Heroes & Villains, the Aston Villa fanzine
Heroes & Villains => Match Threads & Player Ratings => Topic started by: kippaxvilla2 on January 20, 2021, 08:16:21 PM
-
I don’t mind fcuking losing it’s expected. But you work that hard for 80 minutes then you get three cnuts on the pitch and one playing PS5 shafting us over a blatant offside. Everything can fcuk off.
-
I don’t mind fcuking losing it’s expected. But you work that hard for 80 minutes then you get three cnuts on the pitch and one playing PS5 shafting us over a blatant offside. Everything can fcuk off.
This
-
Having had another look, I was harsh on Mings in the match thread. That was a horrible decision and the fact that VAR has not corrected it says all I need to know about VAR. We may well have lost the game anyway, but by giving that goal it changed everything. How is the system allowed to stay in place as it currently stands?
-
And John Moss is a prize cnut
-
It's quite obviously bent.
-
I don’t think we played that well, Jack was fairly quiet, Barkley poor, Traore all over the place first half and McGinn veering between brilliant and comically bad. And we sat too deep second half – perhaps jaded from the COVID and the extended break?
But we were defending brilliantly and looked good for a hard fought draw, with even a chance to nick a win like we did at Wolves and Leicester.
All undone by dodgy officials (again) or a Mings fuck-up (also again) take your pick. And then the kind of penalty that they have stopped giving because they were deemed ridiculous.
Small margins count hugely in this league and we get the rough end of far too many decisions.
Good on Deano for telling him what CU Next Tuesday he is.
-
We looked dead on our arses after 55 minutes, did well too stay with them for so long.
The 'funny' thing is when the 1st went in I was in an air of calmness because it was always going to be dissalowed.... That is never in a million years given if its the other way round.
Actually created a few great openings but we were sloppy (understandable in the circumstances)
-
Good performance considering the lay off. Bit unfortunate we had to play against 12 men
-
We played well enough and created some good chances. I love that BT showed Grealish kicking people, trying to make him out as a dirty player. Man City are a cracking side and really need no help from the officials but both goals were completely dodgy. Moss was nowhere to be seen when the ball hit the City defender in the box earlier in the game. I feel robbed and I hope that Villa use it as a motivation to beat Newcastle on Saturday. We needed to retain the ball better but we have only lost two games on the road. Shove the Manchester wankfest up your arse.
-
Trying to explain the offside rule to anyone has now become a whole lot harder
-
Full kit, computer game watching, telly studio wankers have beaten us today.
-
Hate the result. Pleased with the defence. Worn a groove in the carpet from the pacing. On the other hand, if those points for city mean utd or Liverpool don't win the title I will take it. If, however they stand between us and the title I will be a "bit" hacked off.
-
Very fine performance in the circumstances. Terrible decision for their first goal - and if that is allowed the rules are wrong. Targett was fucking brill.
Hopefully we recover well and batter Newcastle. We’re a seriously good side.
-
Proud of the effort they all put in. Several were out on their feet before the end.
Onward to Saturday.
-
I know it's childish, but I'd really like to have seen the whole team walk off after the two Manchester ref/VAR decisions. The statement it would make would be enormous. Of course the FA would fine Villa for not towing the Sky 6 line but imo it would be worth every penny.
-
A deliberate play on the ball means he's no longer offside. He was offside the moment the ball was played forward. The flag should have gone up before Mings played the ball.
Copied from other thread
Absolutely and it would have done pre VAR....ex ref made some kind of bizarre justification of the decision, "player not deemed to have gained an advantage" Mings chested the ball into his path ffs...dreadful defending though it must be said. Another unforced error from Mings costing us a goal, nearly got an o.g. a few minutes before.
Rode our luck plenty of times during the game but a sickener to lose to that goal in the end. We had nothing left in the tank to get an equaliser, subs made no impact. Hard to be too critical today as some players like Barkley were unsurprisingly miles of the pace. Our right side defensively continues to be a problem, the reverse of last season. Cash needs to be a bit braver I think in going to the player quicker. Backing up into his box far too often and very little support from Traore. Was the wrong call from Smith to select Traore tonight, he didn't look up for it from the first minute.
Martinez 8, Cash 4, Konsa 7, Mings 6, Targett 8, Luiz 6, McGinn 5, Traore 4, Barks 4, Jack 7, Watkins 6. Subs Ramsey 5, AEG 5, Taylor 5
-
Farcical. You can tell we're becoming a decent side again, because officials are having to scrabble for decisions to give to the old order when they find themselves in a spot of bother.
Villa were great. Even better given the context.
-
That game was lost with the award of a corrupt 1st goal.
The ref, var and the biased broadcasters have got what they want.
There seriously needs to be an investigation into the use of var for the benefit of the so-called sky 6 at the behest of tv.
I'm glad Smith called it out for what it is.
Well done Villa boys on a dogged display, which clearly had monopoly city worried. Great performance again by Targett before being subbed.
UTFV!
-
Shocking officiation and supervisory VAR.
-
Would love to know what Smith actually said. We could get t-shirts made up.
-
They are too fcuking busy pissing about with set squares ruling out goals where the strikers arm is furthest forward then completely miss an obvious one like that. The games gone.
-
Very entertaining game to watch and thought we played well, all things considered. So refreshing to see a Villa side try and take the game to these so called ‘big six’ sides rather than try and park the bus.
-
Would love to know what Smith actually said. We could get t-shirts made up.
He certainly didn't hold back, even after the first yellow!
-
Fantastic effort given all the problems we've had over the last two weeks. City did enough to win it, but just when we think the standard of officials can't get any worse, they pull it out the bag. DS reckons he was sent off for asking the 4th official if he'd had juggling balls for Christmas.....
-
Let’s face it if we keep building this team right we’ll launch an assault on the top teams. They fear us have no doubt.
-
Right side of defence a problem? What games do you watch. Cash was superb, as was Targett.
-
Would love to know what Smith actually said. We could get t-shirts made up.
He certainly didn't hold back, even after the first yellow!
Apparently he said "you fcuking prick" to Moss. Not sure if it is was before or after the sending off.
-
It's quite obviously bent.
This is the major concern, it’s happening too often since they formed their little Cabal.
-
It's cheating. Coming from an offside position and seeking to gain an advantage. OFFSIDE. No ifs or buts, OFFSIDE. But no, not for a club that is allowed to spend what it wants without any sanction. VAR people scared to piss the money men off. I wish we could take a stand of some sort. Starts signing petitions to get VAR fucked off.
-
Fantastic effort given all the problems we've had over the last two weeks. City did enough to win it, but just when we think the standard of officials can't get any worse, they pull it out the bag. DS reckons he was sent off for asking the 4th official if he'd had juggling balls for Christmas.....
Ha ha I suspect it was a bit more than that!
-
We battled and defended extremely well, although some of our passing was a bit loose at times I have to hand it to our team for huge effort tonight.
-
Right side of defence a problem? What games do you watch. Cash was superb, as was Targett.
Almost every attack came down our right side, change your spectacles. Cash was torn a new one
-
Remember folks, being miles offside and coming back and tackling your opponents as he is just about to try and control the ball. Not offside.
Olie Watkins, after 9 minutes and some subjectively drawn lines on limited FPS, is though.
Fuck off VAR, fuck off John Moss you fat, corrupt, ******.
-
Would love to know what Smith actually said. We could get t-shirts made up.
Unfortunately nobody would.see them!
-
Right side of defence a problem? What games do you watch. Cash was superb, as was Targett.
Almost every attack came down our right side, change your spectacles. Cash was torn a new one
Because he had fuck all support from Traore, Grealish was almost on top of Targett to help him out all game.
