United (A) | Post Match Thread

[Dribble]

Gutted! But we only had ONE attempt on target in a high profile clash & therein lies the foundation of yesterday's gut-wrenching defeat.

As for "THAT GOAL", no one disagreed that Rashford was offside, but it was interpreted by the ref, his assistant & VAR that he "wasn't interfering with play, nor did he touch the ball, so the goal stood".

The same scenario with & without Rashford? I'll leave this right here. Make up your own minds...

 

[Hes the left back remember]

More so now with Raggy Webb in charge.
It was bad enough with Mike "penalty to the rags" Riley in charge but it's gone to another level now.

Most of the ‘experts’ focusing on the non touch of rashford but few mentioning Edersons view and who would take the shot. Seems clear from stills that he was squaring up to rashford before splinter arrived

 

[simon23]

No it really isn't - instead of sticking to your entrenched view and boring us all to death - read the posts people have taken time and effort to explain why you are factually wrong.

I have read them and listened to the opinions of others not on here. My opinion whether you like it or not is the same. Goal legit by the rules......rules wrong. IF you want to bring FACTS into it then IF you follow the rules I'm closer to facts than others. ( the rules as I previously stared leave room for interpretation as it doesn't exactly state what interference is and some of the wording suggests physical contact....
Again I believe the rules are wrong and unhelpful ar the least.
My opinion is that the goal SHOULD NOT have stood ( said so many times) but within the LOTG it is allowed

 

[ysmsa]

Linesman was flagging straightaway in the first half against Foden on more than one occasion.
Not only has this change made it worse, it's not even applied consistently.

I think it is because he thought Rashford hadn't touched it however, I am not convinced the ball didn't brush his foot after studying the replays. So how the fuck the linesman can be sure from his position!
What was clear was the fact he was 3 yards off chasing and then running with a ball passed to him after Akanji checked to catch him off side.

Joke of a decision and you know it is wrong when they go to these lengths to justify it. Even the evidence presented favours it being called off side!

 

[JewelZee]

I agree with all of that. However the rules allow the ref to ignore everything that Rasford does because he does play the ball or attempt to play the ball which within the way the rules are written it allows the ref to say Rasforf wasn't interfering. I believe Rasforf was interfering in a number of ways....but the rules don't

What rules are you referring to? Touching the ball is only one element. The most important factor is that he is materially involved in the play from an offside position and impacts multiple players on the opposing side, US, gaining an unfair advantage for his side. Case closed. You can keep repeating the same BS but it just means you are as wrong as the scumbags who allowed the goal to stand. You must be one of those obsessed rule follower types who can't fathom the idea that there are plenty of people in authority who fuck up the rules thru corruption and/or incompetence. The "rule" wasn't followed, we got fucked.

 

[simon23]

He’s offside for the phase of play but just before Ratface hits the ball Rashford makes a play with his left foot, there’s everything wrong with this decision, Akanji would have easily got to the ball without Pope Fishfinger being there.

Again I agree. But the rules don't and the vaguity of the rules allow for the ref to say he didn't interfer with play...my opinion is that he did interfere with play

 

[blue ranger]

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

Gundogan is the best at playing Haaland in. Surprised he didn’t get some minutes tbh.

 

[BufordUSABlue]

joke of a comment, Bernardo was outstanding in trying to get us into the game with sprinting back into our back four and looking to feed passes into areas to release our players into more advanced areas which we were struggling to do because of Rags tactics… worked his bollocks off as usual.

Incredible !!
You did watch the game right??
Try watching it back and you’ll see what I mean.
I love Bernie but his body language tells you that he isn’t enjoying life right now and IMO he wants away, for the umpteenth time of late it seems.

 

[Blueboy73]

Most of the ‘experts’ focusing on the non touch of rashford but few mentioning Edersons view and who would take the shot. Seems clear from stills that he was squaring up to rashford before splinter arrived

They have to focus on that as it suits their narrative, you don't have to touch the ball to be "interfering" or "active" though and Fishfingers was both.

 

[kinggoat64]

It’s fucking ridiculous that our players are scared of giving the ball away when trying to play Erling in, and that can only be on Pep.

Great post