Trevor Morley's Tache
Well-Known Member
Feigning a shot isn't interfering?
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Ref Watch
- Thread starter Chi-town blues
- Start date
There are times when there is too much ref blaming. This isn't one of them. City is fighting a spell of somewhat poor form and came out in the second half determined to grind out a win. They worked hard for their goal and were subsequently in total control of the game. That was an atrocious decision to allow that blatant violation to level the match. Coming on here and trying to justify that absurd decision is simply pouring salt in the wounds and in extremely poor form. JMO.e doesnt stop the defender from making a challenge....the defenders can see ball...
what he does do is affect their decision making.
Don Karleone
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 8 Nov 2008
- Messages
- 25,206
- Team supported
- Vampire Squid FC
BamberBridgeBlue
Well-Known Member
What the hell are you talking about? You are all over the place. Did you buy some Christmas presents? Do you believe Jesus was born on December 25th then? There would only be about four threads if people were only able to post facts. Your version of a fact can be disputed by others.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
Rashford was running onto a ball in an offside position, which would have impacted the reactions of defenders. Experience over five decades tells me that Manchester United get favourable decisions at Old Trafford. If I can’t state my belief that that is the case you might as well shut down the Forum.
Repeat after me. Simon23 is not the sole arbiter of “facts”.
Arm out shielding Akanji.
Left foot back ready to shift the ball which puts Ederson in a set position ready to make an attempted save.
Not interfering though...nothing to see here...
A picture paints a thousand words
Clearly interfering with 2 players positioning & decision making. Clearly stopping Akanji from easily collecting the ball & probably Ederson from coming out to comfortably clearing the ball
That photo is all you need to see how poor a decision it was
eyalluvitt
Well-Known Member
He must be used to this stuff having played Bayern Munchkin so many times
simon23
Well-Known Member
Sorry but I disagreeThere are times when there is too much ref blaming. This isn't one of them. City is fighting a spell of somewhat poor form and came out in the second half determined to grind out a win. They worked hard for their goal and were subsequently in total control of the game. That was an atrocious decision to allow that blatant violation to level the match. Coming on here and trying to justify that absurd decision is simply pouring salt in the wounds and in extremely poor form. JMO.
By the laws of the game (which are questionably wrong imho) its a goal.....its the rules that need rewriting....any player in Rashfords position in my mind is interfering with play...but the rules suggest he has to physically try to play the ball, or impede a defender from getting it..which he doesnt do
Father Paul
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 18 Jun 2015
- Messages
- 5,200
Has to be o
Has to be one of the worst decisions in years and it appears little or no VAR involvement. I am now a card carrying member of the society which believes the refs in England are corrupt.It's quite simple. Had Rashford not been there does Fernandez go on to score.
Clearly not, therefore Rashford is instrumental in the creation of the goal and as he was offside then the goal should be disallowed.
Arm out shielding Akanji.
Left foot back ready to shift the ball which puts Ederson in a set position ready to make an attempted save.
Not interfering though...nothing to see here...
Right, Simon.. explain this… what happens in that picture is Rashford is not there?
Trevor Morley's Tache
Well-Known Member
Which makes on field manipulation of decision INFINATELY easier.That used to be the rule but it was changed recently.......
Yet its against the rules to do that when taking a penalty, so clearly a dummy has an affect on the opposition, so he interfered with play and is offsideI agree but the rule suggests that he has to physicall attempt to ply the ball....which none of those are
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
How could the defender have tackled rashford without committing a foul if rashford was between the defender and the ball?
If the answer is he couldn’t, then Rashford is shielding the ball from the defender and therefore offside.
Arm out shielding Akanji.
Left foot back ready to shift the ball which puts Ederson in a set position ready to make an attempted save.
Not interfering though...nothing to see here...
There is no world in which Bruno reaches that ball first if Rashford isn't there.
Manc Born & Bred
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 7 Nov 2005
- Messages
- 11,681
The only people who think that the goal should have stood are rags, Peter Walton and @simon23. Not sure about @BlueHammer85 although he usually agrees with VAR. Decision altered the course of the game which we were comfortable in. Wouldn’t be surprised to see a change in the interpretation of the law happening soon. Law makers have ruined the game we all love Purely for money. Greed and corruption in full view.
Trevor Morley's Tache
Well-Known Member
His whistle and his earpiece seem to be PERFECTLY in sync.5 live commentary said exactly same as you about time taken on decisions. They said his brain and whistle were out of sync.
Jesus H Gabz
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 14 Nov 2019
- Messages
- 5,147
- Team supported
- City
You not broke the shovel yet?I agree its ambiguous and why i have said that the rule is wrong ...but the rule seems to suggest physical ability not decision making....
both defenders could have still chose to slide in...(not sure why they didnt try and bring him down as they wouldnt have been sent off as there was cover there)...even if they had been sent off we only had a bit of time left and we could have hung on
simon23
Well-Known Member
Course he can make a tackle....Rashford is running with the ball (without touching it) but he aint stopping the player from making a challenge......he doesnt phyiscally touch any of our playersHow could the defender have tackled rashford without committing a foul if rashford was between the defender and the ball?
If the answer is he couldn’t, then Rashford is shielding the ball from the defender and therefore offside.
daztrueblue91
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 4 Jun 2009
- Messages
- 4,229
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
Didn’t Fernandinho once give a penalty away in the CL for fouling an offside player before he touched the ball?