-
Let’s face it if we keep building this team right we’ll launch an assault on the top teams. They fear us have no doubt.
Yes they do, so will try to take our best players so Wes and Nas will need to show resolve
-
City better side overall, 1st goal I don't agree with and can understand Smith's frustration, no complaints with the pen.
We had chances, but not taken. We look a decent mid-table side and I'll take that this season.
Next.
-
Right side of defence a problem? What games do you watch. Cash was superb, as was Targett.
Almost every attack came down our right side, change your spectacles. Cash was torn a new one
Was he fuck. He had zero protection in front of him and defended very well, much like "coward" Targett. Open your eyes.
-
Let’s face it if we keep building this team right we’ll launch an assault on the top teams. They fear us have no doubt.
But the system has in place refs and VAR to keep us away from the top 6 . Corruption in football which would be questionable in a lot of other countries
-
So basically all your attacking player's can stand behind the defence then put pressure of the defender just waiting for a misplaced touch.
-
We do miss Trez when out of possession in these type of away games. Traore gets back but then thinks standing still is enough and the ball just gets played passed him with ease and we're in trouble if Cash can't cut it out.
Man. City are experts at mainpulating the ball like that quickly though.
-
So basically all your attacking player's can stand behind the defence then put pressure of the defender just waiting for a misplaced touch.
Yep. But when you're shoved into an offside position, definitely offside. And no penalty.
Yay football!
-
Right side of defence a problem? What games do you watch. Cash was superb, as was Targett.
Almost every attack came down our right side, change your spectacles. Cash was torn a new one
Happens most games because of the way we play. The facts might suggest you are wrong though as we still have one of the best defensive records? Man City are also a world class side.
-
The enormous positive is that the 'big' teams have all needed assistance to beat us. We are building something very special and I can't wait to put all of these twats to the sword in the very near future the way we demolished 'The Mighty Reds YNWA'. All the VAR help under the sun won't be enough to save them.
-
City better side overall, 1st goal I don't agree with and can understand Smith's frustration, no complaints with the pen.
We had chances, but not taken. We look a decent mid-table side and I'll take that this season.
Next.
Think you’re underplaying us a touch. We played the form side in the league, after barely any training following a COVID outbreak. We’re more than a decent mid table side.
-
Would love to know what Smith actually said. We could get t-shirts made up.
He certainly didn't hold back, even after the first yellow!
Apparently he said "you fcuking prick" to Moss. Not sure if it is was before or after the sending off.
That looked to be after the sending off! Don't know what it was before.
-
Both Owen and ex Utd guy in the studio saying,no way
Dermot the call in ref wringing his hands and saying correct but bad decision.
Fuck Manchester and their Refs.
We rode our luck and understandibly did not look on top of our game.
2nd to too many balls
What the fuck, lets do Brucie on Sataday
-
We look a side capable of finishing 8th-6th. We look fucming miles better than Arsenal, West Ham and Chelsea and will be above them come Saturday evening.
-
Right side of defence a problem? What games do you watch. Cash was superb, as was Targett.
Almost every attack came down our right side, change your spectacles. Cash was torn a new one
Give over! Cash, Taggart, Konsa and Mings were incredible tonight. What game your watching I have no idea.
-
Not having that penalty. The ball was smashed at him. I thought they'd made allowances for that again?
-
Would love to know what Smith actually said. We could get t-shirts made up.
Dean Smith: “I thought they would go over to the VAR screen. I saw the incident and saw it was kicking off, so I asked the fourth officials did they get juggling balls for Christmas.”
-
Walton was obviously spoken to by the refs association to make such an about turn. Offside is about seeking to gain an advantage and that's what the offside player did.
-
Does the goal happen if Rodri is not stood miles off side. No.
-
Not having that penalty. The ball was smashed at him. I thought they'd made allowances for that again?
Cash had no excuse for his hand being up that high. Our lads didn't seem to complain much either.
-
Would Klopp/Pep/Frank/Jose have been sent off for berating the ref? I don’t think so.
-
Would love to know what Smith actually said. We could get t-shirts made up.
Dean Smith: “I thought they would go over to the VAR screen. I saw the incident and saw it was kicking off, so I asked the fourth officials did they get juggling balls for Christmas.”
Put a shout out on Twitter to get a graphic made up. Deano standing in the technical area while Charlie Cairoli unicycles past with some balls in the air.
-
Very entertaining game to watch and thought we played well, all things considered. So refreshing to see a Villa side try and take the game to these so called ‘big six’ sides rather than try and park the bus.
This. The defending was A++. And we tried to play out at ever opportunity. But a case of not keeping the ball for long enough. Maybe in hindsight Elmo might have been a better option that Bert for the first half at least.
Despite the obvious offside goal, Citeh were easily the best team we have faced this season.
No shame.
Onwards. Nothing is decided in Jan.
-
If it’s the “correct” decision then the rules are wrong.
-
Right side of defence a problem? What games do you watch. Cash was superb, as was Targett.
Almost every attack came down our right side, change your spectacles. Cash was torn a new one
Because Traore will not help out. How many times does he amble back leaving Cash to deal with double ups.
Traore can be great at times but he's a luxury also who costs us...
-
Reckon it's time to replace Mings. Regardless of the offside decision, it was yet another dithering on the ball fuck up when he should have just cleared it no messing, like Rio Ferdinand said. England international my arse.
-
Would love to know what Smith actually said. We could get t-shirts made up.
Dean Smith: “I said to the fourth official David Coote, 'did you get juggling balls for Christmas?' I don't think any other manager would get sent off for that."
-
If it’s the “correct” decision then the rules are wrong.
And they will be changed, a bit like the decisions Ollie has had against him. We seem to be the guinea pigs for officials and VAR this season.
-
Reckon it's time to replace Mings. Regardless of the offside decision, it was yet another dithering on the ball fuck up when he should have just cleared it no messing, like Rio Ferdinand said. England international my arse.
He was very good tonight. Our back four was incredible, they had so much thrown at them and they stood strong. He made countless blocks and won lots of headers.
-
Sorry if this question has been asked already but does anyone know why VAR didn’t go back to see if there was an offside in the build up to the first goal?
-
Right side of defence a problem? What games do you watch. Cash was superb, as was Targett.
Almost every attack came down our right side, change your spectacles. Cash was torn a new one
Because he had fuck all support from Traore, Grealish was almost on top of Targett to help him out all game.
Yeah that's true, though I think Targett is engaging the forward a lot quicker than Cash on the other side. Cash is back tracking into the box too much when 1 on 1. It wasn't as if they were overloading us with 2 on 1 too often but Cash was letting Foden get into our box far too easily.
Maybe it's a confidence thing as it was our left flank last season that nearly every team had a lot of success. Jack working harder for sure helps, Traore is a bit of a liability defensively in truth. Leeds and Southampton made hay down our right flank too.
-
Sorry if this question has been asked already but does anyone know why VAR didn’t go back to see if there was an offside in the build up to the first goal?
They didnt have a line thick enough to use.
-
I think people are getting a bit paranoid about the decisions. To the letter of the law it was a legal goal.
Anyway, fully fit and in our groove we are a very good side. Parity with the so-called elite is so close you can almost touch it. Maybe a couple of first-team signings and a bit more squad depth and we’re there. If we show the same commitment as tonight in every game and don’t get complacent we can beat about 14 teams in that league easy.
-
So a keeper saves the shot and it rolls to a player stood offside who scores - now a goal. So free kicks stand in front of the keeper waiting...
-
Reckon it's time to replace Mings. Regardless of the offside decision, it was yet another dithering on the ball fuck up when he should have just cleared it no messing, like Rio Ferdinand said. England international my arse.
