I didn’t see the game, but heard about this mother of all feck ups in the var room which decided the match. Watched it back and thought yeah that’s a goal, what did they disallow it for? Then I realised it stood after all! It’s really not the massive deal they’re making it out to be, yet Arteta has decided this is the one he’s going all in on.
VAR and Refs | General Discussion | May 15: Premier League clubs to vote on proposal to scrap VAR from next season
- Thread starter Samid
- Start date
That part may be so but the simple fact is that once Maguire made an attempt to play the ball he became active and that means he was correctly given offside.
From that point on everything thing else becomes irrelevant things like he didn’t get to the ball etc just don’t get considered . It’s not been mentioned but it could be viewed that had Maguire not made an attempt to play the ball the keeper may have re acted differently
What's embarrassing is Arteta will (and probably has) just shrug it off with vague notions about what a tough job the refs do if a major incorrect decision goes in Arsenal's favour. So this isn't about protecting the integrity of the game or improving the game for everyone, as I've seen some Arsenal fans characterise it. It's just an emotional outburst because he's upset they lost the game and the club doubled down on it the following day trying to bully officials into giving them decisions in future games.
Moving towards the ball isn't an off-side offence. Neither is the often trotted out generic phrase 'interfering with play'
Harry isn't challenging the defender for the ball. He isn't clearly obstructing the defenders line of vision or clearly preventing the opponent from playing the ball.
It's his forlorn attempt to play the ball which has done him.
It's not so cut and dried when you watch the full incident from the wide angle shot which shows the action which occurred before the start of this clip. Contact and the defender leaning forward of his own volition has already occurred before this clip starts. Either this shot didn't pick up the earlier action or they've edited it out to make it appear worse than it is.
100%
Arteta, and all managers to be fair, couldn't be bothered about the fairness of VAR, as long as they're on the right end of the decisions.
I actually get it and respect it, given how high pressure it is. But wrapping the moaning in the guise of "betterment of the game" is embarrassing.
There’s definite tribalism at play. He’s ducked to come up for the header and been pushed in the back with both arms. It’s clear as day.
I have no problem with the Ref missing it, btw. From his point of view it’s very easy to miss. But the fact that VAR didn’t even send him to the monitor to have a look is inexcusable.
Gordon was obviously offside as the ball didnt go backwards to him and there werent 2 players in line or in front of him, and yet the VAR couldnt decide as there were no clear camera angles (WTF?), and the pundits have glossed over it.
The other decisions are marginal and subjective, but this is a bit more cut and dried and i can see where the issues come into play about integrity.
it is odd that referees and the people involved in the structure around that part of the game can be employed by the same people that own football clubs they normally officiate.
The other decisions are marginal and subjective, but this is a bit more cut and dried and i can see where the issues come into play about integrity.
it is odd that referees and the people involved in the structure around that part of the game can be employed by the same people that own football clubs they normally officiate.
It’s a blatant foul. Ridiculous for that goal to stand. You have to give the benefit to the same team in three seperate situations in a matter of seconds and the push alone is enough.
It is not different. Handball isn't about where the action happens in the 18. It's about the action itself. And I see that the video isn't available. Not sure why. But it explains it all. I'm not expressing my opinion. I'm expressing a fact...
You can be there and not interfere. Maguire didn't interfere. So he's not offside. Put it this way. If there are 2 players running for a ball. One is in an offside position and the other isn't, and the player who is onside gets the ball, is the play offside? No it's not. Because the offside player doesn't touch the ball. According to your argument, the correct call would be offside just because he goes for it. He has to interfere with play to be offside. Maguire doesn't interfere with play. In fact, if the goal stood, there would be little to no controversy. The fact that it has been called off has created controversy. That in itself should tell you something...
The first part of the debate was the ball in or out and VAR would not only get involved if it was a clear and obvious which it’s difficult to see it meets that threshold
2) Despite what you say “ interfering with play is in the law
1) Try reading this part of the law again
- making an obvious action which clearly impacts on the ability of an opponent to play the ball
2) Despite what you say “ interfering with play is in the law
How long until a goal is ruled out because his "aura" was interfering with play?
But that was the whole point of the new law. To take "interpretation" out of the equation. In the link that I posted (that isn't working for some reason), an official is doing a workshop with a couple hundred other officials. In the class he shows several videos of "handball". He then asks the refs to raise their hand on which play they would all call a foul on. The room is split on most of the calls. And this was the problem. So they wanted to erase that "interpretation" so that all refs will call it the same way. I personally think that the handball rule is broken. I don't think the incident like Barkley's should be a handball. But according to the Laws of the Game it is. Or let me change that. I think that any time a ball hits a hand, a handball should be called. But I think the punishment should vary. For example, in Barkely's case, where he clearly has no idea and is very close to VVD, I'd like to see that given as an indirect free kick inside the 18. For others that are more clinical, award a penalty. Does that make sense?
