Referees/Officials 2017/18 performances

Status
Not open for further replies.
Ric said:
You’re also making strawmen here. I’m not comparing the leg breakers you mention with the “Silva goal” [sic], I was merely answering a specific question about decisions that have gone our way.
Click to expand...
Sorry Ric but your Silva post is a straw man bigger than than the one Edward Woodwood was burned alive in.
 
blueinsa said:
Must have been after he'd originally given the goal then yes?

I'm not trying to be argumentative her with you mate but what happened today surrounding that goal was complete and utter nonsense form both mason and his linesman.
Click to expand...
The question of interfering with play only came into it after the linesman flagged. I am pissed off with refs not clamping down on reckless tackles , with offside decisions you win some and lose some , the other question that arises is the fact that the VAR system is not being used in all FA Cup games, so basically teams are not competing on a level playing field
 
blueinsa said:
No he wasn't.

We have it was disallowed for offside which it wasnt and we have it was disallowed because he was interfering with play which again he wasn't.

At least they got together to get their stories straight i suppose.........
Click to expand...
That decision was totally mind boggling
 
cleavers said:
Yes he did, but it doesn't matter he had no influence on the goal, and that is the current rule, therefor offside or onside doesn't matter, its a goal.
Click to expand...

They thought he was in the line of sight as well as offside, that’s why they gave it.

Clearly he wasn’t offside. In line of sight, I personally think not but I can see how some could say he was.
 
carlosthejackal said:
The question of interfering with play only came into it after the linesman flagged.
Click to expand...

But who brought it up?

The linesman couldn't have because from his position he cant see that given the nagle and can only flag for offside.

mason didn't because he gave the goal so didn't see anything wrong with it from his position and only when they go for a chat together does it get brought up and its bollox because he was neither offside or interfering and by the laws of the game he has every right to stand where he was and the goal is perfectly good.

It felt like any excuse to disallow it and they took it and i will say this now, if VAR had been there they would have still stuck by their bent fucking decision.
 
cleavers said:
I admire your stance here Ric, but no matter what the reasons are, that goal should stand, even if Sane was in an offside position, because under the current rules Sane is entitled to be there, and he made no attempt to go near the ball, and Mason knew that, which was why he originally gave the goal. He wanted a reason not to give it, to keep a big game for the TV broadcasters and sponsors open, so for me he went over to make it look like he'd taken advice.
Click to expand...

I agree completely that the goal should have stood, that’s clear. I’m just laying the blame for that one with the linesman rather than Mason.

Regardless, I’m less arsed about that. It’s frustrating that such a good goal was wrongly ruled out, but the dangerous challenges that are consistently not being punished properly are the bigger concern for me. Something needs to be done about this as a matter of priority. It’s laughable that players can retrospectively be punished for diving, but not endangering an opponent’s safety (if they were booked at the time). The whole system is completely flawed.
 
meltonblue said:
They thought he was in the line of sight as well as offside, that’s why they gave it.
Click to expand...
Don't you mean didn't give it ?

Mason gave it originally because he thought it was a legit goal, and the lino flagged, fine no issue with that if he thought he was offside, but he has no idea if he was in line of sight of the keeper, that is the referee's decision to make, and we all knew how that would go with Mason refereeing City.

I'm sorry but the goal was ruled out purely to keep the game interesting, us being 2-0 up that quickly would kill the spectacle, even though we had pretty much already killed it anyway.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Unread Posts

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

SIGN UP
Back
Top
✖
  AdBlock Detected
Bluemoon relies on advertising to pay our hosting fees. Please support the site by disabling your ad blocking software to help keep the forum sustainable. Thanks.