If you win the league this season you have to say the refs help you lot to it.
Refs & VAR 2020/2021 Discussion
- Thread starter Annihilate Now!
- Start date
Running towards the player with the ball is an obvious action.
You see its the right decision. The Mexican lineswoman was criticised for getting the next one wrong. Again to the letter of the law its onside. To common sense its offside. Thats the point I'm trying to make. I'm not saying it's right, I'm saying its the correct decision because the rules are stupid. Did you think it was wrong when Spurs got a peno vs Liverpool in the same way?
Exactly and I agree completely. But its the law thats wrong, given those videos to the letter of the law Rodri is onside just like all those guys. Its wrong and stupid but its the rules.
Heres one for you all. It won't play embeded, jump to 5.37. Same thing happening in the Premier League (again John Moss)
to be fair the offside decision is one of the worst VAR decisions I have seen, i honestly cant see how anyone thinks it should be a legitimate goal, you can bring these stupid rules up but they ain't clear either,
And a dive to boot
Thankfully he had the good grace to miss it.
Harry Kane, England no.9, never dived ever, nor is he ever offside.See if I was a manager of a club and that goal got giving against me, I would take my team off the park, if they are giving goals like that then they should just scrap offside all together
Turns out Mings didn't know the rules. Completely on him...
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
But its the rules, if you walked off the park over that would you walk off over someone scoring directly from a throw in or some other stupid rule like the handball on earlier in the season? The rules need changing but the officials were correct except that one sensible Mexican lady who gave offside (and was wrong)
I always thought you became "active" when you're involving yourself in the play /moving towards the ball in an offside position... Was this never the case? Or has the rule changed?
I don’t get why you’d assume offside applies when the opposition is in possession of the ball. It literally makes no sense.
Dudes a pro footballer, he should know that.
aint the rule, hes offside when the ball is played, the ball is clearly intended for him, so flag should go up, simple.
sure KDB did an interview not long ago, saying he don't no what rules are now a days because they keep making different rules every summer
Thats not the rule.. hasn't been since VAR. Officials are told to keep their flags down and allow play to go on. I mean its everywhere. I swear 3/4 of this forum would argue red is green just to prove a point if they were blind.
The rules are the issue. That goal rightly stands. However it shouldn't as the rule is nonsense. You shouldn't be able to gain an advantage by standing Offside.
Had that happened to Stones or Dias would you be saying the same thing? Of course not.
The rule is an ass and needs changing back. Offside is Offside.
Its his job to learn them, he's a pro footballer. Same applies to Mings, Messi whoever... can't see many boxers going into a fight not knowing the rules of boxing, even the little ones.
100% agree, I've been saying that all night.
With regards City I always accept the rules are the rules. Anyone who saw my posts when Llorente handballed City out of the CL a couple of years and then when City got screwed vs the same opposition for the same hand ball a week or two after the rule changing with attest to. You can only play to them regardless of how stupid they are.
Offside in Serie A but not in Premier League
Onside, ref got it wrong. If the flag had stayed down or the ref hadn't whistled goal would have stood when reviewed.
No, that's not it. Linesmen are told to let play unfold if they're not 100% sure of the call, but they still have to make the call. If the linesman thought Rodri was initially offside, then Mings actions don't supersede that and he would have flagged the offside
Ah cheers. Surely then Rodri was offside on the first pass and none of the other actions with Mings should have counted?
Just checked as usual the PL interpretation is stupid and the flag does indeed stay down, nothing to do with tight calls and just "leave the flag down". which still begs the question why wasn't Rodri flagged after? Because the ball didn't reach him? Again thats a kinda stupid rule.
https://www.premierleague.com/news/1833470
just saw a replay. that's *obviously* offside. ball is lumped forward to an offsider player, which forces a defender to intervene, even before he controls the ball, he is tackled by the same offside player. no way is that two different phases of play. if the rules say otherwise i have no idea what offside is supposed to mean.
Last edited:
Not sure about that. His foot that's about to land gets taken away. It actually resembles what happens on a particular foot sweep in Judo (kouchi gari) with very little force applied if the timing is just right you go flying and it looks like you throw yourself legs splay out, you've just set up to land your weight so you have no control once it doesn't land normally. Couldn't find a perfect example but at about 1 min 15 in this video this leg sweep.
But I'm going off only getting a quick look at it, can't find online and somehow the premier league footage of the game doesn't show it at all which is strange.
Personally, I’d get rid of around 90% of offsides and only really use it for goal hanging.
