Villa (H) Post Match Thread

[St.Pauli support]

We'd have been crying like babies had it happened to us.

Only those who can't accept the rules in place though.

 

[Dave Ewing's Back 'eader]

Don’t know why some are even discussing the first goal in a negative vein, it was a goal, plain and fuckin simple, we were the better team and deserved to win ... Happy fuckin days, about time we got these correct decisions..
The other good news is it’s fuckin with the heads of the haters big time... :-)!

Ah, but it was OUR goal, and there's the rub. Nothing sticks in the fuckin' craw of the RDAHMeedya than a City goal that looks to be taking the points.

 

[west didsblue]

I listened to that rant about the first goal and I couldn’t believe what I was hearing. The offside rule was explained to him and he still wouldn’t let it go. He made an even bigger dick of himself than he did in the pregame talking about Kev. He is a complete tool.

Yep he’s had a shocker today. If he had any insight he’d be embarrassed tomorrow.

 

[domalino]

It’s not Rodri’s fault at all.

But Mings should be fully entitled to turn towards his own goal without interference from an offside player.

The moment Rodri prevents Mings from doing so he is interfering with play.

How can you still be so wrong?

Mings never got interfered with by an offside player.

No one interferes with Mings as he chests the ball down. At that point, no one on the pitch is offside.

But Mings should be fully entitled to turn towards his own goal without interference from an offside player.

This sentence makes no sense whatsoever. If you turn towards goal, no one is offside. They can't be offside, because you can only be offside from a team mate's pass. As soon as you turn towards goal, it's not a pass from a team mate, so Rodri can't be offside.

 

[FantasyIreland]

I’d be kicking and screaming... at the defender who didn’t know the fucking rules mate.

Maybe that too,but it doesnt alter my point.

 

[daztrueblue91]

I haven't the time or inclination to compare the events.
But for the record when a professional takes part in a professional game it's his or her duty to learn the laws. No use bleating when it suits them.
I dont know if this law has changed recently or been in place for years there is really no excuse for the players.
For what it's worth I would prefer it if the concept of offside was applied only to receiving the ball or being involved in play.

I fully agree with the last point and I think the definition of being involved with play is the grey area.

If Rodri challenged Mings before he chested the ball, it would have been offside.

I seem to be in a minority here but I think running towards the ball from an offside position also constitutes interfering with play.

 

[Thaksinssoldier]

We'd have been crying like babies had it happened to us.

And we’d only have ourselves to blame.=

 

[The perfect fumble]

That **** grealish did two of our players tonight

Quite a few blues want to see Grealish in a City shirt, if the match day thread is anything to go by.

NO f**king way!

 

[AlexWilliamsGloves]

How strong is our Phil now ?

Sure he is an exceptional talent, one of best players, destined for greatness.

I have seen him out muscling some big powerful opposition players lately.

You think back to the young lad who was knocked off the Ball.

Them days are gone.

He is is going to be the backbone of the England team one day.

Couldn't believe it when Traore bounced of him!!

 

[BuryBlue1977]

Well at least that win put us top for a few hours

 

[Deleted member 77198]

It’s not Rodri’s fault at all.

But Mings should be fully entitled to turn towards his own goal without interference from an offside player.

The moment Rodri prevents Mings from doing so he is interfering with play.

Rodri didn’t interfere with play when he was in the offside position. He actually wasn’t anywhere near him:

Then as soon as Mings deliberately controls the ball (chested it) (where Rodri is still not interfering with play), he starts a new phase of play and the offside is cancelled.



And only then did Rodri win the ball off him.

If Rodri had challenged for the ball before Mings chested it, he would have been offside, but he didn’t.

 

[west didsblue]

At the end of the day we were the better team and deserved it. Villa gave us a good game but we were better and scored two goals that were well within the rules of the game.

 

[Pingu the Penguin]

Rodders’ stats were awesome tonight

 

[Heisenberg's Blue Sky]

Maybe if the dozy twonk wasn't busy chewing gum during a professional football match like a nightclub tart giving it the big I am he would have seen Rodri sneaking in. Fuck him. No one else to blame. Might be a daft law to some but its the law for now. Ergo, its a fuckin goal.

 

[give it to gordon]

How can it be controversial when its within the laws of the game ? Nothing controversial about it. It just shows BT employ numptys that dont understand the rules of football.

 

[SidJames]

Dean Smith after Rags cheat with a Pogba dive to score the winning goal recently v Villa.
A dubious penalty has lost us the game.

Today after we score a goal that’s deemed correct in accordance to the rule.
sent off, Terry confronts Moss in Tunnel and fuming in interview calling it farcical and the penalty rediculas.

Amazing how upset people get when it happens against us.

28 shots, he should consider himself lucky we have no strikers and how Moss let them esp Grealish get away from late fouls. Grealish should have picked up a few yellows alone. Needs to look in the mirror about his teams own snide tactics

Grealish is a sly dirty fucker,and the rest were constantly fouling.

Moss never once punished the shirt pulling they were doing consistently to slow down our attacking players.

 

[Dave Ewing's Back 'eader]

Then the law is bollocks,and yes this board would have been full of people going off their tits about it.

Kid yourself otherwise if you must.

Being in an offside position is not an infringement. If an opposition player last played the ball he renders every person on the other side onside. Doesn't matter where they are or what they were doing. Rodri would not be blown up for offside simply by being nearer the goal than the ball, and then Mings plays the golden touch which lays our 'goalden' egg!

 

[Dave Ewing's Back 'eader]

How can it be controversial when its within the laws of the game ? Nothing controversial about it. It just shows BT employ numptys that dont understand the rules of football.

It's controversial 'cos it was our goal that opened the door to three points.

 

[domalino]

Rodri didn’t interfere with play when he was in the offside position. He actually wasn’t anywhere near him.

Then as soon as Mings deliberately controls the ball (chested it) he starts a new phase of play and the offside is cancelled.

And only then did Rodri win the ball off him.

There is 1 basic rule to offside that people seem to have forgotten -

You can only be offside when receiving a teammate's pass in the opposition half.

As soon as that pass is stopped and the opposition has possession, you can't be offside.

How @FantasyIreland and @daztrueblue91 can follow football for decades and not realise you can never be offside when the opposition has the ball is absolutely beyond me.

 

[daztrueblue91]

Rodri didn’t interfere with play when he was in the offside position. He actually wasn’t anywhere near him.

Then as soon as Mings deliberately controls the ball (chested it) he starts a new phase of play and the offside is cancelled.

And only then did Rodri win the ball off him.

Rodri gained 20 odd yards on Mings before he touched the ball. He was in the perfect position to dispossess him due to the run he had made from an offside position.

My argument isn’t that Rodri was offside because the law states he clearly wasn’t, it’s that the law should change so Rodri should be offside.