Happy Blue Posted January 20, 2021 Share Posted January 20, 2021 1 minute ago, Rick said: just as Villa were turning the screw. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Administrator Stan Posted January 20, 2021 Author Administrator Share Posted January 20, 2021 Just now, LFCMike said: I've just seen Man City's first goal. Absolutely astonishing that's not been ruled out Apparently the rule is because Mings makes a deliberate play at the ball, it renders Rodri not offside any more. Very weird. If I remember correctly, there was similar in a Liverpool/Spurs game a few seasons back, so the rule isn't new. There was more debate about whether the ball was played deliberately back then. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rick Posted January 20, 2021 Share Posted January 20, 2021 This explanation of the decision from the Premier League is a mess. Rodri is clearly affecting play from that offside position when he’s chasing down that ball that Ming’s chests. I don’t know why he doesn’t just fucking header it or hoof it clear, but he is clearly affected in his judgement from Rodri. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rick Posted January 20, 2021 Share Posted January 20, 2021 2 minutes ago, Happy Blue said: They were parked in your box for a good 5 minutes straight right before that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Administrator Stan Posted January 20, 2021 Author Administrator Share Posted January 20, 2021 1 minute ago, Rick said: This explanation of the decision from the Premier League is a mess. Rodri is clearly affecting play from that offside position when he’s chasing down that ball that Ming’s chests. I don’t know why he doesn’t just fucking header it or hoof it clear, but he is clearly affected in his judgement from Rodri. Yep, this is the sticking point for me. Mings plays the ball because of where Rodri is. He's influenced in to playing the ball (and consequently a mistake) because of Rodri being there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rick Posted January 20, 2021 Share Posted January 20, 2021 The only thing that’s going to cheer me up tonight is Utd getting a hiding. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Happy Blue Posted January 20, 2021 Share Posted January 20, 2021 2 minutes ago, Rick said: They were parked in your box for a good 5 minutes straight right before that. They was lucky they wasn't 4-0 down Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Administrator Stan Posted January 20, 2021 Author Administrator Share Posted January 20, 2021 1 minute ago, Rick said: The only thing that’s going to cheer me up tonight is Utd getting a hiding. Yes please! The one good thing about today is another Stones clean sheet and Gundogan getting another goal for FPL. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Subscriber RandoEFC+ Posted January 20, 2021 Subscriber Share Posted January 20, 2021 There is no argument, you can't run back from 10 yards offside, tackle someone and set up a goal within a matter of seconds of the last time your team-mate played the ball. It's just silly, that's definitely offside. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted January 20, 2021 Share Posted January 20, 2021 I was watching it but couldn't listen to Steve McManaman any longer Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LFCMike Posted January 20, 2021 Share Posted January 20, 2021 18 minutes ago, Stan said: Apparently the rule is because Mings makes a deliberate play at the ball, it renders Rodri not offside any more. Very weird. If I remember correctly, there was similar in a Liverpool/Spurs game a few seasons back, so the rule isn't new. There was more debate about whether the ball was played deliberately back then. I don't think it's the same. In that incident, Lovren miskicked the ball and it went through to the Spurs player and they won a penalty. Rodri isn't receiving the ball from an opponent, he's tackling him from an offside position Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Administrator Stan Posted January 20, 2021 Author Administrator Share Posted January 20, 2021 3 minutes ago, LFCMike said: I don't think it's the same. In that incident, Lovren miskicked the ball and it went through to the Spurs player and they won a penalty. Rodri isn't receiving the ball from an opponent, he's tackling him from an offside position Yeah but the point being Lovren deliberately played the ball? I can't remember fully what happened, just that there was a similar incident. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Burning Gold Posted January 20, 2021 Share Posted January 20, 2021 Yeah, if we take the Kane/Lovren thing as precedent, and we should as everyone came out and assured us it was the correct decision, this is the correct decision as well. As soon as the defender deliberately plays the ball, you stop being offside. Absolutely ridiculous rule, but correct decision Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LFCMike Posted January 20, 2021 Share Posted January 20, 2021 1 minute ago, Stan said: Yeah but the point being Lovren deliberately played the ball? I can't remember fully what happened, just that there was a similar incident. The rule makes sense in the Lovren incident. It doesn't here. You always see offsides given for players coming back from an offside position. Bollocks interpretation of the rule imo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Burning Gold Posted January 20, 2021 Share Posted January 20, 2021 43 minutes ago, LFCMike said: The rule makes sense in the Lovren incident. It doesn't here. You always see offsides given for players coming back from an offside position. Bollocks interpretation of the rule imo Surely makes more sense in this incident? Lovren swung a boot at it which he had to do because of Kane's position and sliced it, whereas Mings brought the ball down and controlled it Both attackers are interfering with play in my view, but apparently that doesn't matter Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LFCMike Posted January 20, 2021 Share Posted January 20, 2021 26 minutes ago, Burning Gold said: Surely makes more sense in this incident? Lovren swung a boot at it which he had to do because of Kane's position and sliced it, whereas Mings brought the ball down and controlled it Both attackers are interfering with play in my view, but apparently that doesn't matter Kane doesn't run 20 yards to tackle the defender. The ball just falls to him Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scouse_Mouse Posted January 20, 2021 Share Posted January 20, 2021 1 hour ago, LFCMike said: The rule makes sense in the Lovren incident. It doesn't here. You always see offsides given for players coming back from an offside position. Bollocks interpretation of the rule imo Yet another bogus interpretation of the rules. Mings doesn't even try to play the ball if the City player isn't there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Administrator Stan Posted January 20, 2021 Author Administrator Share Posted January 20, 2021 2 minutes ago, Scouse_Mouse said: Mings doesn't even try to play the ball if the City player isn't there. I think he would Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scouse_Mouse Posted January 20, 2021 Share Posted January 20, 2021 47 minutes ago, Stan said: I think he would Debatable Stan. Either way imho this rule is flawed, Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Administrator Stan Posted January 21, 2021 Author Administrator Share Posted January 21, 2021 Jon Moss again. Forgot it was him at the time too Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rick Posted January 21, 2021 Share Posted January 21, 2021 Muppet he is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LFCMadLad Posted January 21, 2021 Share Posted January 21, 2021 2 hours ago, Stan said: Jon Moss again. Forgot it was him at the time too Not a clue what he's doing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Administrator Stan Posted January 21, 2021 Author Administrator Share Posted January 21, 2021 Just now, LFCMadLad said: Not a clue what he's doing. It's how he went from 'I don't know if he's touched the ball' immediately to 'I'm giving a penalty'. Absolute knob of a ref. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LFCMadLad Posted January 21, 2021 Share Posted January 21, 2021 Just now, Stan said: It's how he went from 'I don't know if he's touched the ball' immediately to 'I'm giving a penalty'. Absolute knob of a ref. Yeah, the obvious decision to give if he wasn't sure was to not give a penalty. He just decided "fuck it, let them have one". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr. Gonzo Posted January 21, 2021 Share Posted January 21, 2021 Please respect referees, it is impossible for any of us laypeople to understand any sort of pressure comparable to what they face. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.