https://www.skysports.com/football/...on-should-have-seen-red-says-dermot-gallagherHave you got a link….I’ve been looking but can only find quotes on Liverpool game.
The explanations Gallagher gives for the Everton penalty and the De Gea one are both absolutely nuts.
That is close to the most stupid thing I have ever heard any football pundit say. How can Lindelof be in his eyeline when he can’t actually see Lindelof BECAUSE NKETIAH IS STANDING IN THE FECKING WAY!!The explanations Gallagher gives for the Everton penalty and the De Gea one are both absolutely nuts.
The first one is basically “the referee thought about it really hard, so VAR shouldn’t intervene” and the second he just makes up rules - since when does distance away matter if a player is in the eyeline and what does it matter if he also had to look around Lindelof? The explanation for Cedric’s handball also sounds suspect but I haven’t actually seen that one to properly comment.
Straightforward decision, not even up for debate. It's a simple call as per the laws of the game - "If a defender starts holding an attacker outside the penalty area and continues holding inside the penalty area, the referee must award a penalty kick."Spot on. As always.
What did you make of the other two controversial incidents?
Nketiah obstructing DDG’s view from offside position
Tavares wrestling Elanga to the ground (again!) in the second half.
TL;DR: Many incorrect calls this weekend but they are all correct with the PL’s interpretation of VAR where the right decisions are secondary to protection of the boys in black.
@Anustart89Straightforward decision, not even up for debate. It's a simple call as per the laws of the game - "If a defender starts holding an attacker outside the penalty area and continues holding inside the penalty area, the referee must award a penalty kick."
Agree with you on the Nketiah offside. In fairness it's more open to interpretation compared to a standard black-and-white offside call as it hinges on the definition of interference. The rule tries to strike a balance between not disallowing great goals due to overly anal officiating, while punishing any obvious advantage from being offside. So I'd chalk that one off on the basis that De Gea had to move the wrong way to get a view past a clearly offside player, and stood a good chance of stopping it with a clear view (strike wasn't really in the corner).
Trying to bundle the Nketiah offside in with other decisions is stupid because it ignores the specific footage they reviewed here. Which clearly shows De Gea peering around Nketiah’s shoulder to see the ball, taking a step to his right, then being blindsided by a shot to his left that was a yard inside his post and easily saved by a top keeper with a clear view of the ball. Completely different to, say, an offside player briefly passing between a keeper and an unsaveable shot into the top corner.
Exactly, as good a strike as it was, I was amazed at De Gea, the best shot stopper I have ever seen, being beaten from that distance. Until I saw the replays of him peering around the offside player. But of course, the corrupt officiating in the PL once again chose to make a shocking decision against United.Trying to bundle the Nketiah offside in with other decisions is stupid because it ignores the specific footage they reviewed here. Which clearly shows De Gea peering around Nketiah’s shoulder to see the ball, taking a step to his right, then being blindsided by a shot to his left that was a yard inside his post and easily saved by a top keeper with a clear view of the ball. Completely different to, say, an offside player briefly passing between a keeper and an unsaveable shot into the top corner.
It’s so bloody obvious. With no obstruction between De Gea and Xhaka he saves that shot every single time.
Thanks. Ridiculous takes but we shouldn’t be surprised
Honest question. Can you remember another time when this kind of decision was given (goal ruled out for offside player obstructing the keeper's line of vision) with the offside player beyond the penalty spot? I'm struggling to think of another example.Trying to bundle the Nketiah offside in with other decisions is stupid because it ignores the specific footage they reviewed here. Which clearly shows De Gea peering around Nketiah’s shoulder to see the ball, taking a step to his right, then being blindsided by a shot to his left that was a yard inside his post and easily saved by a top keeper with a clear view of the ball. Completely different to, say, an offside player briefly passing between a keeper and an unsaveable shot into the top corner.
It’s so bloody obvious. With no obstruction between De Gea and Xhaka he saves that shot every single time.
