[ThaReaper01]

From the FA's website.

Okay..? He didn't throw a punch or kick out at him so that has no bearing on the attempted tackle. Doesn't even mention tackles. I don't understand.

 

[Im red2]

So did anyone else notice that BBC and BT both showed a line across the pitch for our disallowed goal, yet BT showed Mata offside by a toe, while BBC had him clearly onside.

BT for me now stands for Big Toe.

 

[Globule]

Okay..? He didn't throw a punch or kick out at him so that has no bearing on the attempted tackle. Doesn't even mention tackles. I don't understand.

Sorry, you're right. I didn't read that thoroughly enough and just assumed it was regarding tackles. This should have been the part I copied:

A tackle that endangers the safety of an opponent must be sanctioned as serious foul play. Any player who lunges at an opponent in challenging for the ball from the front, from the side or from behind using one or both legs, with excessive force and endangering the safety of an opponent is guilty of serious foul play.

 

[Mitser]

Loving a late winner! Feels like it's been a while and it has come at a perfect time.
Has been a tough 7 days since Ukraine, and with the top 5 all winning it makes this result all the sweeter.
Some eye catching individual performances, DDG, Jones, Ander, Zlatan and of course Pogba (MOTM).
Hopefully we have enough in the tank to win at WB, then I really fancy us to enjoy the break until Sunderland and flog them on Boxing Day.

 

[buckooo1978]

We did well to win the game as we missed quality from wide positions

the sooner we have Martial/Mhiki/Valencia/Shaw back in the fold the better

If we can beat West Brom I really fancy us to go on a decent run

 

[RaptorSlo]

Saying ref done everything to feck us is just BS.

He didn't send off Rojo for what was probably a red worthy challenge, and while they did cancel our regular goal, the first we scored was from an offside position.

So the ref was just full of mistakes, not really doing us more harm than to Palace.

 

[manc exile]

Saying ref done everything to feck us is just BS.

He didn't send off Rojo for what was probably a red worthy challenge, and while they did cancel our regular goal, the first we scored was from an offside position.

So the ref was just full of mistakes, not really doing us more harm than to Palace.

you cant post sane comments on here, "they" are all against us.

 

[ThaReaper01]

Sorry, you're right. I didn't read that thoroughly enough and just assumed it was regarding tackles. This should have been the part I copied:

A tackle that endangers the safety of an opponent must be sanctioned as serious foul play. Any player who lunges at an opponent in challenging for the ball from the front, from the side or from behind using one or both legs, with excessive force and endangering the safety of an opponent is guilty of serious foul play.

Yes it says that exact thing on FIFA's website but the examples show contact and I've never seen someone sent off for a failed tackle attempt. That's not the rule. Either the rule isn't specific enough for missed tackles or missed tackles aren't governed the same way. Seems like the latter, to me, since a sending off for a failed tackle is unprecedented.

We're going in circles here and I'm tired of talking about it. Agree to disagree.

 

[manc exile]

Yes it says that exact thing on FIFA's website but the examples show contact and I've never seen someone sent off for a failed tackle attempt. That's not the rule. Either the rule isn't specific enough for missed tackles or missed tackles aren't governed the same way. Seems like the latter, to me, since a sending off for a failed tackle is unprecedented.

We're going in circles here and I'm tired of talking about it. Agree to disagree.

do you watch united?
Vincent kompany was sent off against using us, he won the ball
, Made no contact with our player,was sent off

 

[Manny]

Linesman fecked up, but Howard Webb and BT Sport offered the opinion that the decision against Mata was correct. Rojo was jumping with a defender, but they drew the offside line from his boot (not his position projected onto the ground). Pathetic.

The BBC (MOTD) interpreted the scene differently, using a different camera angle. It shows that a really brilliant goal was denied credit by poor officiating. (To be completely nerdy about it, their line should be a bit tighter to Mata, as the defenders feet were also off the ground. It was close, but never offside. What a leap Rojo makes, by the way, perfect timing by Mata, too.

I'm starting to think that its completely pointless analysing these types of calls. It happened so fast that it was always 50/50 whether the linesman would give it and pundits should discuss it as such. Instead they draw flashy lines all over the screen and get fans all bent out of shape over it.

Personally, I think it should have been given just on the basis of giving the attacker the benefit of doubt on a difficult call. Whatever happened to that line of thinking?

 

[m1y2]

Saying ref done everything to feck us is just BS.

