Jump to content
  • Sign up for free and receive a month's subscription

    You are viewing this page as a guest. That means you are either a member who has not logged in, or you have not yet registered with us. Signing up for an account only takes a minute and it means you will no longer see this annoying box! It will also allow you to get involved with our friendly(ish!) community and take part in the discussions on our forums. And because we're feeling generous, if you sign up for a free account we will give you a month's free trial access to our subscriber only content with no obligation to commit. Register an account and then send a private message to @dave u and he'll hook you up with a subscription.

Other Football - 2019/20


Recommended Posts

23 minutes ago, Bjornebye said:

This. It wasn’t offside at all that’s a disgraceful decision now I’ve got to put up with a sulking blue nose twat for the rest of the day. Fuck you VAR

As you’re an Everton wife you know the drill...

 

images?q=tbn:ANd9GcTm_992TZh6H_VxWzvNMqN

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Strontium Dog™ said:

He's sitting in front of the goalkeeper, people need to read the offside rule if they think that should have stood.

 

Mind you, I'm still bitter about that Everton equaliser in the 1989 FA Cup Final. 

I think the only question here is whether Maguire tries to play the ball or not. If he does, it's a new phase of play, and the player sitting in front of de Gea doesn't matter. 

 

I guess with Maguire's general slowness he has a pretty good case of not reacting enough to "play the ball", even if there's some movement from his legs/ankles

Link to comment
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, niallers said:

Correct call as he's in front of the keeper so he's offside. However, every bloo I know I'll be saying it was a travesty and should have stood. The powers that be, including United, doing their best to thwart the rise of the bloos.

They can't even say they're like a Phoenix as that's red. 

 

The conspiracy theory has already started...,Give it an hour or two and it’ll be our fault

 

https://mobile.twitter.com/grandoldteam/status/1234150434606133249

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If that happened to us we would be going mental and being a patronising gobshite doesn't make it any different. It was a poor decision IMO. It comes off their player. Sigurdsson doesn't touch the ball. De Gea didn't appear to be distracted by it. Subjective things of course but my opinion is that it should have stood. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Quote
  • interfering with play by playing or touching a ball passed or touched by a team-mate or
  • interfering with an opponent by:
  • preventing an opponent from playing or being able to play the ball by clearly obstructing the opponent’s line of vision or
  • challenging an opponent for the ball or
  • clearly attempting to play a ball which is close when this action impacts on an opponent or
  • making an obvious action which clearly impacts on the ability of an opponent to play the ball

He's not "clearly obstructing" De Gea's line of vision, as De Gea reacts to the initial shot. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, lebron said:

I think the only question here is whether Maguire tries to play the ball or not.

 

No, it's just a bog standard deflection. And Iceland is clearly in De Gea's line of sight. I don't even know why it's up for debate. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Bjornebye said:

If that happened to us we would be going mental and being a patronising gobshite doesn't make it any different. It was a poor decision IMO. It comes off their player. Sigurdsson doesn't touch the ball. De Gea didn't appear to be distracted by it. Subjective things of course but my opinion is that it should have stood. 

It's funny though. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, polymerpunkah said:

And if Sigurddson was in the line of sight to the ball after the deflection, he wasn't interfering with De Gea's ability to stop it as De Gea wasn't getting to it anyway.

 

It's immaterial whether De Gea would have saved it or not. To be offside, the player only needs to be in the goalkeeper's line of sight.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Strontium Dog™ said:

 

It's immaterial whether De Gea would have saved it or not. To be offside, the player only needs to be in the goalkeeper's line of sight.

Hahaha I hadn't realised the keeper was stood on his head. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, polymerpunkah said:

clearly attempting to play a ball which is close when this action impacts on an opponent or

By deliberately moving his legs out of the path of the ball to allow it to go in the net is to my mind playing the ball within the overall context of the game. Otherwise it makes a nonsense of the rule of interference. If he doesn’t do that the ball is stopped from going into the net, so his action clearly impacts on an opponent.

 

If that goal had been given against us we’d be livid. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share


×
×
  • Create New...