citymad
Well-Known Member
Mr Whippy.....99 flake.....take a bow.
Well done, looking forward to the next one.
That part of the law does not relate to the Rodri incident because Rodri didn’t receive the ball from Mings.
Further down in the laws it states;
“a player moving from, or 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”
This is where it shows that Rodri was not offside because he didn’t impede Mings or challenge for the ball at the point of Mings controlling the ball here:
View attachment 8678
Because he was not aware of the rule.the more you see this the more i dont understand why any of Mings team mated didnt shout form him to leave it. Rodri couldnt have gone for the ball as it rolled to the keeper. Why is Mings even playing the ball ? He is an international its almost a school boy error yet the press/media are blaming City for playing to the rules lol
and whos fault is that ? a international player doesnt know the rules ! think i would be cutting his wages if he doesnt understand football ! ;)Because he was not aware of the rule.
Jon Moss was reffing last night, no way on Gods green earth Mason would have allowed that to stand he would have given a free kick 10 seconds earlier for Bernardo daring to head the ball the useless twatDon't I remember - in the '14-15 season? - the City-Villa match at Villa Park? Last few minutes at 0-0 and City put the ball into touch so that a Villa lad could receive treatment? Villa took the throw in to give it to Joe Hart but a villa lad nipped in, played it off one of our defenders and Villa got the corner? City were furious, even more so when all the big Villa lads piled in to try and get something from the corner to win the game? Villa argued that they hadn't broken any laws. Fair enough, they hadn't. But the media's (unanimous) line was that any side arguing about the spirit of the game didn't belong anywhere near the top of the table.
On last night's event specifically, I must say that few on here - and I include myself - have had a good word to say about Lee Mason but last night he appears to be just about the only person in any official capacity who understood the laws of the game. To be fair VAR checked the goal and agreed hat it should stand but anyway ruled that the law had been applied and this was not a matter of judgement. Congratulations, Mr Mason.
He was. He'd just never thought about it being applied this wayBecause he was not aware of the rule.
Legally.Depends, morally or legally?