I’m not interested in if another goal has been disallowed or a defender who isn’t offside and Whois crouching down is also there….if a goalkeeper has to crane his neck to get sight of a ball because offside player is in the line of vision then the attacking team has gained an unfair advantage. End of. It’s pure common sense. To not apply common sense is ridiculous. Nothing is black and white.Honest question. Can you remember another time when this kind of decision was given (goal ruled out for offside player obstructing the keeper's line of vision) with the offside player beyond the penalty spot? I'm struggling to think of another example.
De facto, the unwritten practice seems to be that if you're far enough away you can't really obstruct the line of vision that badly, or the keeper can be reasonably expected to adjust his position slightly to see around you. Or, as was the case here, you're not the only one in the way (Lindelof also seemed to be obstructing the view).
See above. The lack of a precedent isn’t justification for not implementing the laws of the game. It was an absolutely nailed on, 100% obvious example of a goalkeeper failing to save a shot because of an offside attacker obstructing his view. It literally could not have been more obvious if you’d staged the footage for a refeee training session. The idea that it should be ignored because it’s something that doesn’t often happen is, obviously, ridiculous.Honest question. Can you remember another time when this kind of decision was given (goal ruled out for offside player obstructing the keeper's line of vision) with the offside player beyond the penalty spot? I'm struggling to think of another example.
De facto, the unwritten practice seems to be that if you're far enough away you can't really obstruct the line of vision that badly, or the keeper can be reasonably expected to adjust his position slightly to see around you. Or, as was the case here, you're not the only one in the way (Lindelof also seemed to be obstructing the view).
I think when a free kick is taken from a similar distance and a player is standing in a offside position in a relatively similar postion to the penalty and clearly obstructing the goalkeepers view, it is automatically not given. I cannot see a difference it does not matter if a defending player is infront of that player.See above. The lack of a precedent isn’t justification for not implementing the laws of the game. It was an absolutely nailed on, 100% obvious example of a goalkeeper failing to save a shot because of an offside attacker obstructing his view. It literally could not have been more obvious if you’d staged the footage for a refeee training session. The idea that it should be ignored because it’s something that doesn’t often happen is, obviously, ridiculous.
I think when a free kick is taken from a similar distance and a player is standing in a offside position in a relatively similar postion to the penalty area and clearly obstructing the goalkeepers view, it is automatically not given. I cannot see a difference it does not matter if a defending player is infront of that player.
Well, we knew that all along, didn’t we?@Anustart89
See above. No we weren’t going mad. The gooners trying to tell us that where the infringement starts is where the foul takes place are the mad ones.
I think it happens regularly and is never called. The broader situation - a ball gets half cleared, defense pushes up to the edge of the box while a forward lags a bit, and somebody has a strike from distance - happens all the time. Some small portion of those times the forward must end up partially screening the keeper.See above. The lack of a precedent isn’t justification for not implementing the laws of the game. It was an absolutely nailed on, 100% obvious example of a goalkeeper failing to save a shot because of an offside attacker obstructing his view. It literally could not have been more obvious if you’d staged the footage for a refeee training session. The idea that it should be ignored because it’s something that doesn’t often happen is, obviously, ridiculous.
Didn’t Liverpool have a situation similar to for them last year ? When the view wasn’t even blocked. You can literally see DDG have to look around the player. Unfortunately he picked the wrong side to look…..yeah that’s fair.I think it happens regularly and is never called. The broader situation - a ball gets half cleared, defense pushes up to the edge of the box while a forward lags a bit, and somebody has a strike from distance - happens all the time. Some small portion of those times the forward must end up partially screening the keeper.
Football is a game with formal rules and de facto rule applications in all sorts of situations (ie, fouling in the box ahead of s corner). If you didn’t get a call no other team has ever gotten by the de facto rule application, it’s hardly a travesty.
