United Thread - 2023/24

Status
Not open for further replies.
Paladin said:
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.
Click to expand...
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.
 
cheekybids said:
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.
Click to expand...
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).
 
Paladin said:
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.
Click to expand...
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.
 
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 :-)
 
Colin Bells Boots said:
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.
Click to expand...
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.
 
cheekybids said:
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.
Click to expand...
I beleive this is what is confusing people

Screenshot_20230827_105303_X.jpg

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
 
halfcenturyup said:

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.
Click to expand...
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.
2af2f921a4c5d92ae07840e44f2ccc6f.jpg
 
urban genie said:
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
Click to expand...
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?
 
halfcenturyup said:
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.
Click to expand...
Fine. I need to read up on phase of play. Can you find one place where this is explained in the LOTG please? I've looked, but can't find anything.
 
the-ecstacy-of-eight said:
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.
Click to expand...
Apart from the rat river for the free kick.
the-ecstacy-of-eight said:
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.
Click to expand...
Apart from the fact the rat dived for the free kick
 
deano ou812 said:
It’s Clear and organised what’s going on,would forest have got that pen or would the rags have had a player sent off like the forest player..
Would they have fuck ..
Click to expand...
the pen ill give you, even tho city doesnt get that penalty 9 times out of 10 i can see why theyve got away with giving it, but that as a straight red is a joke, he wasnt getting to that ball in a month of sundays whether he was brought down so theres no way thats denial of a goalscoring opportunity
 
mancboy said:
the pen ill give you, even tho city doesnt get that penalty 9 times out of 10 i can see why theyve got away with giving it, but that as a straight red is a joke, he wasnt getting to that ball in a month of sundays whether he was brought down so theres no way thats denial of a goalscoring opportunity
Click to expand...

There was another defender behind him who could have moved across. Didn’t look like he was the last man, another week of odd decisions at the swamp from the refs.
 
urban genie said:
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
Click to expand...
tbh that out of context screenshot is the sort of crap I see thrown at City. Sorry, dont mean to rain on your parade but casemiro was on brought down by a forest defender and is getting up there, he wasnt interfering with play, he was on the floor, the ball was clearly crossed over him to rashford, the keeper could see it all the way.

Are you really saying you would want City to not get that? Thats unfair? Because I would be livid if that was cancelled.
 
feedmpenzaandhewillscore said:
There was another defender behind him who could have moved across. Didn’t look like he was the last man, another week of odd decisions at the swamp from the refs.
Click to expand...
that 2, that defender could have got across and the ball was running through to the keeper, there is no way you can justify it as denial of a goalscoring opprotunity
 
mancboy said:
that 2, that defender could have got across and the ball was running through to the keeper, there is no way you can justify it as denial of a goalscoring opprotunity
Click to expand...

The women’s World Cup was an eye opener with the refs mic’d up. Could you imagine a Premier League ref trying to explain that sending off with out keeping a straight face?
 
Alan Harper's Tash said:
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?
Click to expand...
I could trawl google all day to find clips. but I not wasting my time, but I could say 2022 scousers v chelase league cup semi, matip ruled out as one that comes to mind or the idiocy of our game at the swamp where intefering with play was dismissed by atwell

however it is easy to post the rules

Standing in, an offside position is in the way of an opponent and interferes with the movement of the opponent towards the ball this is an offside offence if it impacts on the ability of the opponent to play or challenge for the ball

Casemeros postion (offside) when rashford plays the ball in is offside as normal and under the rules contunies to be so when fernandes recieves the ball a his original position interferes with the goalies positioning for who he covers (as he has to judge to go to cover a cross or a shot bottom right) as fernandes crosses casemero is onside, bit depending where you decide the passage of play starts then he can be given either on or off.

I still say 80% of the time the official would say the play starts with rashfords ball in and so under the rules he is offside, if the game and VAR officials decide it is from fernades cross so he is on, and whether some disagree or not that is the fact.

Like the ref who made the call on his opinion, saying he was on or off is open to where you think the move started so neither is right or wrong because the rules are batshit in how they can be openly interpreted

There were bigger more obvious officiating errors than this in the game that should be looked at though
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Unread Posts

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top