It is only a controversy because United fans thinks there is an conspiracy against them. It is literally right there in the rules, you just chose to interpret the rules in a way (or maybe just thinks the rules should be something they are not) that makes you think it is not offside.
It looked clearly in for me.
On pt 2, yes it is sorry but it's in only used in the context of playing the ball. What I meant was it's widely used to describe any kind of interference in general and the meaning has been obscured. It's become quite nebulous and not representative of what is written.
On the first point, the opponent's ability to play the ball wasn't clearly impacted by the run of Maguire. You can surmise that he may have made a different run or been in a different position and got there before Garnacho but in the absence of Maguire he could well have marked somebody else entirely. This is beside the fact that he was never really in a position to play the ball in the first place.
I think if the ball had carried on it would have hit the corner flag, which shows it was still in.
It's definitely a foul outside the box but in the box its the kind of challenge referees are inconsistent on. We have had goals overturned for less and had far worse against us go unpunished including against Arsenal.
Arteta is following the SAF rulebook as copied by Klopp. He's made such a big fuss Arsenal will get a few in their favour now. It's about time ETH had the guts to do the same for us.
Common sense and football, that ship ailed a long time ago!
If Maguire hadn't taken a big swing at the ball it would probably have stood, the fact that he attempted to play the ball is why he's "active" and as such is deemed offside
Was Maguire offside when Garnacho crossed the ball?
Because when the initial free kick comes in McTominay is actually offside, given that he scored but VAR didn't seem to have a problem that. I can only assume it was considered to have moved onto a different phase of play. In which case Maguire attempting to play the ball after the cross is irrelevant no?
Pretty much. The only reason it’s even a big conversation is that a certain set of pundits always protect the referees and then football tribalism makes fans of rival clubs try to find reasons to dismiss the obvious. A foul clear as day, it’s hard to be more clear.
VAR is broken, it’s not a system for arriving at correct decisions. We’ve seen it a million times and this is just another example.
The only aspect of the Newcastle goal that warranted disallowing it was the clear push on the back. Clear as day, but the referee lost his nerve and overlooked it, or perhaps he felt the Arsenal player was making a meal of it, which he was, but it was a clear foul.
VAR has called the Ref to view the pitch side monitor. Ref disallows goal, because while an attacking player didn't actually move towards the ball, subjectively the Ref after reading the attackers body language deemed that he intended to do so. The keeper might have read it the same way and it possibly affected his judgement.
And we all know it'll work. It's been proven time and time again.
It's crybaby stuff specially when managers go out and claim "referees are humans and we need to understand they can make mistakes as well" when they get calls in their favour.
But if any team has been fecked by VAR this season it's us, we should be doing some ranting so the 50-50s go our way. Matches are won inside and outside the pitch.
The sad thing is moaning about decisions actually seems to work, make a big enough stink and it puts a bit of doubt in the officials heads over the next few games. Especially if you manage to get one of those nice shiny PGMOL apologies that United never get.
ETH and United not complaining about the crazy string of decisions that have went against us this season has probably worked against us. Ferguson was a master at calling out Refs, he always did it in a calculating manner that benefitted us over the course of a season. Erik's a bit of a pussy cat in this regard, he barely says a peep about the refs/VAR.
No, he was offside when Eriksen crossed the ball. As another poster mentioned, there was a similar situation in the Brentford v Burnley game a few weeks back. The difference in that situation was that the ball got nowhere near to the offside player nor he did make an attempt to play the ball (as the ball was crossed a couple of yard before it reached the offside player). It was offside anyway.
I think ten Hag do it in a gentle man way, for the honour of the game I like it that way but we've got so many ridiculous decisions against us that enough is enough.
I'm convinced if we'd had make a big fuss out of the first big mistake against us many of the others wouldn't had happened. The referees as humans feel the pressure next 50-50 call against arsenal unconsciously they'll think about all the fuss is was made and say nah I don't fancy to be involved in another one just give it to arsenal.
There's a reason home teams get most of the 50-50 calls the stand cheering and boos influence the referees decisions. That influence is done outside the pitch as well.
You can see why the rules are so terrible there's always a bunch of people that genuinely think it's the correct decision its impossible.
How you can watch years of football then decide Maguire being offside was the correct decision, it's baffling! You have been watching the exact same thing happen in nearly every other attack ever.
It's quite clear the officiating is corrupt in the league, be it protecting their own staff, conflict of interests or individual bias. Having people involved in the sport that can reach out, contact and influence people at government level was always going to cause huge integrity problems and here we are.
