Arsenal (A) Premier League 3/11 K.O 17:30

[Grinch]

24 minutes ago, aws said:

You're not offside anymore if you're in an offside position unless you touch the ball or interfere with an opposition player.  Mane did neither before Firmino played the ball and as he was behind the ball when Firmino played it the goal was good.  

 

Im not sure why anyone is still confused about this, it’s been like that for years.

[Creator Supreme]

He was looking to run on to the ball Bobby got on to, he was interfering with play, he's offside. If it had been at the other end and the goal had been given we'd have been fuming, good call (for a change) by the lino.

[suzy]

On MoTD they said the goal should have stood.

[johnsusername]

57 minutes ago, suzy said:

On MoTD they said the goal should have stood.

The pundits in the studio did. The commentator said it was an obvious offside - just goes to show the confusion of the matter! 

[dylstar]

if only Firminio had scored when through this offside debate wouldn't have manifested itself.....

We all dream of a team of purple Akis.....

On another day Van Dijk would've had a hat trick...

Top of the league until this afternoon ...

We beat Fulham and Utd beat City next week and we go top leading into an international break .....come on you reds

[Guest]

 

1 hour ago, suzy said:

On MoTD they said the goal should have stood.

Having watched MotD after watching the match at the time, some of observations...

 

If Liverpool's goal should have stood (which the consensus seems to be it should have) it's also fair to say that Arsenal's disallowed goal should have stood. From the highlights, the Arsenal player who was offside never once touched the ball. The header across the area came from a player whom did not appear to be offside and the striker who finished the goal was not offside either.

 

What was Trent doing for their goal? He was tracking the wide player under instruction from Milner and when the ball was played through to Lacazette he stood still with his hand raised for offside! He was nowhere near the line of play! If he had been tracking back he was in pole position to stop Lacazette from having a free shot at goal! Play to the whistle.

 

Although Arsenal had the better tactics, no doubt that Liverpool had by far the best chances to win this. 

[Bob]

I watched most of this while getting ready for a ball, but had to leave just as they scored.

 

it was a cracking match and our back four was got at for the first time in a long time. They’re a good attacking side.

 

our disallowed goal should defo have stood, their disallowed goal was while I was in the showe so I don’t know.

 

we should definitely have had 3 or more so it’s disappointing but for large parts of the game they were the better side so a draw is probably fair and in balance not a bad result.

 

ive never thought we will win the league as city are just so strong, but I’m really pleased we’re continuing to give ourselves a chance and are there abouts.

[Bob]

I watched most of this while getting ready for a ball, but had to leave just as they scored.

 

it was a cracking match and our back four was got at for the first time in a long time. They’re a good attacking side.

 

our disallowed goal should defo have stood, their disallowed goal was while I was in the showe so I don’t know.

 

we should definitely have had 3 or more so it’s disappointing but for large parts of the game they were the better side so a draw is probably fair and in balance not a bad result.

 

ive never thought we will win the league as city are just so strong, but I’m really pleased we’re continuing to give ourselves a chance and are there abouts.

[Trumo]

9 hours ago, Creator Supreme said:

He was looking to run on to the ball Bobby got on to, he was interfering with play, he's offside. If it had been at the other end and the goal had been given we'd have been fuming, good call (for a change) by the lino.

 

Under the current interpretation of the offside law, the linesman completely fucked it up. First of all, his positioning was way off so his line of sight was impaired. Mane was initially in an offside position when Trent played the ball in, but he didn't get the ball. Firmino had run onto it quickly very much from an ONSIDE position so he was OK throughout the move. The linesman never thought Mane was interfering with play at this point or else he would have raised his flag sooner, and Leno's movement was based on dealing with Firmino - he wasn't hampered with Mane's presence at all. Once Firmino got onto the ball, it is then about what they call the 'second phase', and by that point, Mane is no longer offside. In any case, he ensured that he was at worst level with Firmino at the point Firmino got his shot away, so he wasn't ahead of the play or ahead of the keeper when the ball bounced off the woodwork and straight to him.

