It came off Fabinho, it should've counted right?
Should that Benzema goal have stood?
- Thread starter tentan
- Start date
-
In the latest episode of the United Hour Podcast, Nik @Rood and Imran @Annihilate Now! start with the good news by celebrating Manchester United Women's emphatic FA Cup win over Spurs at Wembley and the future of manager Marc Skinner.
Then it's the bad news and the ever worsening form of our Men with losses to Arsenal and Palace.
Finally the main debate - ETH Out now or keep him until the end of the season - if not longer. Are you Team Nik or Team Imran?
It came off Fabinho, it should've counted right?
Was goal
Yes.
I can see where the justification comes from for not giving it, but if you're going to ground like that as a defender then it should be considered a deliberate action when the ball inevitably comes off you.
Konate touches it, Alisson touches it then Konate touches it again then Fabinho touches it and Benzema scores 
should have stood
should have stood
The ball barely toches Valverde, Konate intercepts it and it goes forward for Fabinho to direct it backwards to Benzema.
Yes, it should've stood.
Yes, it should've stood.
100%
It was a ridiculous decision. Lucky it didn't affect the result.
EDIT: Is that the best vid available? It's after messing up me vision for a few minutes. Thanks for that
It was a ridiculous decision. Lucky it didn't affect the result.
EDIT: Is that the best vid available? It's after messing up me vision for a few minutes. Thanks for that
Has there been an official reason why the goal was called off? Watching on CBS, American TV, they showed replays at halftime that shows Benzema's original run was offside
I don't understand that "behind the keeper but ahead of another player but still offside" rule.
Its because you need at least two adversaries closer to the goal line than you. The idea is that one of the adversaries is always gonna be the keeper. So the rule is there to prevent you from keeping some attacking players parked in the adversary box, ahead of the defensive line, because it would descharacterize the game.
Last edited:
Well there has to be at least 2 players between the attacker and goal when the pass is made for it to be onside. If the keeper is way off his line and ahead of on his defenders, the last defender ends up being 'the keeper' in a usual offside scenario.
Valverde made no attempt to play the ball to Benzema and the ball came off Fabinho from Konate's tackle of course this goal should have stood. Haven't heard anyone convince me of anything else.
Of course it was a goal.
100% goal to me. Although I’ve heard some good argument saying the opposite as according to the offside rule.
That rule is fine. Two defenders need to be between the attacker and the goal. It's the whole "defender needs to deliberately give the ball to attacker" that makes no sense. This wasn't even a Liverpool player standing and getting a nick of his jersey. Fabinho's challenge even faced Benzema so if we're going that much in detail then yes he actively went in for a challenge which knocked the ball got knocked into Benzemas path which was the expected outcome.
Goal.
That's a goal any day
I don't think Valverde even touched it, at the very least he wasn't trying to pass it to Benzema but I don't know what they saw or what was the reason to disallow it.
Should have counted.
Should have stood. Another stupid decision by stupid referees who have the tools required to make the right call.
How can you possibly be offside when the ball is played to you by the opponent. Ridiculous rule.
It was confusing as hell. The reason we prefered football over another sports is due to its simplicity rules of law, thats not the case anymore i guess.
It was absolutely perfect goal. Very very dubious refereeing
I also thought he was offside the first time already.
Yes, not because it came off Fabinho but because before that the ball is deliberately played in to him by another Liverpool player sliding in to the ball.
I don't see how they can claim the original slide in wasn't a deliberate play, the defender had time and options. If he doesn't slide in you don't get the double rebound to Benzema.
Mistake, though I'm sure we'll get some justification from Dale Johnson today...
I don't see how they can claim the original slide in wasn't a deliberate play, the defender had time and options. If he doesn't slide in you don't get the double rebound to Benzema.
Mistake, though I'm sure we'll get some justification from Dale Johnson today...
No as far as I know, if they have time to make a decision to play the ball or not.
My brother in law is a die hard scum fan and even he said it should have stood.
No.
The decision is fecking clear as day.
Some of you sound like you've never watched a game of football.
First by questioning the goalkeeper offside rule, second by questioning common sense.
None of the touches were controlled in any way. Whether you deem them as deliberate or not.
The rules as simple and easily understood.
Can't fathom what you can't comprehend about them.
And yes, Valverde touches the ball first.
The decision is fecking clear as day.
Some of you sound like you've never watched a game of football.
First by questioning the goalkeeper offside rule, second by questioning common sense.
None of the touches were controlled in any way. Whether you deem them as deliberate or not.
The rules as simple and easily understood.
Can't fathom what you can't comprehend about them.
And yes, Valverde touches the ball first.
It certainly came as news to me that you can be offside from an opponent playing the ball.