How you can watch years of football then decide Maguire being offside was the correct decision, it's baffling! You have been watching the exact same thing happen in nearly every other attack ever.
It's quite clear the officiating is corrupt in the league, be it protecting their own staff, conflict of interests or individual bias. Having people involved in the sport that can reach out, contact and influence people at government level was always going to cause huge integrity problems and here we are.
That’s a myth. Klopp has been losing his shit about tight VAR (or refereeing calls) going back years. And which team got most blatantly screwed over by VAR this season? Liverpool.
It’s all just noise. Managers are forever yapping and moaning. All of them. But that can’t have any influence on how VAR calls are made in the moment.
I don't know for sure but I'm of the opinion that it can't hurt to call Refs out on their shit decisions. At the very least try to highlight to see if the media pick up on it and run with a week long injustice campaign like they did for the 50/50 that went against Wolves.
Maybe mate, but there had to be a reason Ferguson moaned about refs for 3 decades. Liverpool did get fecked over on that offside true, but the PGMOL were falling over themselves to apologise for it, which may or may not have affected decisions againt them in subsequent games. I reckon if that had been against us they wouldn't have bothered as they know Erik won't kick up a fuss.
Fair enough this is where I'm having trouble with it. If Maguire's offside for the Eriksen cross ok, but if he's onside for the Garnacho cross then him attempting to play the ball should be irrevlevent. If the goal was ruled out simply for Maguires head being offside when the ball was lofted over him, as ridiculous as I find that fair enough. But in that case I've no idea why people keep mentioning him attempting to play the ball after the Garnacho cross.
I thought he McTominay goal was right to be chalked off. Had Maguire not been there, the Fulham defender would have had an easier job in trying to stop the free kick reaching Garnacho.
Pre VAR, that never gets seen.
Pre VAR, that never gets seen.
Funny you should mention Wolves. Victims of a much worse VAR decision than United this weekend. The second time they’ve had VAR award an unbelievably harsh penalty against them after their game against us. Using your rationale shouldn’t they be getting calls in their favour? Instead, the exact opposite is happening.
I'm not sure on this. I can see why it's given as offside but at the same time I don't think the Fulham player would reach the ball if Maguire wasn't there- very hard to judge so shouldn't the onfield decision be the one they side with?
Dermott Gallagher ‘They definitely made the right decision’ on McT disallowed goal 
It’s funny how he’s always definitively certain when it comes to decisions against us. Gabriel’s foul on Hojlund he said he’d have been ‘shocked if that was given’ yet felt that the penalty City got last week was the correct call.
It’s funny how he’s always definitively certain when it comes to decisions against us. Gabriel’s foul on Hojlund he said he’d have been ‘shocked if that was given’ yet felt that the penalty City got last week was the correct call.
I think the defender has a good chance of getting to that cross without Maguire being there.
As you see from below, they are both fighting to get to the ball. Harry goes across the defender and they make contact. That tells me that Maguire is involved in the play.
Even the commentator on the MUTV clip from YouTube says as the ball comes across "Maguire's there".
Hey I'm not claiming it actually works in 100% of cases or that it's an exact science but all I am saying it surely couldn't hurt for Erik to at least highlight shit decisions against us. Because I know him not saying anything definitely hasn't helped us in that regard this season as we seem to be the most fecked over side in terms of bad Ref/VAR calls.
Persenter: What do you think of this decision Demot, was it correct?Dermott Gallagher ‘They definitely made the right decision’ on McT disallowed goal
It’s funny how he’s always definitively certain when it comes to decisions against us. Gabriel’s foul on Hojlund he said he’d have been ‘shocked if that was given’ yet felt that the penalty City got last week was the correct call.
Dermot: Correct decision.
Presenter: And this one?
Dermot: Correct decision.
Presenter: But what about this one Dermot?
Dermot: Correct decision.
Presenter: Thanks for joining us Dermot.
Its a paradox, if Maguire wasn't in that exact location would the defender actually be there? Wherever Maguire is the defender follows because he is quite clearly man marking him.I think the defender has a good chance of getting to that cross without Maguire being there.
As you see from below, they are both fighting to get to the ball. Harry goes across the defender and they make contact. That tells me that Maguire is involved in the play.
Even the commentator on the MUTV clip from YouTube says as the ball comes across "Maguire's there".
You can't just imagine Maguire isn't there he will be somewhere. If he makes his run more into the centre the defender will follow him. Meaning he would definetley not be able to play the ball.
The defender doesn't try and play the ball he doesn't look at the ball, he doesn't try and get round Maguire or try and stop the ball getting to garnacho he just tries to make Maguire's life difficult from behind. If you take Maguire out of the equation the defender wouldn't be there.
He was only just off. You don't re-imagine the situation as if United were playing with 10 men in order to figure out if it's an offence. That's absurd.