Ref Watch

Trevor Morley's Tache said:
I'm calling BULLSH*T.

I GUARANTEE VAR would have stepped in at the other end of the pitch had that been given as a goal AGAINST the Rag's

They do whatever the f*ck they want, and there is NO comeback.
Click to expand...

I don't disagree - which I'm why so keen to actually find out how Atwell reached that decision (and it was allowed to stand) without any input from them.

His interpretation of the offside 'law' subsequently opens it to allow teams to place players anywhere on set pieces or even in open play. Effectively makes the defensive line redundant.
 
halfcenturyup said:
I'm with you. Still fuming. It's not the wrong decision, or the fact we lost the match as a result. Although those hurt in the short term. It's the contempt with which they treat us, the fans. VAR and its associated protocols are strangling the game and I am questioning if it's worth getting up at 3 in the morning every matchday to watch when there are other priorities in life as well. God only knows what those of you who pay to get to, and into, games are thinking.
Click to expand...
Defeats, I can handle. Been a fan since the early seventies and there were periods when defeats weren't that unusual (hard for younger BMers to believe I know, but it's true!). If the side gives it all, or if we're simply beaten by a better side (again, having given it our best shot), then so be it. But we put up the white flag at Southampton. And we were cheated on saturday. Those two results sting.
 
mcfcbill91 said:
I don't disagree - which I'm why so keen to actually find out how Atwell reached that decision (and it was allowed to stand) without any input from them.

His interpretation of the offside 'law' subsequently opens it to allow teams to place players anywhere on set pieces or even in open play. Effectively makes the defensive line redundant.
Click to expand...
We'll never find out because there is no transparency. Best we can hope for is a token apology delivered through a stifled snigger.
 
blueinsa said:
Any talk of a subjective call and VAR not being allowed to intervene is out and out gaslighting.

Cheating bastards.
Click to expand...
We were told that every goal was checked by VAR. Remember our disallowed goal against Liverpool when VAR went back to us gaining possession near the halfway line and said it was a foul getting the ball at the start of the attack. Today ref Gallagher said it was the referees decision so VAR was not needed. Something is wrong and it stinks. Every professional I have heard have said it should have been disallowed for various reasons.
 
If I understand VAR usage correctly for offside VAR will confirm if the player is offside The referee is the final arbiter of the decision of the subjective part of offside, which is whether a player is active or not
The facts
Rashford was flagged offside when the ball entered the net indicated by the lino
VAR would check, as it does all goals, and there is no way they said other then confirmed
Speculation
Atwell probably thought that Rashford hadn't touched the ball so he would ask VAR to confirm (?) he then asked McCann the lino who confirmed from his POV that he hadn't
Atwell awarded the goal based on Rashford not touching the ball
The Law and the IFAB's intended interpretation of
IFAB wanted tos top goals being disallowed when a player was offide at the start of the moved but wasn't ACTIVE ie didn't touch the ball or affect his opponents but later in the move he took an active part
If Rashford had been onside but fernandez off then the the rest of the play rolled out as it did on Saturday then this would have been legitimate
Conclusion
So Atwell made a subjective decision which he was entitled to do so based on;

A player in an offside position at the moment the ball is played or touched* by a team-mate is only penalised on becoming involved in active play by:
  • interfering with play by playing or touching a ball passed or touched by a team-mate or
  • interfering with an opponent by:
    • preventing an opponent from playing or being able to play the ball by clearly obstructing the opponent’s line of vision or
    • challenging an opponent for the ball or
    • clearly attempting to play a ball which is close when this action impacts on an opponent or
    • making an obvious action which clearly impacts on the ability of an opponent to play the ball

      Which of the above did Rashford commit?
      He absolutely prevented Akanji or Edison from clearing the ball that cannot be argued with (image below with him removed) he also pulled his shooting leg back which affected Edison's positioning images below his eyes are clearly on Rashford as he is lining up to shoot
      Rashford claimed he was aware he was off and that why he didnt touch the ball, I think he lied
826EE889-D2BC-45ED-A8ED-76F66F243CEA.jpegC673F625-3D89-42D7-B640-E0F693E669C7.jpeg13597C5F-EFF5-4E21-AE47-27BF848425EF.jpeg

Consequences of the decision
Atwell effectively changed the offside law by making it legitimate for a player to run with the ball having been in an offside position David Ellery head of IFAB must be tearing out any hair he has left
An amendment need adding to say a player is active if he is in playing distance of the ball, same as when a player is not obstructing an opponent if he is shielding a ball out of play as long as he is in playing distance
 
Last edited:
MikeF said:
For my sins, I’ve just had a mooch on ragcafe and 2/3 of them think Rashford was interfering with play. Says it all!!
Click to expand...
United fans I’ve spoken to at work today are almost embarrassed by it. They start off all ‘good result Saturday’ and gloating then you ask ‘do you think he was interfering?’ And their head goes down, yeah, yeah it was offside.

Everyone knows we’ve been cheated out of it
 
blueinsa said:
Any talk of a subjective call and VAR not being allowed to intervene is out and out gaslighting.

Cheating bastards.
Click to expand...
It’s funny because they’re almost trying to make the laws subjective when they’re not, they’ve been uploaded on here countless times since Saturday & nowhere does it say subject too, what it does say is when considering whether somebody is offside do they meet the threshold of A B C or D ? In Rashford’s case this was 3 times over, if it was just one instance then I can see why the ref could possibly make a mistake. At the end of the day they are now in damage limitation mode & will say nothing, because when you actually analyse the process they used you realise every step was wrong
 
When Gallagher says it’s offside you know they’ve fucked up royally, that twat Walton said it wasnt but that **** changes his mind like my missus. How can a law be open to interpretation, it’s black and white otherwise you have the mess we have now. TAA offside immediately previously same with Foden but not this, it’s a joke, every programme I’ve seen since Saturday, not one pundit (unless a rag), ex official has said it wasn’t offside. Atwell has now put the cat amongst the pidgeons for future games.
 
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