He was very good tonight. Our back four was incredible, they had so much thrown at them and they stood strong. He made countless blocks and won lots of headers.
It all counts for nothing if he gifts a goal or a chance of one to the opposition almost every game. Gifted Brighton their first goal, got himself needlessly sent off v Palace by dithering again. In my book you could have said similar of Elphick, could regularly play well most of the game then fuck it up in one moment of stupidity. Until he learns he's not Franco Baresi he's a liability.
-
Right side of defence a problem? What games do you watch. Cash was superb, as was Targett.
Almost every attack came down our right side, change your spectacles. Cash was torn a new one
Give over! Cash, Taggart, Konsa and Mings were incredible tonight. What game your watching I have no idea.
Agreed...they were all immense. Yes Mings could have dealt with that ball better but on balance you can’t criticise him with any conviction.
I’m relieved we came out and played with confidence, the goals and wins will come
-
I think people are getting a bit paranoid about the decisions. To the letter of the law it was a legal goal.
Anyway, fully fit and in our groove we are a very good side. Parity with the so-called elite is so close you can almost touch it. Maybe a couple of first-team signings and a bit more squad depth and we’re there. If we show the same commitment as tonight in every game and don’t get complacent we can beat about 14 teams in that league easy.
Nah Percy just count the number of times we've been mugged off by refs and VAR last season and this, and often the same culprits.
-
Mings did nothing wrong, he had time to chest it down seeing the play in front of him.As he does not have eyes in his arse how does he know Rodri is behind him in an offside position. wtf is he meant to do, just leave it and wait for a player in front of him to come and nick the ball? Rodri gained an unfair advantage and if not one of the 'big six' it would have been ruled out. We are getting.far too many bad decisions.
-
Not having that penalty. The ball was smashed at him. I thought they'd made allowances for that again?
Cash had no excuse for his hand being up that high. Our lads didn't seem to complain much either.
After seeing Rodrigo come back 50 yards offside would you bother contesting another decision?
-
I think people are getting a bit paranoid about the decisions. To the letter of the law it was a legal goal.
Anyway, fully fit and in our groove we are a very good side. Parity with the so-called elite is so close you can almost touch it. Maybe a couple of first-team signings and a bit more squad depth and we’re there. If we show the same commitment as tonight in every game and don’t get complacent we can beat about 14 teams in that league easy.
I don’t care about the conspiracy theory stuff, but the letter of the law is clearly wrong.
-
What does the offside rule actually say? We need to know the facts.
-
So basically all your attacking player's can stand behind the defence then put pressure of the defender just waiting for a misplaced touch.
But Ollie's fingernail can't progress further than the defenders armpit.
Got it...
I don't understand the rules of this game anymore.
-
Reckon it's time to replace Mings. Regardless of the offside decision, it was yet another dithering on the ball fuck up when he should have just cleared it no messing, like Rio Ferdinand said. England international my arse.
He was very good tonight. Our back four was incredible, they had so much thrown at them and they stood strong. He made countless blocks and won lots of headers.
He did....but it's those unforced errors that cause all the problems. A few minutes before the goal, he made a mess of a clearance that nearly ended up in our net. Another effort to play the ball in our box nearly caused another problem. If he could stick to the basics he would be fine. You don't see Konsa making those mistakes and taking unnecessary risks.
-
Right side of defence a problem? What games do you watch. Cash was superb, as was Targett.
Almost every attack came down our right side, change your spectacles. Cash was torn a new one
I think you were watching a different game Cash was superb. If there is a problem it’s Cash’s cover
-
What does the offside rule actually say? We need to know the facts.
In terms of their goal, the player becomes onside when an opponent (Mings obvs) deliberately plays the ball.
-
as said before if keeper makes a save and player in offside position scores the rebound it's a goal because keeper deliberately made the save and therefore plays him on. what a load of s**t
-
What does the offside rule actually say? We need to know the facts.
Right side of defence a problem? What games do you watch. Cash was superb, as was Targett.
Almost every attack came down our right side, change your spectacles. Cash was torn a new one
I think you were watching a different game Cash was superb. If there is a problem it’s Cash’s cover
Cash was superb as was Targett.
-
as said before if keeper makes a save and player in offside position scores the rebound it's a goal because keeper deliberately made the save and therefore plays him on. what a load of s**t
Good point.
-
Reckon it's time to replace Mings. Regardless of the offside decision, it was yet another dithering on the ball fuck up when he should have just cleared it no messing, like Rio Ferdinand said. England international my arse.
we would have been 4 down already without him ...he got in the way of everything
-
What does the offside rule actually say? We need to know the facts.
You just know that if Watkins tries something similar in the near future it will instantly be given offside because it’s us not City or United.
In terms of their goal, the player becomes onside when an opponent (Mings obvs) deliberately plays the ball.
-
as said before if keeper makes a save and player in offside position scores the rebound it's a goal because keeper deliberately made the save and therefore plays him on. what a load of s**t
Good point.
The rule is open too all kinds of interpretation but does state that GK saves would be offside.
-
Mings does make one mistake a game but he's still a great player and wore his Villa kit on the train to Bournemouth. Lest we forget.
-
Not having that penalty. The ball was smashed at him. I thought they'd made allowances for that again?
I think they'll look at it a bit like umpire's call in cricket, where there's not enough to overturn the on field decision. So if the fat ****** hadn't given it, neither would var.
-
Whoops I’ve messed up on the response to quote there, popped up in wrong place (it’s offside 😉)
-
Mings did nothing wrong, he had time to chest it down seeing the play in front of him.As he does not have eyes in his arse how does he know Rodri is behind him in an offside position. wtf is he meant to do, just leave it and wait for a player in front of him to come and nick the ball? Rodri gained an unfair advantage and if not one of the 'big six' it would have been ruled out. We are getting.far too many bad decisions.
Last year in the FA cup, Liverpool's lower league opposition had a goal ruled out because 5 phases before play the a similar thing happened where someone coming back was offside by an ankle. It wasn't quite the same as it was played to the player directly without the touch but......
From 41 seconds on the below. It was so far back in the play that the TV VAR was looking at the wrong incident.
-
I can't wait for Saturday. That will out some extra fire in the players to smash Newcastle.
-
Walton was obviously spoken to by the refs association to make such an about turn. Offside is about seeking to gain an advantage and that's what the offside player did.
Hell yeah. Walton back tracked faster than an Italian tank driver. Someone definitely had a word in his shell like.
What's really boiling my piss is how they're fannying around with interpretations to try and justify their shocking decisions. I blamed Mings in the match thread but I was wrong. Of course Mings knew he was behind him and miles offside that's why he was relaxed about bringing the ball under control safe in the knowledge that a blatantly offside player can't tackle him as he would be given offside. You'd think. And the penalty wasn't much better. He headed the ball straight at Cash's hand so he had no chance of avoiding contact. They fought like lions and that made me feel proud as did the kids the other night. It would seem that a culture of fighting for the Villa is being developed from top to bottom. But tonight I feel gutted and hate what football has become. A corporate money driven cash cow designed to keep the usual suspects at the top table. I actually feel sick thinking about it.
-
Mings does make one mistake a game but he's still a great player and wore his Villa kit on the train to Bournemouth. Lest we forget.
I don’t give a fuck about him wearing his kit on the train but he still had a great game. One of the last we need to replace. It was close to a game of shots in against a top drawer team and the defence were all excellent.
-
If anyone wants cheering up, Small Heath are losing.
-
I am a big critic of Ming when he should just head or kick it out but on this occasion definitely not,if this would have been the other way round it would have went to VAR
-
From now on, all you have to do is leave a forward ten yards behind the last defender and aim the ball at the defender's chest.