He didn't send off Rojo for what was probably a red worthy challenge, and while they did cancel our regular goal, the first we scored was from an offside position.

So the ref was just full of mistakes, not really doing us more harm than to Palace.

just give a red for everything ffs, it was a two footie but he wanted to win the ball and it wasnt that bad.. someone just doesnt like one of our players it seems and he would have won it back for us with the regular assist for mata goal

 

[Cathy Ferguson]

Not sure I get this. It would still feature Herrera, Carrick, Mata, Miki, Valencia; all currently playing very well. Arguably all playing better than Zlatan if you consider more than just the last handful of games.

Seems to me most of the team have been playing pretty well for quite a spell now, and the results are beginning to reflect that a bit better. We've got some worldies, but it's certainly not the case that they're carrying everyone else.

I am very impressed by the form of Valencia and Herrera, they are our most improved players are almost world class (always tricky to define though). Miki has started to fulfill his potential, but only during the last couple of games. Mata is having a decent but not outstanding season and Carrick has always been a classy player and there is no coincidence that our best form is occuring when he is playing.

With Rooney in decline, Rashford and Martial out of form and still learning their trade it is indeed hard to see where the goals would come from except for from Zlatan and with Pogba as main creator.

The key for the remainder of the season is for other players to start contributing with goals.

 

[RaptorSlo]

just give a red for everything ffs, it was a two footie but he wanted to win the ball and it wasnt that bad.. someone just doesnt like one of our players it seems and he would have won it back for us with the regular assist for mata goal

Don't know where you see me not liking Rojo in that comment.

 

[Still ill]

just give a red for everything ffs, it was a two footie but he wanted to win the ball and it wasnt that bad.. someone just doesnt like one of our players it seems and he would have won it back for us with the regular assist for mata goal

Oh behave. 100% a red. He was right, ref equally atrocious for both sides.

 

[m1y2]

Oh behave. 100% a red. He was right, ref equally atrocious for both sides.

could be red and that would be very harsh decision, 100% like you say is bullshit.. it wasn't very dangerous, ppl are obsessed with two footed tackles way too much, it was a good decision and I wouldn't like ref to send of a player in the opposing team for a similar one... saying all this it wasn't a very good tackle - yellow card as a result for me fair outcome

 

[RedDevil@84]

It was a potential red, unlike the Everton one which was a stonewall red. Anyways, the refs nowadays do not give reds unless there is significant contact. That is the way it is.
Remember the Pogba dive scenario. Though Pogba dived, the challenge was reckless enough. But you see only Pogba being punished because there was no contact.

 

[RedFish]

Feck Pardew. Just saying.

 

[carlosp]

The amount of press bias against Manchester United is laughable.

Sky running with two stories about United's players and their indiscretions and saying the ref was incorrect.

http://www.skysports.com/football/n...-rojo-deserved-red-card-says-dermot-gallagher
http://www.skysports.com/football/n...-fa-action-over-alleged-elbow-on-yohan-cabaye

Dermot Gallagher gives nice details and 3 verdicts on United players(only one I agree with is Rojo) but nothing regarding Mata's goal that is disallowed(70th) or the hand ball that wasn't given in the 68th minute or Pogba getting pushed off while going for the ball in the 86th minutes. Clear bias.

Then Peter Gilbert reports on Ibra and mentions Rojo, Pogba's offside and Mata's offside yet also doesn't mention the clear hand ball that should have been given or the push on Pogba.

 

[vodrake]

I've seen a lot of publications now after the fact trying to push that Pogba should have been sent off too for diving, but still few mentions of Bailly's kick to the knee, the disallowed goal or the missed penalty.

Football 365's Mediawatch has been pretty good at mentioning them though and pointing out how many articles are ignoring them.

 

[DomesticTadpole]

The amount of press bias against Manchester United is laughable.

Sky running with two stories about United's players and their indiscretions and saying the ref was incorrect.

http://www.skysports.com/football/n...-rojo-deserved-red-card-says-dermot-gallagher
http://www.skysports.com/football/n...-fa-action-over-alleged-elbow-on-yohan-cabaye

Dermot Gallagher gives nice details and 3 verdicts on United players(only one I agree with is Rojo) but nothing regarding Mata's goal that is disallowed(70th) or the hand ball that wasn't given in the 68th minute or Pogba getting pushed off while going for the ball in the 86th minutes. Clear bias.

