The Stones Goal

[jimharri]

1 vote out of 267 for the "no" option. Hardly a surprise!

 

[lasereyes]

I think it was right decision and well done to ref. Either way, if we win the league by 1 point it will make a great t-shirt with the rodri 'hand ball' on back and just for fun stick the goal line technology view of stones clearence off the line a few seasons back as well

What Rodri handball? The one where Richarlison was offside prior to Rodri getting possession?

 

[jimharri]

Im not a fan of players obstructing keepers, but it happens in almost every game. Gabriel’s goal against us should have been disallowed also. So fuck it x

Your first contribution in 3 weeks, and it's to say that the goal shouldn't have been allowed. Riiiiight.

 

[dublinblue12]

What Rodri handball? The one where Richarlison was offside prior to Rodri getting possession?

Yeah but it still hurts them

 

[ancoats]

Silva can not be offside from the corner, Only when John Stones heads the ball is offside, But clearly not interfering with the keeper's line of sight when John Stones header wins the game for City, Forget he's fouled the keeper, Silva has every right to defend his space and does not hold or push the keeper, GOAL

Say what you like about City being poor today and lucky, We scored before the final whistle and won the game that's football for you, Score more than your opponents and it wins you the game

 

[jaiguruKun]

It definitely wasn't interfering when Stones heads the ball. It's clear from the camera angle facing the goal.

It's only people who don't understand that a player cannot be offside drom a corner who are trying to argue otherwise.

 

[The blue phantom]

1 vote out of 267 for the "no" option. Hardly a surprise!

What do you reckon that vote would of been if Wolves had scored the exact same goal. Fwiw I think it was a goal but I'll guarantee you we'd be playing fuck on here had it been given against us

 

[meltonblue]

I may have worded it badly but the gist

I came into the thread presuming the discussion would be about the contact between Silva and the goalie but most were on about the 'offside' or not decision. This seems odd because he wasn't offside and it wasn't given. It's not even a debating point, the commentator said he wasnt offside, the pundits said he wasn't offside. The discussion on the TV within seconds was Silva impeding the keeper. And that was what dumb and dumber(Richards and Sturridge) were blabbing about.

They were talking about in the context of whether it was offside or not to be fair, they were being even dumber than you think!

 

[TFC]

Course it's a goal ffs. There should be no debate whatsoever about it.

 

[jimharri]

What do you reckon that vote would of been if Wolves had scored the exact same goal. Fwiw I think it was a goal but I'll guarantee you we'd be playing fuck on here had it been given against us

Of course. Football fans are blinded by bias when it comes to their own club. It's always been the way. 95% would argue that it shouldn't be given, the other 5% are more level headed. I just find it strange that a lone supposed City fan is so out of step with the common consensus on here. Are they all wrong, and he right?