-
Reckon it's time to replace Mings. Regardless of the offside decision, it was yet another dithering on the ball fuck up when he should have just cleared it no messing, like Rio Ferdinand said. England international my arse.
Harsh.
I thought he was excellent all match considering.
And when the ball came to him before the goal I thought take that down, and he did, then from behind him hello Rhodri comes along and goodbye fairness
Exactly the second Rhodri moved towards the ball he became active and therefore offside it should have been flagged before Mings touched it. Additionally Mings was excellent all match along with the other defenders totally unfair to scapegoat him yet again
-
the fact is we have a totally egregious record against United and City.
-
From now on, all you have to do is leave a forward ten yards behind the last defender and aim the ball at the defender's chest.
Is what I said earlier.Isn't this the precise reason the offside law was originally brought in?
-
From now on, all you have to do is leave a forward ten yards behind the last defender and aim the ball at the defender's chest.
Quite. Letter of the law - bollocks.
-
the fact is we have a totally egregious record against United and City.
What a brilliant word, I’ve just had to look it up!
-
The decision on the first goal (clearly) changes the game and for all those saying "by the letter of the law ..."
This is borrowed from Smithy on the VAR thread:
"This is the law they've used to allow the goal:
"A player in an offside position receiving the ball from an opponent, who deliberately plays the ball (except from a deliberate save), is not considered to have gained an advantage."
So, they're arguing that Rhodri "received" the ball from Mings, rather than "took it" from. If Tyrone had headed the ball back to Emi and Rhodri had got it and scored, then I can see how this law would apply - but I don't see how you can argue Rhodri "received" the ball from Mings."
In order words - Rhodri tackles Mings so cannot be said to have 'received' the ball.
We may be getting closer to parity with the 'Big 6' in performance terms but we're still miles off in terms of the decisions they get.
-
Dean reckons McGinn was booked, I thought it was Luiz. Livegoals doesn't show either??
-
They deserved the win, we deserved a better referee. In this age of endless replays a mistake such as that is completely unacceptable. To compound that mistake by sending off our boss for, correctly, calling the ref a total useless cnut is just rubbing chilli into the bellend. He should be made to resit his referee's exam or alternatively be made to take charge of every game played at St Dogshits. No blame to Tyrone.
-
Dean reckons McGinn was booked, I thought it was Luiz. Livegoals doesn't show either??
BBC says McGinn.
-
(https://i.ibb.co/Drt9Lyf/Screenshot-20210120-211729-Whats-App.jpg) (https://ibb.co/Drt9Lyf)
Var release image to clear up Man City's first goal tonight.
-
(https://scontent-lhr8-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/140772979_10159344217232658_814641978225291234_o.jpg?_nc_cat=109&ccb=2&_nc_sid=8bfeb9&_nc_ohc=rbGUDnAA-8IAX97dA_d&_nc_ht=scontent-lhr8-1.xx&oh=5bf432ca14687eb0f4637389c5f0411d&oe=602E8745)
-
(https://scontent-lhr8-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/140772979_10159344217232658_814641978225291234_o.jpg?_nc_cat=109&ccb=2&_nc_sid=8bfeb9&_nc_ohc=rbGUDnAA-8IAX97dA_d&_nc_ht=scontent-lhr8-1.xx&oh=5bf432ca14687eb0f4637389c5f0411d&oe=602E8745)
Its so bad that its actually fucking comical.
-
What does it clear up?
-
(https://scontent.flhr2-1.fna.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/140727163_10222409916289688_2409825798855471029_n.jpg?_nc_cat=101&ccb=2&_nc_sid=dbeb18&_nc_ohc=-Y9BC3YJ7XkAX_ZZw_B&_nc_ht=scontent.flhr2-1.fna&oh=9ca74cd69a4f41cc867edd3146cd9efa&oe=602EDC9E)
-
(https://i.ibb.co/Drt9Lyf/Screenshot-20210120-211729-Whats-App.jpg) (https://ibb.co/Drt9Lyf)
Var release image to clear up Man City's first goal tonight.
I'm still pissed off, but this made me laugh.
-
Off fucking side.
-
(https://scontent.flhr2-1.fna.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/140727163_10222409916289688_2409825798855471029_n.jpg?_nc_cat=101&ccb=2&_nc_sid=dbeb18&_nc_ohc=-Y9BC3YJ7XkAX_ZZw_B&_nc_ht=scontent.flhr2-1.fna&oh=9ca74cd69a4f41cc867edd3146cd9efa&oe=602EDC9E)
"Recieving the ball from an opponent"
But he didn't receive the ball. He bloody tackled Mings.
-
(https://scontent.flhr2-1.fna.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/140727163_10222409916289688_2409825798855471029_n.jpg?_nc_cat=101&ccb=2&_nc_sid=dbeb18&_nc_ohc=-Y9BC3YJ7XkAX_ZZw_B&_nc_ht=scontent.flhr2-1.fna&oh=9ca74cd69a4f41cc867edd3146cd9efa&oe=602EDC9E)
Clearly they gained an advantage from it.
-
"Recieves the ball from an opponent"
But he didn't receive the ball. He bloody tackled Mings.
[/quote]
Exactly - apart from the spelling :)
-
The offside rule was brought in to outlaw "goal hanging". It is back with a vengeance because as DW says you leave a player on or near the opposition goal line then play for, A ricochets or B incompetent self agrandizing corrupt referees.
-
https://www.skysports.com/watch/video/12193889/city-leave-it-late-to-see-off-villa
-
https://www.skysports.com/watch/video/12193889/city-leave-it-late-to-see-off-villa
Edit: officials leave it late to rob Aston Villa
-
Manchester City/Match Referee 2 Villa 0 Yet again that fat bastard Moss cheats us , Just like last season in this fixture a blatant offside is ignored and the goal stands .Its hard enough playing a good team like City ,we have no chance when we have corrupt refs to contend with
-
Reckon it's time to replace Mings. Regardless of the offside decision, it was yet another dithering on the ball fuck up when he should have just cleared it no messing, like Rio Ferdinand said. England international my arse.
Harsh.
I thought he was excellent all match considering.
And when the ball came to him before the goal I thought take that down, and he did, then from behind him hello Rhodri comes along and goodbye fairness
Exactly the second Rhodri moved towards the ball he became active and therefore offside it should have been flagged before Mings touched it. Additionally Mings was excellent all match along with the other defenders totally unfair to scapegoat him yet again
To be fair some people talk absolute shite on here sometimes.
Suggesting binning Mings for that is pathetic.
Defensivly Villa were brilliant.
-
We were outplayed.
Move on to Saturday.
-
If Mings had turned round and attempted a back pass then fair enough. But he didn’t, he was tackled. That’s not in line with the rules.
-
It's farcical.
-
Even the in studio ‘referee’ didn’t know the rules, that’s how fucked up things now are.
-
We were outplayed.
Move on to Saturday.
I don’t think anyone is arguing Man City were the stronger side - not a huge surprise. Still as a fan it grates a bit when such a poor decision leads to the key goal.
-
I'm getting angrier the more I dwell on this.
Questions I'd like asked and answered, from the officials: at what point (if any) did the linesman (assistant referee) consider raising his flag for offside, and at what point (and why) did he decide not to?
-
The law is correct if the 'offside' player receives the ball, he didn't, he challenged for it from an offside position so should never have stood. Thought all the back 4 were superb including Mings.
-
The offside rule was brought in to outlaw "goal hanging". It is back with a vengeance because as DW says you leave a player on or near the opposition goal line then play for, A ricochets or B incompetent self agrandizing corrupt referees.
Exactly. Just instruct your killer striker: Save your energy. Stay in the opposition box throughout the game. Come to life when the ball's down your end. Just don't get caught offside.