My absolute pet hate is when a player is offside when the ball is passed but by the time he receives it he’s a good 5 metres on and it’s still “offside” according to the law. How on Earth has he gained an advantage in that situation? Why are we trying to make life easy for defenders and the game less fun?
This one wasn’t quite that but I’m still glad it was given. All Mings had to do was allow the ball to go over his head and Rodri would be flagged offside. By bringing it down he starts a new phase of play and Rodri is free to take possession from him. Really daft defending.
Offside - player challenges for the ball from an offside position and doesn’t “receive” the ball from the defender - he takes it off him.
There’s massive ambiguity in the wording of this rule and the recent interpretation of it seems to be plain wrong to me. It was obviously meant to cover the situation where a defender misplaces a pass to an offside attacker - hence the use of the word “receive” - not a situation where the offside player challenges for and wins the ball.
Still remember Evans own goal vs Newcastle. Cisse clearly offside and Evans trying to intercept the pass. (at 0:40 in video)
h ttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zIFuwHGtxG0
h ttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zIFuwHGtxG0
On the same day as well
You just know the rule is gonna be silently changed half way through this season and somebody else is going to be flagged. And then they will point to an amendment that was made.
What a mess. So as ever it comes down to interpretation of the law. It depends on what the referee decides Rodri is actually doing because if he is challenging an opponent for the ball then he should be offside, and I would like to see anyone argue that he isn't.
The receiving the ball from a deliberate act is another nice unclear rule what exactly constitutes a deliberate action? and also perhaps more importantly does he receive the ball from mings? Or does he take it off mings?
I think they fecked up here (again). Rodri IMO clearly comes from an offside posistion to challenge mings for the ball which means its offside, the receiving from a deliberate act should be used if for example mings went to pass the ball and Rodri came from offside position to intercept then he would be receiving the ball from a deliberate act and that would be fair game.
The receiving the ball from a deliberate act is another nice unclear rule what exactly constitutes a deliberate action? and also perhaps more importantly does he receive the ball from mings? Or does he take it off mings?
I think they fecked up here (again). Rodri IMO clearly comes from an offside posistion to challenge mings for the ball which means its offside, the receiving from a deliberate act should be used if for example mings went to pass the ball and Rodri came from offside position to intercept then he would be receiving the ball from a deliberate act and that would be fair game.
While I don't think the gould should have stood, I find it absolutely shocking that not only Mings says he doesn't know the rule, he goes on Twitter to brag about it. Footballers can be weird.
Footballers can be weird.He never had possession, he chests it and before the ball hits the ground Rodri is on him, mings immediate action is to tackle the offside player.
Rightly so. Theres no way that or this should be allowed to stand
It’s been pretty obvious for some time that the VAR refs must be independent from the officials on the pitch. The VAR refs are more concerned with protecting their mate and match official, than actually getting the correct decision.
They need to remove the screen from the pitch and give the VAR official the power to tell the match ref they are wrong. Why does the match referee need to have the final say? No football fans cares about that, we just want the right decisions made.
Yesterday was a prime example where Jon Moss and VAR have made a clear mistake and rather than admit it, the Premier League look at the rules and argue interpretation. Like Dean Smith said in his interview anyone that watches football knows that’s offside. It’s just common sense that the attacker has gained an advantage, therefore offside.
Where was the new phrase of play when the referee played on against Burnley? Cavani got fouled but the referee went back to the Shaw decision? A good 8 seconds had passed between each play. The Premier League can’t have it both ways.
They need to remove the screen from the pitch and give the VAR official the power to tell the match ref they are wrong. Why does the match referee need to have the final say? No football fans cares about that, we just want the right decisions made.
Yesterday was a prime example where Jon Moss and VAR have made a clear mistake and rather than admit it, the Premier League look at the rules and argue interpretation. Like Dean Smith said in his interview anyone that watches football knows that’s offside. It’s just common sense that the attacker has gained an advantage, therefore offside.
Where was the new phrase of play when the referee played on against Burnley? Cavani got fouled but the referee went back to the Shaw decision? A good 8 seconds had passed between each play. The Premier League can’t have it both ways.
Exactly his next touch is to try and shield the ball from the offside player.
You can tell by the lack of complaints there how the rule should look.
If he chests it, takes a couple of touches and a few seconds pass, then yes, rodri works back and shouldn't be offside, but this was instant. Theres no law that can convince me that goal should have been allowed to stand. It's just not right.
I think it’s a fair argument from mings. Everyone knew it was offside, mings knew it offside, the ref have used a kop out of “interpretation” to cover up a huge mistake.While I don't think the gould should have stood, I find it absolutely shocking that not only Mings says he doesn't know the rule, he goes on Twitter to brag about it.