montpelier
Full Member
- Joined
- Oct 24, 2011
- Messages
- 10,637
Clattenberg thought it was a goal
Clattenberg thought it was a goal
Nah, he's offside, he's in front of the goal, he has to move out of the way.Which it should have been
BingoHe had to move to get out of the way of the ball, meaning he is interfering with play whether he touches the ball or not.
Quite clearly offside and not sure why it even is a debate.
Did you see how the ref just went and made the right call, on purpose? It was intentional!Blatantly the correct decision.
Fixed that for ya.Clattenberg thought he could get some attention by chiming in on this nonsense
Rules are rules. Otherwise, you could have players doing silly things in front of the GK all the time and irritating him, even if the shots are unsaveable. That is not important.It’s the correct call, but no way the player affected De Gea, it was a deflection, the keeper was already heading in the other direction. Whether the player was there or not didn’t make any difference. But it was still the right call ultimately.
Look where the ball hits Maguire. DDG view is strictly obstructed of that. It’s a little silly. The ball hit Maguire on the bottom of his ankle - clearly it’s on the floor (where he is)I didn't see a thread about this on the forum so creating one. Please merge if another one exists.
So which side of the fence are you on? Do you think that it was an off-side and VAR made the right decision?
In my opinion, the rules aren't clear. He tried to "not interfere" with the play by moving his legs out of the way. As long as a player doesn't interfere or influence the play then he shouldn't be deemed off-side. Also, I don't buy the argument that he restricted DDG's view of the ball as he was on the ground and DDG would have had no chance whatsoever of saving that goal with or without him. So based on my understanding it should have been a goal.
However, something feels totally off when a player is offside within the opposition's penalty box and is moving out of the way to let the ball in. I don't think regular field rules should apply in the box. The rule in my opinion should be that any player inside a box should be deemed off-side irrespective of whether he is influencing play or not.
He doesn't lean right to look past Sigurdsson, he moves to the right in reaction to the shot. You can see in this image that De Gea hasn't even reacted to the initial shot yet. The ball is moving at high speed, not in slow motion. So if De Gea hasn't even reacted to the initial shot yet, how can you seriously expect him to react a second time and save the deflected shot? De Gea is not Quicksilver.Of course he could have.
This was DDG's starting position before he had to lean right to look past Sigurdsson.
It's not definite, but saving a near post shot from there is theoretically possible. The ref's decision is only decide what could happen without an offside interference, not what would happen.
Nailed it, it happened against Chelsea when two correctly disallowed goals were being talked about as the reason to change the rules.Obviously offside.
Only reason it’s considered controversial is because United benefitted from it.
Well you’re not very intelligent when it comes to the offside rule then. SimpleIt shouldn’t had been disallowed, if it was us I would be furious.
Check the other images in my earlier post.He doesn't lean right to look past Sigurdsson, he moves to the right in reaction to the shot. You can see in this image that De Gea hasn't even reacted to the initial shot yet. The ball is moving at high speed, not in slow motion. So if De Gea hasn't even reacted to the initial shot yet, how can you seriously expect him to react a second time and save the deflected shot? De Gea is not Quicksilver.
More to the point, why does Sigurdson make no attempt to move into an onside position? He's just sitting there like a tit in a trance.Of course he could have.
This was DDG's starting position before he had to lean right to look past Sigurdsson.
It's not definite, but saving a near post shot from there is theoretically possible. The ref's decision is only decide what could happen without an offside interference, not what would happen.
I wish he would have sat there like a tit in a trance. But he didn't.More to the point, why does Sigurdson make no attempt to move into an onside position? He's just sitting there like a tit in a trance.
I'd be having words if I was Ancelotti.
