United (A) | Post Match Thread

[Petetheblu]

Ian wright did a piece on it on motd,3 times haaland was in,not once in whole game did we even try an play a thru ball,thing is it doesent have to even be perfect ,just between lines,and haaland will do the rest,or at least put them under serious pressure,instead we just passed it too very slow wings,then utd had everyone behind and 2 or 3 defenders round haaland,its rearly not haalands fault ,this is our main issue,if we had fast wingers that actually beat a player it wudnt be a problem but at moment they dont even try to beat last man just past back inside,greelish was only one when he came on that was beating man and puttin them under it,it was poor play yday,summert needs to change,and quickly because it does look like were easy to play against

Bang on the buck. Haaland at City is being underused, anywhere else he'd be the main focus, currently he's working off scraps.

 

[East Level 2]

Haarland is more than a tap-in merchant according to City fans and we gave the best coach in the world so why can't we get more from him?
We've spent a few seasons watching Jesus on the shoulder of defenders ready for a through ball that never comes and we've seen the same with Haaland. We have talented midfielders so why won't they play that ball? Haaland's second at West Ham on the opening day showed it worked and we need to try it more often.

 

[FantasyIreland]

I'll try and break it down for the people who believe he was onside,

1) the ball was played to Rashford.
2) Akanji plays him offside.
3)Rashford runs with the ball within playing distance
4) Rashfords team mate shouts "Leave it"
5) he leaves it.

1) & 2) he's active when the ball is played to him and impacts on Akanjis decision making : Interfering with play.

3) He runs with the ball in playing distance because of this he impacts on the decision making of Ederson and the defenders: Interfering with play.

4) & 5) He gets the Instruction, Leave it, he is then part of the move, Active!! : Interfering with play.

The officials the pundits the Rags and any one who thinks it's not offside need to find another hobby and don't give me this Grey area shit It's a really bad decision.

Rashford was offside,Fernandes wasn't.

Rashford never touched the ball so the rules don't cover interfering with play in the manner in which you claim.He didn't ACTIVELY obstruct Akanji,who waas 2 yards behind and never getting back,neither did he obstruct Walker or Ederson.

Rashfords presence most definitely affected the decisions of the our players,but seemingly that isn't against the rules and is the reason the officials came to their decision.

And just in case you are confused.....once again,i agree that it is bollocks and the game has gone if that is deemed a legitimate goal.

 

[tonea2003]

Haarland is more than a tap-in merchant according to City fans and we gave the best coach in the world so why can't we get more from him?
We've spent a few seasons watching Jesus on the shoulder of defenders ready for a through ball that never comes and we've seen the same with Haaland. We have talented midfielders so why won't they play that ball? Haaland's second at West Ham on the opening day showed it worked and we need to try it more often.

thats because west ham were starting to open up chasing the game leaving space at the back, at no time did utd do that yesterday even at 1 down they kept players back, its because of that very reason we would kill them if space is left in behind

 

[Len Rum]

That doesn't affect the law though.Of course he was interfering with play as common sense would dictate but he didn't affect an opponents ability to reach the ball.

The law is total bollocks.

But is he affecting Edersons 'ability to reach the ball'?
Ederson cannot be expected to know he is in an offside position and therefore had to cover the angle of his run and a potential shot and also was unable to reach the ball without potentially fouling him and maybe getting sent off.
This allowed Fernando to run in from a different angle and score with the keeper's attention focused elsewhere.

 

[GaudinoMotors]

Rashford was offside,Fernandes wasn't.

Rashford never touched the ball so the rules don't cover interfering with play in the manner in which you claim.He didn't ACTIVELY obstruct Akanji,who waas 2 yards behind and never getting back,neither did he obstruct Walker or Ederson.

Rashfords presence most definitely affected the decisions of the our players,but seemingly that isn't against the rules and is the reason the officials came to their decision.

And just in case you are confused.....once again,i agree that it is bollocks and the game has gone if that is deemed a legitimate goal.

Had me worried for a minute.

 

[East Level 2]

thats because west ham were starting to open up chasing the game leaving space at the back, at no time did utd do that yesterday even at 1 down they kept players back, its because of that very reason we would kill them if space is left in behind

But we still had chances to pop the ball over the top to him. Perhaps not many yesterday but certainly in other games.

 

[jim tolmies perm]

The lino should have simply put his flag up immediately.It wasn't even close. Even before fat faced thug touched it. When he touched it Rashford was 4 yards offside.
What transpired after that was a pure attempt to legitimise and therefore rectify a mistake. Problem was the lino had rat face and a baying mob all over him. Complete and total shithouse of an official. Atwell was looking for ANY possibility to give it hence they were in cahoots.
That's it..end of...corrupt or at the very least unduly influenced by the occasion and location.

 

[FantasyIreland]

But is he affecting Edersons 'ability to reach the ball'?
Ederson cannot be expected to know he is in an offside position and therefore had to cover the angle of his run and a potential shot and also was unable to reach the ball without potentially fouling him and maybe getting sent off.
This allowed Fernando to run in from a different angle and score with the keeper's attention focused elsewhere.

He was affecting Edersons decision making,he did not affect his line of vision.

 

[jim tolmies perm]

He was affecting Edersons decision making,he did not affect his line of vision.

A shame Eddy didn't just go for rat face and smash his teeth down his neck...
Would Rashford have touched the ball then?
An interesting scenario nevertheless..