-
I do not know all the British sayings, so is there a meaning to "getting juggling balls for Christmas" of which I am probably unaware?
-
People keep saying ‘the game has gone’ and I agree with them, because the situation is completely unsatisfactory, but frankly I’m confused about what the fuck is actually happening.
I think my issue is that, I don’t care whether it’s caused by VAR itself, or the laws of the game more generally, but if a decision doesn’t make immediate sense then it just can’t be the right decision. If you have to trawl through footage to explain the issue, then it’s the wrong decision. The fundamental determining factor as to whether an offence (i.e. an offside, a foul, or a handball) has been committed should be whether a team has gained an unfair advantage. If they have gained an unfair advantage, it should be an offence.
So, Watkins shouldn’t have been given offside at West Ham, because him being 1mm offside (calculated in an entirely spurious way) didn’t gain him an advantage in the context of him being held back by Ogbonna.
Similarly, Rhodri should have been given offside tonight, because he gained an advantage by nicking the ball from behind Mings, coming from an offside position.
Any other justification for making decisions is going to be unsatisfactory. I was never in favour of VAR, and I think it doesn’t help to try to make the decision-making more ‘scientific’, because you have to try to write down the criteria, and then apply them, and life, the world, and football are always going to be too nuanced to be able to deal with every eventuality. I’d actually prefer to make things more subjective, and put more weight on the view of the referee on the pitch. Personally, I think that I would find the odd poor decision more acceptable knowing that there is always going to be an element of subjectivity, or even human error involved.
-
You didn't VAR for the first goal, any Sunday League ref would have blown for that.
-
I do not know all the British sayings, so is there a meaning to "getting juggling balls for Christmas" of which I am probably unaware?
The only people that use "juggling balls" are Clowns!!
-
We were outplayed.
Move on to Saturday.
I don’t think anyone is arguing Man City were the stronger side - not a huge surprise. Still as a fan it grates a bit when such a poor decision leads to the key goal.
Two decisions.
-
I'm getting angrier the more I dwell on this.
Questions I'd like asked and answered, from the officials: at what point (if any) did the linesman (assistant referee) consider raising his flag for offside, and at what point (and why) did he decide not to?
I think this instance raised an issue with the 'keep the flag down ' policy they have too, previously the lino would flag that then the ref would've been compelled to give it.
-
Offside offence
A player in an offside position at the moment the ball is played or touched* by a team-mate is only penalised on becoming involved in active play by:
* 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
*The first point of contact of the 'play' or 'touch' of the ball should be used
I think the 4th bullet point here is the relevant one. Rhodri clearly challenged Mings for the ball - he didn’t receive it from Mings
-
I do not know all the British sayings, so is there a meaning to "getting juggling balls for Christmas" of which I am probably unaware?
Clowns use juggling balls.
-
I do not know all the British sayings, so is there a meaning to "getting juggling balls for Christmas" of which I am probably unaware?
Clowns use juggling balls.
I didn't get what he was saying until i just read this explanation.
-
I do not know all the British sayings, so is there a meaning to "getting juggling balls for Christmas" of which I am probably unaware?
The only people that use "juggling balls" are Clowns!!
Right, got that, but I was wondering if there were masturbatory undertones or something of that kind. Clearly not.
-
We all know that nothing will be done against people like Moss ,Friend and Oliver making game changing awful decisions unless it is one of the so called big six .Next time we have Moss or Oliver in charge we should just concede the points .Have just seen the offside that never was , a disgraceful decision not to give offside ,i am gradually losing my love for our once great game
-
I do not know all the British sayings, so is there a meaning to "getting juggling balls for Christmas" of which I am probably unaware?
The only people that use "juggling balls" are Clowns!!
Right, got that, but I was wondering if there were masturbatory undertones or something of that kind. Clearly not.
You need to wash your mind my friend.
-
I've just been on the FA website to check the offside law
I found this under law 11
Offside offence
A player in an offside position at the moment the ball is played or touched* by a team-mate is only penalised on becoming involved in active play by:
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
-
People keep saying ‘the game has gone’ and I agree with them, because the situation is completely unsatisfactory, but frankly I’m confused about what the fuck is actually happening.
I think my issue is that, I don’t care whether it’s caused by VAR itself, or the laws of the game more generally, but if a decision doesn’t make immediate sense then it just can’t be the right decision. If you have to trawl through footage to explain the issue, then it’s the wrong decision. The fundamental determining factor as to whether an offence (i.e. an offside, a foul, or a handball) has been committed should be whether a team has gained an unfair advantage. If they have gained an unfair advantage, it should be an offence.
So, Watkins shouldn’t have been given offside at West Ham, because him being 1mm offside (calculated in an entirely spurious way) didn’t gain him an advantage in the context of him being held back by Ogbonna.
Similarly, Rhodri should have been given offside tonight, because he gained an advantage by nicking the ball from behind Mings, coming from an offside position.
Any other justification for making decisions is going to be unsatisfactory. I was never in favour of VAR, and I think it doesn’t help to try to make the decision-making more ‘scientific’, because you have to try to write down the criteria, and then apply them, and life, the world, and football are always going to be too nuanced to be able to deal with every eventuality. I’d actually prefer to make things more subjective, and put more weight on the view of the referee on the pitch. Personally, I think that I would find the odd poor decision more acceptable knowing that there is always going to be an element of subjectivity, or even human error involved.
Exactly. In tonight's case a short sighted ref on a galloping horse could see that Rhodri was offside and used it to his teams full advantage by stealing a goal. Forget the tiny details in the rule book and apply some common sense. Give offside when you see a player is clearly 15 yards offside.
-
In the past the linesman would flag the player offside, the ref would make a judgement whether to stop the game or play on signalling his acknowledgment to his linesman, if said offside player then became involved coming back from that offside position he would halt play.
And this "phase of play" is nonsense, wide open to interpretation it can be used as a convenient excuse to absolve officials of missing fouls or infringements.
-
"The clown clearly moved his hand towards the ball Jon, under rule 42.c it's a penalty Manchester Utd or City"
-
I've just been on the FA website to check the offside law
I found this under law 11
Offside offence
A player in an offside position at the moment the ball is played or touched* by a team-mate is only penalised on becoming involved in active play by:
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
As I said earlier it’s the 4th point that is relevant
Rhodri clearly challenges Mings - he does not receive it from Mings
-
I am just getting fed up with, they are fucking up the game and no one seems to have any power to do anything about it.
-
I really don’t think that rule was meant to be interpreted in that way. The confusion seems to be the interpretation that Rodri received the ball from Mings (which must means a pass) when he had it taken off him by the player dispossessing him from an offside position.
I think they’ve used the rule to dig themselves out of admitting another error.
Edit: as Clive has said above.
-
In the past the linesman would flag the player offside, the ref would make a judgement whether to stop the game or play on signalling his acknowledgment to his linesman, if said offside player then became involved coming back from that offside position he would halt play.
And this "phase of play" is nonsense, wide open to interpretation it can be used as a convenient excuse to absolve officials of missing fouls or infringements.
Totally agree Nev
It used to be such a simple game - sadly no longer
-
So from now on pump it long to a striker standing miles offside by the corner flag, get him to stand perfectly still until a defender comes over and touches the ball, then tackle him instantly.
-
So a keeper saves the shot and it rolls to a player stood offside who scores - now a goal. So free kicks stand in front of the keeper waiting...
Completely agree. It was a change in the phase of play apart from the player who hadn’t reset. The ball was intended for him and he had an advantage. Failing that stand Watkins next to the keeper and have everyone ping shots in on sight
-
I do not know all the British sayings, so is there a meaning to "getting juggling balls for Christmas" of which I am probably unaware?