Then Peter Gilbert reports on Ibra and mentions Rojo, Pogba's offside and Mata's offside yet also doesn't mention the clear hand ball that should have been given or the push on Pogba.

Wonder if all this is what's eating at Jose?


Mourinho not in a happy mood
We’ll have more on this later but a bee has been buzzing in his bonnet since the Palace game.

 

[Paul the Wolf]

Regarding the Mata "goal".
They were talking about introducing more video evidence for decisions, but Howard Webb still got it wrong after playing it back countless times in his BT truck.

 

[sunama]

Zaha didn't dive. Attackers have a right to avoid fouls. Defenders can still be called for a foul even if the attacker was not touched. Read the laws and the interpretations. And you can certainly get a red even if you miss the attacker. Should have been a red IMO.

Pogba did the same thing recently. He fell to the ground, to avoid being hit with a hard tackle. He got a yellow card for diving.
Explain this one, please.

 

[Adam-Utd]

I'm starting to think that its completely pointless analysing these types of calls. It happened so fast that it was always 50/50 whether the linesman would give it and pundits should discuss it as such. Instead they draw flashy lines all over the screen and get fans all bent out of shape over it.

Personally, I think it should have been given just on the basis of giving the attacker the benefit of doubt on a difficult call. Whatever happened to that line of thinking?

It should have to be clear daylight between the attack and defence IMO. The rule has always been "if in doubt give the advantage to the attacker" but that's not how it's adapted anymore. There is no referee in the world that could call Mata offside by his big toe. For them to even bring it up is just fishing for attention.

Mata was "in line" with the defender, and that's all that matters. 1 hand or a foot infront of the line doesn't count, it's not a clear advantage. Stupid BT.

 

[Ibi Dreams]

I've seen a lot of publications now after the fact trying to push that Pogba should have been sent off too for diving, but still few mentions of Bailly's kick to the knee, the disallowed goal or the missed penalty.

Football 365's Mediawatch has been pretty good at mentioning them though and pointing out how many articles are ignoring them.

The Pogba one looked like a dive at first but on a replay it actually looked like he did get a bit of a push. The referee still bottled it though, he just let play on when it probably should have been a free kick given one way or the other

 

[TheRedDevil'sAdvocate]

It should have to be clear daylight between the attack and defence IMO. The rule has always been "if in doubt give the advantage to the attacker" but that's not how it's adapted anymore. There is no referee in the world that could call Mata offside by his big toe. For them to even bring it up is just fishing for attention.

Mata was "in line" with the defender, and that's all that matters. 1 hand or a foot infront of the line doesn't count, it's not a clear advantage. Stupid BT.

Incorrect. If any part of the body with which the player can score a legitimate goal is in front of the offside line, it's an offside and the assistant must raise his flag. When the hand is in front of the offside line, then and only then the attacking player is considered to be onside.

The "if in doubt" statement is not a rule but a directive UEFA/FIFA have given to the assistants in recent years. If they are not 100% certain that the attacker is in an offside position, they should allow the play to continue. Judging by that directive, the assistant was dead certain that Mata was offside. The replay tells us he made the right call in the end.

The Pogba one looked like a dive at first but on a replay it actually looked like he did get a bit of a push. The referee still bottled it though, he just let play on when it probably should have been a free kick given one way or the other

Not true. Sometimes there is contact, the ref sees it but he believes that the player could have continued his attempt. In these cases it's neither a foul nor a card for simulation. Since there is contact, it's not considered as unsportsmanlike behavior. He's not trying to steal by fooling the ref, he just gives him a decision to make. Ronaldo used to do that a lot, even when he played for us. When asked, he replied that when he feels that the contact will not allow him the good angle for a shot/pass he believes he has gained in his attempt, he will go down (even if he can go on) because he feels that he loses his advantage.

 

[Adam-Utd]

Incorrect. If any part of the body with which the player can score a legitimate goal is in front of the offside line, it's an offside and the assistant must raise his flag. When the hand is in front of the offside line, then and only then the attacking player is considered to be onside.

The "if in doubt" statement is not a rule but a directive UEFA/FIFA have given to the assistants in recent years. If they are not 100% certain that the attacker is in an offside position, they should allow the play to continue. Judging by that directive, the assistant was dead certain that Mata was offside. The replay tells us he made the right call in the end.



