Jump to content

Dogawful Officiating: PL to keep VAR next season (official)


Guest YANKEEBLEEDSMAGPIE

Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, gjohnson said:

His foot clearly beyond all other players, and therefore he is offside

 

Not quite, the decision on whether he's offside is also based on what he's doing. Not just where his foot is. 

 

 

Edited by AyeDubbleYoo

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just now, gjohnson said:

And that is the spirit rather than the letter

 

Nah, the spirit is what it intends to do, the letter is what the rulebook says. The rulebook will spell out when someone is offside, which will include what the player is doing (interfering in play etc). 

 

I guess I know what you mean, just being pedantic for some reason :lol:

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, AyeDubbleYoo said:

 

Nah, the spirit is what it intends to do, the letter is what the rulebook says. The rulebook will spell out when someone is offside, which will include what the player is doing (interfering in play etc). 

 

I guess I know what you mean, just being pedantic for some reason :lol:

Well in that case it's even more offside, as there's no way he's not interfering with play in that situation.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just now, mattypnufc said:

Also, did they even look at that tackle on Big Joe? Fucking awful. They genuinely need to sort the consistency out as Bruno got sent off for the exact same thing the other week. 

That was the most egregious. Bruno rightly saw red, Cas should have too 

Link to post
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, gjohnson said:

His foot clearly beyond all other players, and therefore he is offside

 

I thought it was offside as well, but not really surprised when they gave it. If it's marginal it's always going to go the way of the royalty clubs.

Link to post
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, gjohnson said:

Well in that case it's even more offside, as there's no way he's not interfering with play in that situation.

 

That's what I thought; why was he there if not interfering with play? But like I say, the coach I know reckons that from a free kick if he didn't score he wasn't offside, the end. I have no idea how it works any more :lol:

 

 

Edited by OpenC

Link to post
Share on other sites

When Shaw is about to take the free kick, how can they determine that wieghorst is NOT the intended target? surely any fucker that makes an attempt to run forward has to be flagged as offside? 

I bet there's 500 examples of goals chalked off in identical circumstances. New rules? fucking bollocks, it may not be next week, maybe not the week after but we know there will be an exact situation where Man Utd are the defending team where the goal is chalked off.  Corruption, plain and fuckin simple 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, gjohnson said:

By the letter it was offside....in the spirit he was going away from goal. Would have been disallowed if it was us that scored from it

 

 


If it was us it would have been disallowed on the pitch and it wouldn’t have been “clear and obvious” enough for it to be overturned.

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Mr Pups said:

yep, was in a very similar area of the pitch too? 

Aye, was fuming when it wasn't given. 

As for the offside, it should have been given if Weghorst attempts to play the ball or interferes with play. Haven't seen it again to say if he does that. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

If he's in the line for a free kick, it's hard to argue that he's not interfering with play, though. The only reason to be there is to be trying to get on the end of the cross and/or drawing a defender

 

 

Edited by OpenC

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...