Spot-on. This fake narrative being spread by some pundits that what happened was "within the laws" is just total bollocks. In fact the law is quite clear. Atwell did not even check the monitor. He just ignored the rules. No sane person can argue that Rashford was not "interfering with play."Offside is objective not subjective, the rules are there in black and white and there is no grey areaView attachment 66224
Rashford was offside - confirmed by replays and the lineman flag.
He was interfering with play - shielding the ball by continuing to run between Akanji and the ball, thus preventing Akanji gaining possession. The lying bastard even tried to claim he stopped running when interviewed!
He gained an advantage - shielding the ball, stopping Akanji and Ederson getting to the ball by continuing his run, distracting Akanji, Ederson and possibly Walker.
His actions were an obvious action which clearly impacts the ability of an opponent to play the ball - dummying to shoot, shielding the ball from Akanji which stopped him getting to it and running towards goal which stopped Ederson coming out and gaining possession.
Ederson wouldn't know if he was offside or not, Akanji suspected he was offside but played to the whistle and knew he would be penalised regardless if he committed a foul meaning all he could do was follow Rashford (who stopped Akanji gaining possession from an offside position)
The linesman delayed his flag as instructed then raised it at the end of the phase as he knew it was offside.
The problem was Attwell failing to apply the laws, took him literally seconds to over rule his linesman despite being well away from the action.
you honestly think we would get a free kick for akanji fouling him? really?If Akanji takes Rashford down then we get a free kick for offside - I think ?
When you put it like that it does make you realise why Pep is so obsessed with possession & control. He’s not just taking the jeopardy of a counter attack out of the equation, he’s nullifying the cheating bastard refAttwell was utterly biased throughout the game and the Goal was the culmination of his entire performance. He’d ignored Malacia’s sole tactic of fouling Mahrez throughout the game and allowed a few out of control lunges by Ratface to go completely unpunished. To win at OT we have to take the cheating of the Officials out of the equation as we’ve done so well recently but on Saturday we didn’t do this. Attwell will no doubt get many future assignments from Howard Webb to Stretford on the back of his performance on Saturday
At OT and Klanfield I’ve no doubt whatsoever that Pep plans for the Officials cheating -and we all know he’s 100% right to do so. He sees what we see -but can only cryptically comment on it.When you put it like that it does make you realise why Pep is so obsessed with possession & control. He’s not just taking the jeopardy of a counter attack out of the equation, he’s nullifying the cheating bastard ref
No, akanji sent off!!If Akanji takes Rashford down then we get a free kick for offside - I think ?
Its not a quirk of the current law/interpretation. Its always been the law…. Well for the last 40 odd years ive been playing at leastThis is another ridiculous quirk of the current interpretation.
He was behind the ball when it was played but, before that, he gained an advantage by being in an offside position. It was like a goal that Jesus scored against West Ham on the opening day a few seasons ago. He was stood well offside, didn't move but was just behind the ball when Sterling crossed to him.
Let's look at a more extreme example. One team has a corner and their opponents defending it leave their striker stood at the other end of the field and a pacy winger just inside their own half. They clear the corner up to the winger, who's onside as he's in his own half. He then legs it downfield and as soon as he's a foot in front of his striker teammate, he crosses to him while the opposition are still getting back and he scores.
Under the current law, the striker is onside and the goal stands, even though the striker has never at any point had two opposition players between him and the goal line. That's nonsensical.
Agreed. The fact Dermott and some other ex refs think its subjective is very scary….No, a foul is given to the attacker even though he's in an offside position but it's the law.
Akanji knew this which is why he didn't just wipe him out.
The offside law (law 11) is objective not subjective.
All this bollocks about subjective and grey areas is a red herring used to try and deflect from the simple fact that Attwell failed to implement the laws of the game.