It’s hardly as if the multiple decisions that you claim to be precedents involve the below being the keeper’s body position as the shot is struck. Considering de Gea’s body position, how can you claim that his ability to react to the shot wasn’t impacted by the offside player?I think it happens regularly and is never called. The broader situation - a ball gets half cleared, defense pushes up to the edge of the box while a forward lags a bit, and somebody has a strike from distance - happens all the time. Some small portion of those times the forward must end up partially screening the keeper.
Football is a game with formal rules and de facto rule applications in all sorts of situations (ie, fouling in the box ahead of s corner). If you didn’t get a call no other team has ever gotten by the de facto rule application, it’s hardly a travesty.
Madness that's not given as offside ffs. Shocking shocking decisionIt’s hardly as if the multiple decisions that you claim to be precedents involve the below being the keeper’s body position as the shot is struck. Considering de Gea’s body position, how can you claim that his ability to react to the shot wasn’t impacted by the offside player?
The situations you refer to might involve the keeper acting and reacting as if no player was even close (but we don’t know that because you can’t even give us any examples), yet here you can clearly see that de Gea has to put the weight on his right leg to see around N’ketiah, whereas he would need to have his weight on his left foot to push his body to the side that the shot came. To claim that he wasn’t clearly interfered with when his reaction to the shot was a) delayed due to seeing the ball late, and b) impacted with because he has to change his body position in order to be able to see the ball as a consequence of the offside players position when you see the picture below is just dishonest and shows that you don’t have an honest intention in discussing the actual situation and that you’re more interested in other situations that you can’t specify that may or may not be similar at all.
We've had terrible decisions go against us whilst the likes of scousers get everything their way this weekend. Rather than outright corruption I think there's something in the "United are shit" - don't get calls, "Liverpool are great" - get calls.Madness that's not given as offside ffs. Shocking shocking decision
It’s also easier as a ref because media glosses over calls like this against us whereas the referee would catch much more heat if he were to make those calls against Liverpool from pundits and journalists and I genuinely believe that.We've had terrible decisions go against us whilst the likes of scousers get everything their way this weekend. Rather than outright corruption I think there's something in the "United are shit" - don't get calls, "Liverpool are great" - get calls.
Klopp is the first to raise a greivance, he's got that fear factor like Fergie had. To not review that Gordon penalty shout was utterly criminal - I've also noticed refs trying to hurry the game up, assume so they dont have to revisit incidents - and also quickly administering yellows for what could easily be reds.It’s also easier as a ref because media glosses over calls like this against us whereas the referee would catch much more heat if he were to make those calls against Liverpool from pundits and journalists and I genuinely believe that.
Mike Dean didn't lift a finger while a 10 man brawl was erupting a feet from him. Can't wait to see what he decides to see or not see on VAR dutyHas to be at its worst ever right?
And im talking about the referees. Then having the same ones in charge of Var is horrible.
Another case with Angelino's volley in the Europa semi on Thursday night. The offside Leipzig striker runs across the path of the keeper and has to take evasive action to get out of the way of the ball. That said, compared to De Gea, it's not as clear cut whether it was obstructing McGregor's view.Honest question. Can you remember another time when this kind of decision was given (goal ruled out for offside player obstructing the keeper's line of vision) with the offside player beyond the penalty spot? I'm struggling to think of another example.
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
Think it looked that way at first, because the line for the ball is also level with the defender closest to ronaldo.Am I imagining it or did they draw the offside line from the defender when they should have drawn it from the ball for Ronaldo’s disallowed goal?
He didn’t look ahead of the ball in any replay I’ve seen.
You could easily swap those lines around. Stupid decision
I'm sick to death of saying this. It shouldnt matter where anyone's head or chest or shoulder is. It should be foot to foot.Such a shit decision. Ronaldo puts his foot down level with the ball. His stance is as upright as possible and they draw the line a full balls width ahead of his foot. Feck off.