When did this rule come in? Has it always been there? Why in 30 years of watching football have I never before seen a goal disallowed for off side because the pass or touch came from an opponent?
Has anyone else ever seen a goal ruled out for this reason before?
When did this rule come in? Has it always been there? Why in 30 years of watching football have I never before seen a goal disallowed for off side because the pass or touch came from an opponent?
Has anyone else ever seen a goal ruled out for this reason before?
If Valverde touches the ball when Benzema is in offside, then it is a correct decision. It doesn't matter what Valverde is attempting, he is playing the ball.
If a shot is deflected off of the opposition player to the attacker in offside, it is an offside.
And as some have said, it looked like Benzema was in an offside when the initial ball was played.
But it wouldn't bother me if this goal was allowed.
If a shot is deflected off of the opposition player to the attacker in offside, it is an offside.
And as some have said, it looked like Benzema was in an offside when the initial ball was played.
But it wouldn't bother me if this goal was allowed.
Should have been a goal.
I'm not sure why the phrase 'deliberate' is being literally used here, compared to say deliberate handball. Fabinho is sliding in to play the ball, and there's only one direction it can go.
I'm not sure why the phrase 'deliberate' is being literally used here, compared to say deliberate handball. Fabinho is sliding in to play the ball, and there's only one direction it can go.
I thought if the attacker is behind the goalkeeper before the final ball gets to the attacking player it's translated as offside?
Yes as I would have won £50
It sort hinges on whether Valverde got a touch in before Fabinho/Konate, and ultimately I think he just about did, so offside is correct.
But even then I'm not 100% sure, because even if he did touch it first, Fabinho tackles the ball immediately afterwards (although that could be seen as another ricochet) and Konate "clears" which in turn ricochets of Fabinho again.
After how many ricochets is it not the same situation anymore? Especially when those "clearances" were intentional if clumsy.. Assuming that Vaverde pokes the ball first but Fabinho's slide tackle / rebound goes straight to Benzeman it's offisde. But when Konate fails to clear it away from goal which bounces off Fabinho towards Benzema, at some point it's not Valverde's ball anymore is it?
Very difficult decision. My first sentence simplifies it, by which I'd say it's correct, but I think it wouldn't be wrong to go with the other interpretation either.
But even then I'm not 100% sure, because even if he did touch it first, Fabinho tackles the ball immediately afterwards (although that could be seen as another ricochet) and Konate "clears" which in turn ricochets of Fabinho again.
After how many ricochets is it not the same situation anymore? Especially when those "clearances" were intentional if clumsy.. Assuming that Vaverde pokes the ball first but Fabinho's slide tackle / rebound goes straight to Benzeman it's offisde. But when Konate fails to clear it away from goal which bounces off Fabinho towards Benzema, at some point it's not Valverde's ball anymore is it?
Very difficult decision. My first sentence simplifies it, by which I'd say it's correct, but I think it wouldn't be wrong to go with the other interpretation either.
It is offside if there is only one player of the opposition team behind the attacker. It doesn't matter if it is goalkeeper, defender, striker, midfielder, winger, right back, etc
I thought this is obvious to anyone who watches football.
It’s not ruled out BECAUSE of the opposition touching the ball, but in spite of it.
Flip it a bit: does a deflected shot count as an own goal?
I can see the contention in this case, but this interpretation is nothing new.
Yes, Madrid won 2-0.
But they should only be winners in an alternate reality, where goals count towards victory.
But they should only be winners in an alternate reality, where goals count towards victory.
So I think the sequence of events was: Valverde -> Konate -> Fabinho -> Benzema
I can understand if it was Valverde playing the ball, it touching Fabinho or Konate before ending up at Benzema.
But Valverde touches it, Konate slides in to push the ball away from goal and the attacker but ends up hitting Fabinho and the ball bounces back towards Benzema.
Honestly I’m guessing they didn’t want to deal with any media pushback in giving an offside goal in such a game.
I can understand if it was Valverde playing the ball, it touching Fabinho or Konate before ending up at Benzema.
But Valverde touches it, Konate slides in to push the ball away from goal and the attacker but ends up hitting Fabinho and the ball bounces back towards Benzema.
Honestly I’m guessing they didn’t want to deal with any media pushback in giving an offside goal in such a game.
Its a simple rule and one that hasn't changed in a very long time. You just always understood the offside rule to be that the attacker should be in line with the last defender, whereas the rule is that the attacker should be in line with the second to last opponent (and most times the second to last opponent is the last defender, with the keeper being the last opponent).
But who chooses a sport based on the simplicity of its rules anyway?
Nope, they didn't even need that much time to conclude that, Fabinho clearly went to tackle the ball hit him and went to Karim, that is not an intentional pass.
What is the difference with that goal and Coke's second goal here? I feel like the VAR room bottled it.