 

I've long thought that the offside rule needs to be simplified to get rid of this first phase second phase crap, which only muddies the waters. A simpler offside rule would have had Mane offside once Trent passed the ball, rendering everything else immaterial. Right now, the officials are having to process a lot of information in a very short space of time and then make an instant decision. VAR would help rectify a lot of it, but the first change should be to give the officials much less to process.

[VladimirIlyich]

It was onside,end of story. Once again poor officials have cost us points. We'd have never let a 2 goal lead slip.

[Johnlj]

Every referee in the world says it was onside. It was a new action and Mane was onside for that goal. No if's and or buts. Clear goal. Fucking state of English refs and linesmen. How can professional officials be so inept. It's beyond a joke.

 

That said Arsenal played well and also had their chances. At the end of the day after digesting it, a point away to a much improved Arsenal side is a decent deal. They will be up there when come may. I just hope we start firing upfront soon, that final pass from our front three is really lacking at the moment.

[TheHowieLama]

When the PGMOL blerts come out immediately and say it was a mistake you know it was truly a fuck up

[Trumo]

4 minutes ago, TheHowieLama said:

When the PGMOL blerts come out immediately and say it was a mistake you know it was truly a fuck up

 

It's alarming that they are saying it was the wrong decision. Normally whenever they claim something, you KNOW the opposite is true.

[thegreatelephant]

fucking had Mane to score first also, the bastards. and Van Dijk- traumatic stuff

[VERBAL DIARRHEA]

12 hours ago, Creator Supreme said:

He was looking to run on to the ball Bobby got on to, he was interfering with play, he's offside. If it had been at the other end and the goal had been given we'd have been fuming, good call (for a change) by the lino.

Talking crap as usual.

[etho]

I don't  normally judge players early on and I hope he comes good, but I have this slight feeling Fabinho might be a bit Averaginho

[Creator Supreme]

1 hour ago, VERBAL DIARRHEA said:

Talking crap as usual.

No, as far as I'm concerned, the way I see the admittedly confusing offside rule is it was the same phase of play!

 

I agree that they need to simplify the rule, and Bobby should have just stuck it away and made all arguments moot!

[Captain Howdy]

6 hours ago, johnsusername said:

The pundits in the studio did. The commentator said it was an obvious offside - just goes to show the confusion of the matter! 

Exactly, it’s a mess and it needs scrapping

[VERBAL DIARRHEA]

It was a goal. That wasn’t. But it was.

[an tha]

12 minutes ago, Creator Supreme said:

No, as far as I'm concerned, the way I see the admittedly confusing offside rule is it was the same phase of play!

 

I agree that they need to simplify the rule, and Bobby should have just stuck it away and made all arguments moot!

As soon as Bobby hit it off post it is a new phase.

[Creator Supreme]

2 minutes ago, an tha said:

As soon as Bobby hit it off post it is a new phase.

That's part of the confusion then for me, I don't see how it can be a separate phase if it hasn't been touched by an opposition player, if Leno had touched it on to the woodwork I'd have said goal.

[an tha]

6 minutes ago, Creator Supreme said:

That's part of the confusion then for me, I don't see how it can be a separate phase if it hasn't been touched by an opposition player, if Leno had touched it on to the woodwork I'd have said goal.

Happy to be corrected but as i understand it 1 phase is the ball to bobby and the new phase is what happens after bobby shoots

[VladimirIlyich]

6 minutes ago, Creator Supreme said:

That's part of the confusion then for me, I don't see how it can be a separate phase if it hasn't been touched by an opposition player, if Leno had touched it on to the woodwork I'd have said goal.

But Mane was never offside,what's the confusion?

[Caramac]

 

 

[Creator Supreme]

18 minutes ago, VladimirIlyich said:

But Mane was never offside,what's the confusion?

He looked offside when the initial ball was played through, to me anyway