Not true. Sometimes there is contact, the ref sees it but he believes that the player could have continued his attempt. In these cases it's neither a foul nor a card for simulation. Since there is contact, it's not considered as unsportsmanlike behavior. He's not trying to steal by fooling the ref, he just gives him a decision to make. Ronaldo used to do that a lot, even when he played for us. When asked, he replied that when he feels that the contact will not allow him the good angle for a shot/pass he believes he has gained in his attempt, he will go down (even if he can go on) because he feels that he loses his advantage.

Yes I know the rules, what I am saying is it shouldn't/can't be THAT close. A linesman in a split second can't tell with it being that tight.

 

[Manny]

It should have to be clear daylight between the attack and defence IMO. The rule has always been "if in doubt give the advantage to the attacker" but that's not how it's adapted anymore. There is no referee in the world that could call Mata offside by his big toe. For them to even bring it up is just fishing for attention.

Mata was "in line" with the defender, and that's all that matters. 1 hand or a foot infront of the line doesn't count, it's not a clear advantage. Stupid BT.

I agree on both counts. I was going to mention the daylight rule too, which I liked, but fans and pundits lose their shit because they don't understand it.

 

[TheRedDevil'sAdvocate]

Yes I know the rules, what I am saying is it shouldn't/can't be THAT close. A linesman in a split second can't tell with it being that tight.

The officials are trained in order to be able to make these tough calls. I'm talking about serious training that helps them pay very close attention to detail, the kind of detail you and i will need several replays to spot. Normally, Mata's offside should be much easier to call than Pogba's where there are so many bodies in the way and the assistant can't see when Zlatan makes contact with the ball (judges by the movement of his body).

We need better officials, there's nothing wrong with the offside rule per se. Video technology may help things even more in those cases.

 

[Manny]

The officials are trained in order to be able to make these tough calls. I'm talking about serious training that helps them pay very close attention to detail, the kind of detail you and i will need several replays to spot. Normally, Mata's offside should be much easier to call than Pogba's where there are so many bodies in the way and the assistant can't see when Zlatan makes contact with the ball (judges by the movement of his body).

We need better officials, there's nothing wrong with the offside rule per se. Video technology may help things even more in those cases.

There is no way the linesman would be able to tell that Mata's foot was two inches offside the moment the ball was played of Rojo's head.

 

[Adam-Utd]

The officials are trained in order to be able to make these tough calls. I'm talking about serious training that helps them pay very close attention to detail, the kind of detail you and i will need several replays to spot. Normally, Mata's offside should be much easier to call than Pogba's where there are so many bodies in the way and the assistant can't see when Zlatan makes contact with the ball (judges by the movement of his body).

We need better officials, there's nothing wrong with the offside rule per se. Video technology may help things even more in those cases.

Mate they aren't fecking Cyborgs! more simple decisions than Mata's offside have been messed up before. The linesman made a judgement call in a split second and fecked it up.

A video referee would have made that decision and called him onside. If anybody is telling me they would have called Mata offside because his toe was about 2 inches over then it's beyond ridiculous. That is 0 advantage.

 

[TheRedDevil'sAdvocate]

There is no way the linesman would be able to tell that Mata's foot was two inches offside the moment the ball was played of Rojo's head.

They are trained to deal with this type of situation. Not all qualify for the job, you need good peripheral vision the the ability to spot two different color patterns with ease to begin with. After that, their training is about learning to make the right call under the hardest of circumstances.

Mate they aren't fecking Cyborgs! more simple decisions than Mata's offside have been messed up before. The linesman made a judgement call in a split second and fecked it up.

A video referee would have made that decision and called him onside. If anybody is telling me they would have called Mata offside because his toe was about 2 inches over then it's beyond ridiculous. That is 0 advantage.

Mistakes will be made, it's only human.

You said you understand the offside rule in your previous post but it doesn't look like you do. The assistant didn't feck up, he made the right call. There's no mention of advantage in the rule. The rule states that if any part of the body with which the attacker can score a goal is in front of the line, it's an offside. Last time i checked a goal scored with the big toe is legitimate. The video line technology would only confirm that the assistant made the right call.

In Pogba's goal the assistant played the "advantage" you keep mentioning. He wasn't sure when exactly Zlatan made contact (not in his field of view) and therefore he wasn't 100% sure that Pogba was offside. So he allowed the play to continue according to the directive he has. The ref fecked up because he didn't spot the handball.

