Jump to content

Other games (2024/25)


simonsays

Recommended Posts

5 minutes ago, KingArthur said:

It certainly was not offside. Maybe a foul on Sa, but even that would have been ridiculously cheap foul to give.

 


He cannot be in an offside position before ball hits Stones' head. And when it does he is 5 feet away and dodging.

 

 

 

He obstructs the goalkeeper. That for me is impacting play.

 

Based on modern rules for offside, he is well out the way when the ball is headed and I can see why it was given, but for me, the modern rules are shite and it should just be if you're offside - you're offside.

 

He has impacted the goalkeeper and thus impacted play. So I could also see why Wolves will feel aggrieved.

 

The fact there's even discussion about it is mad as a ruling. It should be objective not subjective.

 

 

 

Edited by Heron

Link to post
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Heron said:

He obstructs the goalkeeper. That for me is impacting play.

 

Based on modern rules for offside, he is well out the way when the ball is headed and I can see why it was given, but for me, the modern rules are shite and it should just be if you're offside - you're offside.

 

He has impacted the goalkeeper and thus impacted play. So I could also see why Wolves will feel aggrieved.

 

The fact there's even discussion about it is mad as a ruling. It should be objective not subjective.

 

 

 

 

He does not obstruct the keeper when he the offside could happen. When Stones heads the ball, he is far away. 
If offside is given like that you wish for, then the City player giving the corner was in offside also.. 

And usually teams just put a defender in front of the keeper so that blocking doesn't happen. 

When the corner is taken, he is not offside, so only a foul on keeper could be given. Is that really a foul? Sa is not protesting at all...

 

They were checking if he was in line of sight of the keeper. That is why the goal was not given first.

Link to post
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Heron said:

He obstructs the goalkeeper. That for me is impacting play.

 

Based on modern rules for offside, he is well out the way when the ball is headed and I can see why it was given, but for me, the modern rules are shite and it should just be if you're offside - you're offside.

 

He has impacted the goalkeeper and thus impacted play. So I could also see why Wolves will feel aggrieved.

 

The fact there's even discussion about it is mad as a ruling. It should be objective not subjective.

 

They didn't seem aggrieved at the time tbf, I don't think a single one of them even approached the ref. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Keegans Export said:

They didn't seem aggrieved at the time tbf, I don't think a single one of them even approached the ref. 

I know but in a corner there's that much going on I can see why they might not at the time. I just see why O'Neil would be pissed off.

Link to post
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, KingArthur said:

He does not obstruct the keeper when he the offside could happen. When Stones heads the ball, he is far away. 
If offside is given like that you wish for, then the City player giving the corner was in offside also.. 

And usually teams just put a defender in front of the keeper so that blocking doesn't happen. 

When the corner is taken, he is not offside, so only a foul on keeper could be given. Is that really a foul? Sa is not protesting at all...

 

They were checking if he was in line of sight of the keeper. That is why the goal was not given first.

He obstructs him getting put his six yard box. So that is by definition obstruction.

 

Agree on the defending.

 

Historically that would have been given offside.

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Heron said:

He obstructs him getting put his six yard box. So that is by definition obstruction.

 

Agree on the defending.

 

Historically that would have been given offside.

If he stands still that is not a foul. He takes 1 step back so that could be given as a foul, but usually in games a lot worse blocks don't get looked twice.

Link to post
Share on other sites

These cheap ‘fouls’ that refs give to the defending team… It’s a pandemic this weekend if this game and ours are anything to go by. Jota went through 2-3 minutes ago. James dives after a delayed reaction and the ref gives the foul. Bullshit. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Robbo2 said:

Liverpool slinging themselves over left and right, were always going to get one of them

 

Salah should have been booked for diving few minutes ago when he went down in the box. 

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...