decision making.....said it countless times....but thats not in the rules...the rule(s) is about physically trying to play the ball (or actually playing it) - which rashford doesnt...nor does he impede anyone physically...both defenders could have made a tackle (and if you look at the rules if the defender had tried to takcle Rasford and fouled him...it would have been given offside (if Fernandes hadnt scored) as the offside had occured first...if fernardes scores its still a goal (s long as Rasford doesnt touch the ball at any point0

The linesman did flag offside...the ref changed the decision
 
BamberBridgeBlue said:
Irrelevant? Wave goodbye to your credibility. Some people confuse playing Devils Advocate with a being a ****. You’re not the first.
Click to expand...
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
 
simon23 said:
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
Click to expand...
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.
 
Jesus H Gabz said:
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
Click to expand...
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).
 
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.
 
MikeF said:
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.
Click to expand...
I think that was Danny Blanchflower.
 
BamberBridgeBlue said:
Doesn’t make it irrelevant does it. It’s a reasonable hypothesis based on historical experience. Not irrelevant.
Click to expand...
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
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Unread Posts

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top