Referees/Officials

I'm grateful he got the two kicks thing right though. That was a good spot from him and one he could have quiet easily turned a blind eye to had he wanted to.

He's a pedant. That kind of thing would make his day. I can just imagine him dining out for years on the strength of spotting the double touch. I just wonder how much Willie's histrionics persuaded him to apply the Laws of the Game strictly - and not listen to the jug-eared, crisp-munching Foxes' fan! Willie was quite adamant before the ball hit the netting!
 
Erm, no we weren't. There's no evidence Sterling touched the ball and he wasn't remotely in Schmeichel's line of sight

Correct.

Obviously, he lifts his foot but that does not make him offside if the rules still include (and I think these are latest rules):

"clearly attempting to play a ball which is close to him 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"

Sterling's swipe at the ball had no impact: Kasper had already been done and was not unsighted by Raheem.
 
One thing I've noticed is if it's a 50/50 decision,or a way to influence the game in a way it benefits the other team these refs are doing it.weve see it all season penners not given ,fouls that give the other team scoring chances.look at silvas booking yesterday no wonder he went mad ,it's a throw in but again the ref gives them another opportunity to score.we see it the players see ,look at the Chelsea home game the sending offs,pure frustration.its just so obviously blatant.
 
A player has to be in an offside position, and commit an "offence".

Offside position

Sterling was inches offside, but you need video evidence to be convinced. It's so close I don't think in real time a linesman can give it after all a player is not in an offside position if level, and what is meant by level? Technically no player can ever be level. I am sure you could make an argument to say that a player is level if it is not possible for an observer standing 30 m away on the touchline to determine a difference. A players hands and arms do not come into it. It's the position of the torso.

Offside offence

The relevant part of the rule.....

  • clearly attempting to play a ball which is close to him 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
I think Sterling attempts to play the ball even though he claims he did not, but did it impact on an opponent? I would say yes to this aspect, but it's clearly open to interpretation.
The view from behind Sterling shows that he was nowhere close to Schmeichel's line of sight and his claims that he obstructed Fuchs path to the ball was laughable as he never even twitched towards it. MotD claimed that if Sterling wasn't there then Schmeichel would have been stood 2 yards to his left, how the hell they came to that conclusion I've no idea.
 
We got the better of it. The game was won by a goal and we were wrongly awarded one. Claiming anything else based on the odd free kick or a random booking is laughable.

I assume you are on the pisstake. I hope you are, as this post makes zero sense.
 
The view from behind Sterling shows that he was nowhere close to Schmeichel's line of sight and his claims that he obstructed Fuchs path to the ball was laughable as he never even twitched towards it. MotD claimed that if Sterling wasn't there then Schmeichel would have been stood 2 yards to his left, how the hell they came to that conclusion I've no idea.

Agreed - and Sterling or no Sterling, Schmeichel wasn't within a country mile of that shot
 

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.