Clowns use juggling balls.
I didn't get what he was saying until i just read this explanation.
I thought I was the only one!
-
I really don’t think that rule was meant to be interpreted in that way. The confusion seems to be the interpretation that Rodri received the ball from Mings (which must means a pass) when he had it taken off him by the player dispossessing him from an offside position.
I think they’ve used the rule to dig themselves out of admitting another error.
Edit: as Clive has said above.
Spot on. But how can this abuse of the rules be stopped? Deano was enraged but sent to the stands for trying to challenge the decision. Now he'll be charged with bringing the game into disrepute which is about as ironic as it gets. The self appointed rule makers (rule interpreters) are the ones who should be charged with bringing the game into disrepute. But they won't.
-
So a keeper saves the shot and it rolls to a player stood offside who scores - now a goal. So free kicks stand in front of the keeper waiting...
Completely agree. It was a change in the phase of play apart from the player who hadn’t reset. The ball was intended for him and he had an advantage. Failing that stand Watkins next to the keeper and have everyone ping shots in on sight
I think you are incorrect
If the keeper makes a save that doesn’t play the offside player onside
-
Bottom line is that we lost
Move on
It goes to show how far we have come in such a short space of time when we feel we have been robbed and rightly so
Remember they have spent shite loads on a team that just about got over the line tonight
We need to be patient we're not a million miles away
-
What makes it infuriating is that the 'rules' aren't applied consistently. Exactly the same situation, on exactly the same evening, given offside in the Coppa Italia.
Twitter link (https://twitter.com/karlfrankham1/status/1352007887577616387)
-
People keep saying ‘the game has gone’ and I agree with them, because the situation is completely unsatisfactory, but frankly I’m confused about what the fuck is actually happening.
I think my issue is that, I don’t care whether it’s caused by VAR itself, or the laws of the game more generally, but if a decision doesn’t make immediate sense then it just can’t be the right decision. If you have to trawl through footage to explain the issue, then it’s the wrong decision. The fundamental determining factor as to whether an offence (i.e. an offside, a foul, or a handball) has been committed should be whether a team has gained an unfair advantage. If they have gained an unfair advantage, it should be an offence.
So, Watkins shouldn’t have been given offside at West Ham, because him being 1mm offside (calculated in an entirely spurious way) didn’t gain him an advantage in the context of him being held back by Ogbonna.
Similarly, Rhodri should have been given offside tonight, because he gained an advantage by nicking the ball from behind Mings, coming from an offside position.
Any other justification for making decisions is going to be unsatisfactory. I was never in favour of VAR, and I think it doesn’t help to try to make the decision-making more ‘scientific’, because you have to try to write down the criteria, and then apply them, and life, the world, and football are always going to be too nuanced to be able to deal with every eventuality. I’d actually prefer to make things more subjective, and put more weight on the view of the referee on the pitch. Personally, I think that I would find the odd poor decision more acceptable knowing that there is always going to be an element of subjectivity, or even human error involved.
A really good analysis this.
The idea that the decision was made with a knowledge of the rule being referenced, is utter rubbish. A terrible decision, where justification was sought quickly by the powers that be behind the scene, rather than admit one of their elite clubs was given an utterly ridiculous advantage. The handball equally was a decision that was been given regularly earlier in the season, but that decision making has been reversed recently, apart from here.
Man City are an excellent side, the best we’ve played this season, the best in the league I think, it’s the only time this season I can remember us having such a rearguard action for most of the game, but all of the defence were superb. And still we looked a threat at times. Ironically hourihanes left foot would of smashed that one McGinn fluffed on his wrong foot.
I hope we turn up and smash Newcastle on Saturday.
Barclay looked dead on his feet understandably, but there was hints of how the balance of the team looks better with him in it.
-
Reckon it's time to replace Mings. Regardless of the offside decision, it was yet another dithering on the ball fuck up when he should have just cleared it no messing, like Rio Ferdinand said. England international my arse.
Harsh.
I thought he was excellent all match considering.
And when the ball came to him before the goal I thought take that down, and he did, then from behind him hello Rhodri comes along and goodbye fairness
Exactly the second Rhodri moved towards the ball he became active and therefore offside it should have been flagged before Mings touched it. Additionally Mings was excellent all match along with the other defenders totally unfair to scapegoat him yet again
To be fair some people talk absolute shite on here sometimes.
Suggesting binning Mings for that is pathetic.
Defensivly Villa were brilliant.
It's you that's talking shite mate - I'm not suggesting we bin Mings for tonight but for persistently and repeatedly doing the kind of thing he did tonight. As Rio Ferdinand said first thing a defender does is ensure he clears his lines regardless of whether he thinks someone is offside. Mings is a serial offender and wearing his full kit on as many trains to Bournemouth as he likes aint gonna change that. Scapegoating is singling someone out for unmerited blame. Over several games this season and last, there are several example to show criticism of Mings is merited.
-
What makes it infuriating is that the 'rules' aren't applied consistently. Exactly the same situation, on exactly the same evening, given offside in the Coppa Italia.
Twitter link (https://twitter.com/karlfrankham1/status/1352007887577616387)
I would actually argue that is closer to the rules of allowing it as he played it away from him and the player nipped in. Difference there I suspect is the linesman flagged where in this game he didn't. (Going on the ref looking across as soon as the "challenge" was made.
-
Offside offence
A player in an offside position at the moment the ball is played or touched* by a team-mate is only penalised on becoming involved in active play by:
* 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
*The first point of contact of the 'play' or 'touch' of the ball should be used
I think the 4th bullet point here is the relevant one. Rhodri clearly challenged Mings for the ball - he didn’t receive it from Mings
Well found - I'd say that proves they not only cocked it up, but they have quoted the wrong part of the law to try and justify it. No way Rodri "received " the ball from a deliberate touch by Mings, he challenged him for it. Therefore offside. Clear as day.
-
Offside offence
A player in an offside position at the moment the ball is played or touched* by a team-mate is only penalised on becoming involved in active play by:
* 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
*The first point of contact of the 'play' or 'touch' of the ball should be used
I think the 4th bullet point here is the relevant one. Rhodri clearly challenged Mings for the ball - he didn’t receive it from Mings
Well found - I'd say that proves they not only cocked it up, but they have quoted the wrong part of the law to try and justify it. No way Rodri "received " the ball from a deliberate touch by Mings, he challenged him for it. Therefore offside. Clear as day.
Exactly.
-
What makes it infuriating is that the 'rules' aren't applied consistently. Exactly the same situation, on exactly the same evening, given offside in the Coppa Italia.
Twitter link (https://twitter.com/karlfrankham1/status/1352007887577616387)
At least the defender manages to play the ball before losing it. Mings was dispossessed. The other thing to consider in the game in Italy is that a lot of Mafia money could be riding on the result (allegedly) which could explain dodgy decisions. We don't have that problem here do we? Hmmmmmmm?
-
For me and I think a lot of us who are arguing the toss how a very good Citeh performance beat us with a dubious goal just shows how much we have gone is such a short amount of time.
Shrug it off and look forward.
It’s all good.
Very good.
-
This is just opening up another can of confusing worms, trying to justify shit decisions and mistakes, it's going to come back and haunt everyone and piss more and more people off when they get robbed by a top 6 wank decision themselves.
-
Reckon it's time to replace Mings. Regardless of the offside decision, it was yet another dithering on the ball fuck up when he should have just cleared it no messing, like Rio Ferdinand said. England international my arse.
Harsh.
I thought he was excellent all match considering.