The thing is Sigurdsson is offside before the deflection even happens. Just by being in front of the keeper at that moment he is interfering with play. De Gea could have chosen to move forward for example but he has to be aware of an offside attacker on the floor in front of him. By definition, he has affected that phase of play.Personally I think we were lucky. De Gea reacted to the shot and started to move to his right. His view of the shot was not obstructed. It was then deflected off Maguire and went in the net. If the player sat on the floor didn't exist, there is nothing De Gea could have done to save the shot. If De Gea's view of a player shooting is obstructed by a player in an offside position, that should be disallowed for offside. I'm not a fan of VAR and think it should be scrapped completely. It doesn't make the game better because we still get wrong decisions and now we also get stupid decisions. My VAR opinion has nothing to do with what happened today and I don't change my mind just because we got the benefit of a stupid decision.
Because for almost the entire SAF era this club was accused of intimidating and or buying off refs, always getting dodgy decisions and generally being undeserving of our incredible success.not sure why there’s even a debate about it
Even for the initial shot though Sigurdsson is offside. As soon as the ball leaves DCL's foot and Sigurdsson is directly in front of our GK it should be offside. Line of sight or not its a distraction to a keeper. He could have taken a split second glance to make sure he didn't step on the player and that could delay his reaction to the initial shot etc. There are a million tiny distractions going on. Even in the peripheral vision, it would have an influence.He doesn't lean right to look past Sigurdsson, he moves to the right in reaction to the shot. You can see in this image that De Gea hasn't even reacted to the initial shot yet. The ball is moving at high speed, not in slow motion. So if De Gea hasn't even reacted to the initial shot yet, how can you seriously expect him to react a second time and save the deflected shot? De Gea is not Quicksilver.
I'm not even sure it matters whether De Gea could or couldn't have made the save. The call is based on whether there was an impact on De Gea, not whether he was capable of making a save without that impact. Crucially, "impact" in this context includes an impact on his ability to make a decision, not just his ability to act.Check the other images in my earlier post.
Again, you're making judgements about his ability rather than what's physically possible as per the rules.
We were very lucky that Sigurdson happened to be lying in the exact position to be offside from the deflection, because that deflection was making its way into the goal regardless imo.I think it was correct to chalk it off but we got a bit lucky that it went our way
Yep. It's the same principle as if he dummied the ball into the net. Even though he hasn't touched the ball or changed its path, the act of allowing the ball past him in a way the keeper might not anticipate makes him an active part of the goal.He was involved in the play due to his being in the sight line of DDG. His obstructing DDG’s view in an offside position means the goal was rightly disallowed. About as clear cut as it gets. He also moves out of the way to allow the ball to pass, another reason. If he was standing in the keeper’s sight line while offside & moves out of the way to let the ball pass, he should be adjudged correctly offside. No difference if the man is on the deck.
Correct. De Gea is known with his quick reflect which makes it very possible for him to save it without the interference of Siggy.Plus even if Sigurdson wasn't blocking De Gea's vision in the slightest, De Gea's decision making could still have been impacted by Siggy initially blocking the ball's path to goal before then taking action to allow the ball past him.
In the words of Gary "what is he doing on the pitch if he is not interfering with the play"I didn't see a thread about this on the forum so creating one. Please merge if another one exists.
So which side of the fence are you on? Do you think that it was an off-side and VAR made the right decision?
In my opinion, the rules aren't clear. He tried to "not interfere" with the play by moving his legs out of the way. As long as a player doesn't interfere or influence the play then he shouldn't be deemed off-side. Also, I don't buy the argument that he restricted DDG's view of the ball as he was on the ground and DDG would have had no chance whatsoever of saving that goal with or without him. So based on my understanding it should have been a goal.
However, something feels totally off when a player is offside within the opposition's penalty box and is moving out of the way to let the ball in. I don't think regular field rules should apply in the box. The rule in my opinion should be that any player inside a box should be deemed off-side irrespective of whether he is influencing play or not.
Let's do it. 8 men running back and forth right in front of the keeper on free kicks.If it's not offside or interfering then every team should just do the same, sleep or sit in front of opposition keeper.