The offside rule is fine, it's specified and it leaves nothing for interpretation like the change you and Manny want to see. Too many rules in football are open to interpretation from the officials and we don't need more.

 

[ravelston]

Yes it says that exact thing on FIFA's website but the examples show contact and I've never seen someone sent off for a failed tackle attempt. That's not the rule. Either the rule isn't specific enough for missed tackles or missed tackles aren't governed the same way. Seems like the latter, to me, since a sending off for a failed tackle is unprecedented.

We're going in circles here and I'm tired of talking about it. Agree to disagree.

Young Liverpool full back on loan at Fulham - a good few years ago now - I think his name was Kelly. Went in two-footed at about knee level with both feet - missed the player totally but got a straight red for his efforts.

 

[ravelston]

Linesman fecked up, but Howard Webb and BT Sport offered the opinion that the decision against Mata was correct. Rojo was jumping with a defender, but they drew the offside line from his boot (not his position projected onto the ground). Pathetic.

The BBC (MOTD) interpreted the scene differently, using a different camera angle. It shows that a really brilliant goal was denied credit by poor officiating. (To be completely nerdy about it, their line should be a bit tighter to Mata, as the defenders feet were also off the ground. It was close, but never offside. What a leap Rojo makes, by the way, perfect timing by Mata, too.

I'm starting to think that its completely pointless analysing these types of calls. It happened so fast that it was always 50/50 whether the linesman would give it and pundits should discuss it as such. Instead they draw flashy lines all over the screen and get fans all bent out of shape over it.

Personally, I think it should have been given just on the basis of giving the attacker the benefit of doubt on a difficult call. Whatever happened to that line of thinking?

The problem with using a frame from the video as a basis for drawing lines and making a judgement is that the results you get depend on the frame selected. In the first frame above, Rojo's head is much lower than in the second frame, so it's a frame from later in the event. (You can also see a considerable change in Mata's leg positions in the two frames.) It's also the case that we can never know exactly when in the sequence the ball comes off Rojo's head. Analysing it after the event we have incomplete information - in fact, the only person who gets to make a judgement with full information is the linesman.

[I still think he got it wrong.]

 

[Grande]

Pogba did the same thing recently. He fell to the ground, to avoid being hit with a hard tackle. He got a yellow card for diving.
Explain this one, please.

That's easily explained: The ref made a mistake.

 

[Grande]

The assistant didn't feck up, he made the right call. There's no mention of advantage in the rule. The rule states that if any part of the body with which the attacker can score a goal is in front of the line, it's an offside. Last time i checked a goal scored with the big toe is legitimate. The video line technology would only confirm that the assistant made the right call.

In Pogba's goal the assistant played the "advantage" you keep mentioning. He wasn't sure when exactly Zlatan made contact (not in his field of view) and therefore he wasn't 100% sure that Pogba was offside. So he allowed the play to continue according to the directive he has. The ref fecked up because he didn't spot the handball.

The offside rule is fine, it's specified and it leaves nothing for interpretation like the change you and Manny want to see. Too many rules in football are open to interpretation from the officials and we don't need more.

Now it seems that the video evidence reexamined shows Mata was onside, toe-and-all. Apart from that, I think you are right as the rules go regarding off side. Both teams plot their strategy and make their calls on the back of the off side rule, and should know what to relate to in a very simple way.

If you're a defender, you must know that if you keep too small a margin setting the line, you'll get more goals against you due to the inaccuracy of human perception.

For pundits to make a fuss about one yard margin offside calls however shows poor understanding of the game.

 

[TheRedDevil'sAdvocate]

Now it seems that the video evidence reexamined shows Mata was onside, toe-and-all. Apart from that, I think you are right as the rules go regarding off side. Both teams plot their strategy and make their calls on the back of the off side rule, and should know what to relate to in a very simple way.

If you're a defender, you must know that if you keep too small a margin setting the line, you'll get more goals against you due to the inaccuracy of human perception.

For pundits to make a fuss about one yard margin offside calls however shows poor understanding of the game.

My initial response was on a comment that, if only a part of the body is in front of the offside line, there's no offside because the attacking player gains no advantage which is simply not true. My second comment (the one you quoted) was about changing one of the most specific rules of the game (not without flaws) and give the officials even more power than they already have. I'd rather live with these very close calls and have the video technology to help than leave one more rule open to interpretation.

I fully agree with the rest of what you wrote about the defensive tactics and the role of the pundits.