And when the ball came to him before the goal I thought take that down, and he did, then from behind him hello Rhodri comes along and goodbye fairness
Exactly the second Rhodri moved towards the ball he became active and therefore offside it should have been flagged before Mings touched it. Additionally Mings was excellent all match along with the other defenders totally unfair to scapegoat him yet again
To be fair some people talk absolute shite on here sometimes.
Suggesting binning Mings for that is pathetic.
Defensivly Villa were brilliant.
It's you that's talking shite mate - I'm not suggesting we bin Mings for tonight but for persistently and repeatedly doing the kind of thing he did tonight. As Rio Ferdinand said first thing a defender does is ensure he clears his lines regardless of whether he thinks someone is offside. Mings is a serial offender and wearing his full kit on as many trains to Bournemouth as he likes aint gonna change that. Scapegoating is singling someone out for unmerited blame. Over several games this season and last, there are several example to show criticism of Mings is merited.
[/quote
Respectfully disagree.
So does the manager apparently.
-
A corner that never was in the cup final, and now this.
How many more times will they fuck us over with help of referees?
-
For me and I think a lot of us who are arguing the toss how a very good Citeh performance beat us with a dubious goal just shows how much we have gone is such a short amount of time.
Shrug it off and look forward.
It’s all good.
Very good.
Citeh were at the top of their game no doubt. Martinez made some brilliant saves and that what he's there for. Potentially could of been 5-1 1-3 2-2. But right now I just can't get over the feeling of being shafted in Manchester AGAIN. I'll sleep on it and hopefully be as pragmatic as you but right now I'm struggling. One things for sure. We are a very good team to watch right now.
-
Reckon it's time to replace Mings. Regardless of the offside decision, it was yet another dithering on the ball fuck up when he should have just cleared it no messing, like Rio Ferdinand said. England international my arse.
Harsh.
I thought he was excellent all match considering.
And when the ball came to him before the goal I thought take that down, and he did, then from behind him hello Rhodri comes along and goodbye fairness
Exactly the second Rhodri moved towards the ball he became active and therefore offside it should have been flagged before Mings touched it. Additionally Mings was excellent all match along with the other defenders totally unfair to scapegoat him yet again
To be fair some people talk absolute shite on here sometimes.
Suggesting binning Mings for that is pathetic.
Defensivly Villa were brilliant.
It's you that's talking shite mate - I'm not suggesting we bin Mings for tonight but for persistently and repeatedly doing the kind of thing he did tonight. As Rio Ferdinand said first thing a defender does is ensure he clears his lines regardless of whether he thinks someone is offside. Mings is a serial offender and wearing his full kit on as many trains to Bournemouth as he likes aint gonna change that. Scapegoating is singling someone out for unmerited blame. Over several games this season and last, there are several example to show criticism of Mings is merited.
[/quote
Respectfully disagree.
So does the manager apparently.
What you disagree that Mings has made multiple errors that have cost us goals or almost cost us goals? I can only imagine you've not been paying much attention then.
-
What does the offside rule actually say? We need to know the facts.
In terms of their goal, the player becomes onside when an opponent (Mings obvs) deliberately plays the ball.
And the opponent 'receives the ball' ie if Mings had passed it to him, which he didn't. The offside player tackled him from an offside position, this interfering with play.
In any event the flag should have gone up when the ball was played as it as towards the offside player thus immediately making him interfere with play.
-
I really don’t think that rule was meant to be interpreted in that way. The confusion seems to be the interpretation that Rodri received the ball from Mings (which must means a pass) when he had it taken off him by the player dispossessing him from an offside position.
I think they’ve used the rule to dig themselves out of admitting another error.
Edit: as Clive has said above.
Yeah, I think that's exactly it. The rule has always been interpreted as a deliberate pass (which is a somewhat recent development I think?...not a fan of it either tbh). So a misplaced back pass or header. Not being dispossessed from behind.
What really galls is that joker Peter Walton coming on tv to scold Dean Smith effectively that players and coaches in the industry should know the rules, cheeky prick. Ferdinand nor Savage didn't have the intelligence to challenge this face saving interpretation.
On Mings, he still makes a big error. He decides to take the ball down with an attacking player close by. He can't know if all his backline have pushed up, for all he knows someone is playing the attacker onside. He takes an unnecessary risk, makes a poor touch and it costs us a goal. Its only on the replay really that it's clear we have been robbed. Mings continues to cost us goals by taking these unnecessary risks. It's a misplaced belief in his own ball playing ability that continues to do him.
-
MOTD also quoting the wrong part of the laws to say the decision was correct - Lineker saying it would have been offside if Rodri had challenged Mings for it but he didn;t have to because that Mings' touch had taken it too far away from him. Utter bollocks form jug ears. Mings chested it down onto his own foot and Rodri took it off his foot. Clearly a challenge and clearly gaining an advantage which is offside. There is no way on earth Rodri "received" the ball from Mings. Pundits as thick as the refs. At least Keown said even if it's the law it aint right.
-
MOTD predictably glossed over the offside goal. Nobody ever wants to get on the wrong side of the elite clubs do they? By elite I mean wealthiest.
-
I don't think it's corruption, I just think they're shit.
-
MOTD also quoting the wrong part of the laws to say the decision was correct - Lineker saying it would have been offside if Rodri had challenged Mings for it but he didn;t have to because that Mings' touch had taken it too far away from him. Utter bollocks form jug ears. Mings chested it down onto his own foot and Rodri took it off his foot. Clearly a challenge and clearly gaining an advantage which is offside. There is no way on earth Rodri "received" the ball from Mings. Pundits as thick as the refs. At least Keown said even if it's the law it aint right.
Just saw that as well. Although Mings had a loose touch, Rodri had clearly tried to make up the ground to make a challenge and tackled Mings. As soon as he began to get anywhere near Mings (MOTD showing he was 3.5 yards from Mings when he took his first touch) then he should have been flagged. Clearly offside and a bollocks decision.
Does open a can of worms about how a tactic like that could be used by attackers now.
-
He was 3.5 yards from Mings when he chested the ball as measured by the BBC. Then went immediately to tackle him.
But because his starting position was about 25 yards off side when the ball was played it’s okay?!?
So the rule is that because he was so far offside, he then becomes onside?
-
I really don’t think that rule was meant to be interpreted in that way. The confusion seems to be the interpretation that Rodri received the ball from Mings (which must means a pass) when he had it taken off him by the player dispossessing him from an offside position.
I think they’ve used the rule to dig themselves out of admitting another error.
Edit: as Clive has said above.
Yeah, I think that's exactly it. The rule has always been interpreted as a deliberate pass (which is a somewhat recent development I think?...not a fan of it either tbh). So a misplaced back pass or header. Not being dispossessed from behind.
What really galls is that joker Peter Walton coming on tv to scold Dean Smith effectively that players and coaches in the industry should know the rules, cheeky prick. Ferdinand nor Savage didn't have the intelligence to challenge this face saving interpretation.
On Mings, he still makes a big error. He decides to take the ball down with an attacking player close by. He can't know if all his backline have pushed up, for all he knows someone is playing the attacker onside. He takes an unnecessary risk, makes a poor touch and it costs us a goal. Its only on the replay really that it's clear we have been robbed. Mings continues to cost us goals by taking these unnecessary risks. It's a misplaced belief in his own ball playing ability that continues to do him.
I think people are being really harsh on Mings. He brought the ball down knowing the player was behind him but convinced he was no threat as he couldn't take the ball off him as that would make him offside and we would get a welcome free kick. He had no way of knowing that on this occasion those in charge would do things differently. In all my years watching football I have always thought exactly what Tyrone thought. So did everyone else except for the corrupt/inept officials.
