FA Cup 3rd Round starting 6 Jan.

MrsGreyMrsGrey
in Other Teams & Matches
A terrible de Gea clanger got Everton back in the game, but it's looking like Man U have got this in the bag. Shame.
«1

Comments

  • MrsGreyMrsGrey
    The Leicester game started with a minute's applause for Pele, David Gold and Gianluca Vialli O.o =)
  • HamstewHamstew
    Palace HA HA HA!!!!
  • stevesteve
    edited January 2023
    Few prem clubs gone Newcastle being one
  • buffybegoodbuffybegood
    So, Wolves scored but it's flagged offside; apparently, for this one incident, VAR isn't working and so the goal remains ruled out, surprisingly the team to benefit from a VAR call that might have allowed the goal is........ Liverpool, one of the Sky 6 🤔🤔🤔.
  • thornburyironthornburyiron
    VAR was working but apparently didn’t have a definitive camera angle which proved offside or not so had to go with on field decision.
    From what I saw of the game Wolves look very fit and quick so next week is going to be very tough.
  • IronHerbIronHerb
    Of course it is.
  • buffybegoodbuffybegood
    thornburyiron said:

    VAR was working but apparently didn’t have a definitive camera angle which proved offside or not so had to go with on field decision.
    From what I saw of the game Wolves look very fit and quick so next week is going to be very tough.

    Ok, so it was working but didn't work in this instance, that's kinda my point. If they didn't have a definitive camera angle, it wasn't doing what it was supposed to do, so it effectively wasn't working when it was convenient for Liverpool for it not to do so.
  • buffybegoodbuffybegood
    edited January 2023
    I've just seen the Salah goal against Wolves, and I'm sorry, but it should never, ever be in the rules for that goal to stand; the Wolves player only plays the ball because Salah is (in an offside position) is involved in the play, so you can't say Salah wasn't interfering with play.

    I know I might come across as anti-Liverpool at times (mostly because I am), but if that goal is within the rules then the rules need changing.
  • thornburyironthornburyiron
    If the defender knew Salah was in an offside position why did he bother to play the ball and immediately play him inside.
  • IronHerbIronHerb
    Because he thought he'd head the ball away rather than it skimming off the top of his head.
  • buffybegoodbuffybegood
    thornburyiron said:

    If the defender knew Salah was in an offside position why did he bother to play the ball and immediately play him inside.

    He couldn't be sure Salah was offside, but the fact that he was there meant the defender had to try to play the ball.
  • Dodger58Dodger58
    Salah was offside at the point the ball was played to him, so should have been given offside, he was clearly interfering with play - if not, dock his wages.
    The application of the offside rule is an absolute joke nowadays, I'd rather see it removed altogether, at least then it would be consistent!
  • FortuneseekerFortuneseeker
    It's not the first time a goal has been scored because a defender feels he has to done something to stop the ball reaching a player in an offside position & in doing so ends up assisting in a goal being scored which under normal circumstances would be ruled out.
  • MrsGreyMrsGrey
    buffybegood said:

    I've just seen the Salah goal against Wolves, and I'm sorry, but it should never, ever be in the rules for that goal to stand; the Wolves player only plays the ball because Salah is (in an offside position) is involved in the play, so you can't say Salah wasn't interfering with play.

    I know I might come across as anti-Liverpool at times (mostly because I am), but if that goal is within the rules then the rules need changing.

    I kind of agree, but surely it's not the rule as such. Rather, the element of judgement required. And here, it was a judgement that the majority disagreed with.. and the VAR used his/her judgement to not overrule it.

    All about the human element, imo.
  • buffybegoodbuffybegood
    edited January 2023
    MrsGrey said:

    I kind of agree, but surely it's not the rule as such. Rather, the element of judgement required. And here, it was a judgement that the majority disagreed with.. and the VAR used his/her judgement to not overrule it.

    All about the human element, imo.

    According to the BBC, "Salah's goal was not ruled out as a result of Toti's (the defender) header, which started a new phase of play."

    By the sounds of it, it was technically the correct decision rather than an interpretation, purely because the defender deliberately headed the ball.

    That header wasn't the same as a deliberate back-pass, it was an intervention to try and halt an attack so should in no was be considered a new phase of play imo (and that of many I'm sure), so if that is allowed by the rules, rather than a poor interpretation of them, then the rules need changing, again, all imo.
  • thornburyironthornburyiron
    My point was if the defender had let the ball go knowing Salah was in an offside position the goal would have been ruled out but as he deliberately played the ball he played him onside.
    The rule about flagging was changed when VAR came in to help the linesmen because only someone cross eyed could see the ball being played and the attacker at the same time although in this case the ball player was in his line of sight. This was to try to avoid an incorrect call ruling out a valid goal which unfortunately happened with the Wolves goal.
    It seems now that a linesman only flags to show which direction a throw is to be taken and then often only when the ref has told him.
  • MrsGreyMrsGrey
    buffy :+1:

    I was more referring to why Salah wasn't judged offside in the 'first' phase, and thus making everything in the second phase moot.
  • IronHerbIronHerb
    The goal was legal under the current off side laws. I seem to remember Kane scoring at Anfield in similar circumstances. Bad law, but applied correctly.
  • FortuneseekerFortuneseeker
    Two of the goals in the Sheffield Wednesday v Newcastle game were offside which in the EPL would have been ruled out but no VAR available. This starting a second or new phase of play don’t get me started! 🤷‍♂️
  • buffybegoodbuffybegood
    IronHerb said:

    The goal was legal under the current off side laws. I seem to remember Kane scoring at Anfield in similar circumstances. Bad law, but applied correctly.

    Yeah, that's my point, it needs changing.

    It was bad enough that a player could be miles offside in the middle when the ball was played to someone out wide but then be onside for the subsequent cross, but this ball was actually played for Salah yet apparently that doesn't make him active, it makes no sense.
  • thornburyironthornburyiron
    If you read the wording of the law it makes perfect sense. What doesn’t make sense is why it was worded in such a way anyway. Looks like it was written by someone trying to be clever rather than clearer.
  • Giant_HammerGiant_Hammer
    Oh wonderful, let joy be unconfined, Ally McboringCoist on coms at Cardiff.
  • thornburyironthornburyiron
    Hopefully next season we’ll be using the chip ball and offside will be semi automated.
  • OutcastLondonerOutcastLondoner
    Giant_Hammer said:

    Oh wonderful, let joy be unconfined, Ally McboringCoist on coms at Cardiff.

    I actually like him! I think he generally pays more attention to the “smaller” teams and gives them credit when they’re doing well rather than just talk about how the bigger team is failing.
  • IronHerbIronHerb
    McCoist is the best imo.
  • IronHerbIronHerb
    Dirty Lids losing 2-0 at HT. 😬
  • thornburyironthornburyiron
    Perkins gets a stoppage time equaliser.
  • thornburyironthornburyiron
    Played onside by a full back who didn’t have the sense to keep off the pitch
  • thornburyironthornburyiron
    Away to Derby next
  • MrsGreyMrsGrey
    thornburyiron said:

    Away to Derby next

    Have done a new thread 😃
Sign In or Register to comment.