United Thread - 2023/24

[halfcenturyup]

That's not good enough I'm afraid. I read the LOTG, interpret this as offside under the laws, and I need something to explain to me why it wasn't offside. Maybe Gallagher's or Dean will shed light on the matter at some point.

Is your problem one of phase of play? Because that only comes into play :) when an offside offence is committed. Casemiro didn't commit an offside offence even though he was in an offside position when Rashford played the ball. He wasn't offside at all when the ball was played to him. No offside offence = no problem with phase of play.

 

[Grassland Blue]

But we’ve never been given a penalty like that at old Trafford. As has been mentioned on another thread we’ve had 3 pens in 50 years against the Rags.

1 in league cup semi at OT (2010)
1 in League at OT (91)
1 in league at Etihad (06)

They had 2 last season alone so why is there such a disparity? We are talking decisions which are easily not given & yet they get them. We have introduced “subjective” when we discuss them but it’s bias.

Bias : inclination or prejudice for or against one person or group.

Subjective : based on or influenced by personal feelings, tastes, or opinions.

Their most recent pen against us was in the FA Cup final at Etihad south.
That was a bit of a soft one iirc
and it gave them a psychological boost towards their penalty shoot out dream.
(City still did the business, but that isn't the point).

 

[the-ecstacy-of-eight]

No, I'm still waiting for someone to show me under the LOTG, why Casemiro wasn't penalised for offside. Or for anyone to show me anything official that helps to explain different phases of play. Was everything from the initial free kick to the goal being scored one single phase of play? I think it was.

The first line in the FA handbook reads "It is not an offence to be in an offside position."

It's as simple as that really.

Yes, he's stood offside when the pass is played to the Portuguese rat, but that's not an offence.
Him being there doesn't impact anybody's ability to play the ball, he doesn't interfere with any opponent, he doesn't move towards the ball or try to play it either. He's committing no offence by being there.

When the ball is played to him, he's onside.

There really is no issue with their second goal. It's a fair goal.

 

[havefaith]

Cu*ts the lot of them.

Bear in mind today the rag hordes will have to sit and watch (they,ll deny it of course but we know their watching) how the beautiful game should be played as the blues hopefully gain maximum points.

What must really hurt is the fact they've outspent us, yet are so far behind it's hard to comprehend. When they were in their pomp we didn't,t have a pot to piss in and looking back dare I say were a little bit shit.

The transformation in both teams is something no one would have believed possible 15 years ago (khaldoon aside that is) yet here we are start of a new season on the march again.

Up the blues :-)

 

[mancboy]

Tbf after years of De Gea simply hoofing it anywhere up the pitch, any goalkeeper who tries to play it out from the back is bloody revolutionary for these footballing retards.

as i have said earlier when you're used to burgers even a crap steak is the best steak you've ever had, city have been that good that it has become normalised and unappreciated, look at it this way if city win this aft and its only by one goal it will be reported as city scraping a victory and reported as a moral victory to sheffield united, how was utds victory yest reported? united come back from two goals down to beat forest was how, now factually thats true but i guarantee you if that exact chain of events happens in a city match it would be reported as contentious penalty helps man city see off ten man notts forest.

 

[urban genie]

But if you don’t touch the ball or in the line of sight you’re considered to be not interfering. No idea where it says that in LOTG.

I can live with that one, running 40 yards whilst chasing the ball shielding it from a defender is where I have a problem.

I beleive this is what is confusing people



He is clearly in an offside postion here and at an advantage if the ball is played back into him. as he is yards ahead of any defender and the goalie would have to chose to cover him or fernandes running in postionally.

You will see, I would say 80% of the time a flag and the ref do the arm wave to say he ran onside from an offside position.

It is all down to the interpretation of the officials when the passage of play began, if it is when rashford puts it in as per the still above he is off, if it is from when fernandes crosses it is onside, the ref and linesman (and VAR) decided the first ball in wasn,'t relevent, but we have seen plenty given off like this and plenty given on more so at the swamp

 

[Paladin]

Had a quick read of Law 11 just to make sure:

Casemiro was in an offside position when Rashford played the ball but he wasn't committing a defined offside offence. When the ball was actually played to him he wasn't in an offside position.

Stupid to me, as this was exactly what offside was brought in to prevent, but the correct decision under 11, imo.

Thanks. I think the fact that he got back onside might have something to do with it. But in what circumstances could offside possibly be given, under this description below? I think the Casemiro goal fits this ideally, and should be offside.

I'm not too fussed about this decision though, so long as this is applied consistently throughout the season. My main point was that this is a legitimate question, asked by quite a few Blues, who were subsequently labelled "loons", but no explanation was offered as to why it was onside.

 

[Paladin]

That’s fair enough. It doesn’t matter as you aren’t a referee. You’re not likely to get any explanation any time soon as law 11 states how a player is offside.

No part of it applies to Casemiro’s position yesterday.

I am a qualified Class 1 referee.

 

[Alan Harper's Tash]

I am a qualified Class 1 referee.

Did you qualify before the offside law was changed?

 

[Alan Harper's Tash]

I beleive this is what is confusing people

View attachment 91494

He is clearly in an offside postion here and at an advantage if the ball is played back into him. as he is yards ahead of any defender and the goalie would have to chose to cover him or fernandes running in postionally.

You will see, I would say 80% of the time a flag and the ref do the arm wave to say he ran onside from an offside position.

It is all down to the interpretation of the officials when the passage of play began, if it is when rashford puts it in as per the still above he is off, if it is from when fernandes crosses it is onside, the ref and linesman (and VAR) decided the first ball in wasn,'t relevent, but we have seen plenty given off like this and plenty given on more so at the swamp

I’d debate your 80% figure and suggest it’s closer to 1%.

When was the last time that anyone in a position similar to Casemiro there was given offside and the goal ruled out?