-
I was going to point out they won the League Cup from a corner that was quite clearly a goal kick except for the lino who got it badly wrong .I live in hope that one day we will be given a dubious decision against either Manchester club but i won't hold my breath
-
MOTD trying their hardest to say it should have been offside but, then quoting the wrong part of the offside law to justify it. Also saying the penalty for the handball was obvious, well not in my eyes. If the distance between the attacker and defender is so close, there is no way the defender can get his arm out of the way. In brief, both decisions incorrect, give the teams 1 point each and let’s move on.
-
I do not know all the British sayings, so is there a meaning to "getting juggling balls for Christmas" of which I am probably unaware?
Clowns use juggling balls.
I didn't get what he was saying until i just read this explanation.
I thought I was the only one!
That makes at least 3 of us! All I could think of was my Villa supporting cousin in NZ who's really good at juggling, but is certainly no clown!
-
I don't think it's corruption, I just think they're shit.
When was the last time we had a dodgy decision go our way against city or United that gave us victory? Surely if they were just shit everyone would get their fair share of dodgy pens etc.
-
I'm still pissed off.
-
Just posted same in Jon Moss thread but on the motd comms Guy Mowbray said VAR check complete whilst City players still celebrating so being generous 10 seconds, they’d have never had time to watch 2/3 replays to check the decision was correct. I have no doubt they spent rest of that game looking up a rule to justify a poor decision by officials hence Walton’s post Stockley Park briefing u-turn
-
Same as the Moss incident with the terrible penalty decision against Konsa. The VAR check took about 5 seconds. Fat, corrupt crook.
-
This is just opening up another can of confusing worms, trying to justify shit decisions and mistakes, it's going to come back and haunt everyone and piss more and more people off when they get robbed by a top 6 wank decision themselves.
Only solution for us is to become a top 6 club! On our way!
-
This is just opening up another can of confusing worms, trying to justify shit decisions and mistakes, it's going to come back and haunt everyone and piss more and more people off when they get robbed by a top 6 wank decision themselves.
Only solution for us is to become a top 6 club! On our way!
This is true. We’ll be getting all these shit decisions for us soon enough. And no doubt plenty of us will be saying it’s because we attack more (which is what all the wanky Man U fans say).
-
The argument against a top 6 club getting it all is Exhibit V for fucking Vidic and how did the wanker stay on the pitch.
-
The problem is it's a lot harder to break the top 6 when a lot of marginal decision are going against you. The only way is to be so good that a dodgy decision is cancelled out by scoring shedloads.
-
I have no doubt they spent rest of that game looking up a rule to justify a poor decision by officials hence Walton’s post Stockley Park briefing u-turn
I reckon that's exactly what they did - oh fuck how can we bullshit our way out of that one. Poor research by BBC and BT not checking the laws and calling them out on it.
-
Just posted same in Jon Moss thread but on the motd comms Guy Mowbray said VAR check complete whilst City players still celebrating so being generous 10 seconds, they’d have never had time to watch 2/3 replays to check the decision was correct. I have no doubt they spent rest of that game looking up a rule to justify a poor decision by officials hence Walton’s post Stockley Park briefing u-turn
Sure I heard a commentator say in a game a few weeks ago that VAR no longer checks phases of play prior to the act of scoring. Don't know if I heard that right or if it is applicable in the csee tonight, but pretty sure that is what was said.
That said, the ref and lino should have been able to make that decision on the field between them without too much hassle.
-
That would be mad if it is the case - they don’t hesitate to spend 4 minutes painting lines on the screen to see if a pubic hair is offside.
It’s not going to change anything from this game but hopefully there is enough fuss to stop that farce happening again.
I really feel for Darren Bent, he’d have had another 50+ career goals if offside meant onside
-
After all is said and done we didn’t score a goal and lost the match because our centre half was messing around. Idiots make errors or are simply incompetent but we need to do help ourselves.
-
Would love to know what Smith actually said. We could get t-shirts made up.
Dean Smith: “I thought they would go over to the VAR screen. I saw the incident and saw it was kicking off, so I asked the fourth officials did they get juggling balls for Christmas.”
Put a shout out on Twitter to get a graphic made up. Deano standing in the technical area while Charlie Cairoli unicycles past with some balls in the air.
Surely a special commission for villa boy Cold War Steve?
-
I'm still annoyed about the Man U dodgy penalty on NY day.
Now this.
Man City are a great team and will probably end up winning the league but if it wasn't for that non-decision we might have come away with a point.
Just reward for a great battling team performance.
I thought our defence was awesome tonight (including Mings).
We must now beat Newcastle on Saturday.
-
Can’t we claim the cash handball was rush goalkeeper now we’ve got goalhangers?
-
So a keeper saves the shot and it rolls to a player stood offside who scores - now a goal. So free kicks stand in front of the keeper waiting...
Completely agree. It was a change in the phase of play apart from the player who hadn’t reset. The ball was intended for him and he had an advantage. Failing that stand Watkins next to the keeper and have everyone ping shots in on sight
I think you are incorrect
If the keeper makes a save that doesn’t play the offside player onside
Is that different to what happened tonight? If a player blindsides a keeper who rolls the ball out after a catch it’s a clear change of phase, but if you parry the ball away it’s the same as Mings not having the ball under complete control and the attacker challenging him from an offside position but further from the goal.
Irrespective, it was great to see us go at them. I can’t imagine anyone fancies playing against us.
-
Inversley, would man city have complained if it HAD been given offside? No chance, no-one would.
-
Inversley, would man city have complained if it HAD been given offside? No chance, no-one would.
Would it have been given in a wolves Albion game? I feel we’re in a black mirrors episode right now
-
Its become a game where the people playing and watching it no longer know the rules.
The officials now own and control it.
-
If this decision was given against the big 6, they would debate this for days with eventually the Premier League having to apologise to the club for getting the decision wrong
Because it is Aston Villa no one will care and it will be just a shrug of the shoulders and move on to the next game.
We should have had a draw at United and you never now we could have hung on last night for another draw.
-
If you have a referee in the studio being confused about the goal and then having to reverse faster than a member of this government at a Covid press conference then it confirms the fact that 9,999 times out of10,000 its given as offside.
-
On the same night - last night - this incident occurs in Italy https://twitter.com/karlfrankham1/status/1352007887577616387
Feekick for offside is given.
-
My immediate reaction to the first goal was that Mings had screwed up by dilly-dallying on the ball.
The offside really only dawned in the replay, and then the interpretation of the rules is all: when Mings chests the ball, have we moved into a new phase of the game, thereby legitimising Rodri's involvement in what took place? That's the issue in a nutshell, for me.
-
Regarding our performance. I was delighted with many aspects - what a way to return from an enforced 2-week absence!!
All I'd say is that if we are planning to attack on the break, we need to be more clinical with the few chances we get.
Apart from that, let's move on and rip the Jawdies a new one.
-
Its frustrating to have so much brilliant defensive work undone by such a freak incident.
It will now be interesting what happens on Saturday.
Does it affect us or do we power past Newcastle and go on adding to this impressive season's stories.
-
It wouldn’t have been an issue if Rodri had got himself back onside and then challenged Mings. It was the fact he challenged him before that and he did not receive the ball from Mings, he took it off him. It absolutely is offside and no amount of bending the rules to suit the argument works.
My guess is that this will quietly be ‘clarified’ when the dust settles to avoid forwards taking advantage and remaining behind and out of the eyesight of defenders.
-
My immediate reaction to the first goal was that Mings had screwed up by dilly-dallying on the ball.
The offside really only dawned in the replay, and then the interpretation of the rules is all: when Mings chests the ball, have we moved into a new phase of the game, thereby legitimising Rodri's involvement in what took place? That's the issue in a nutshell, for me.
The rule is stupid.
The player should have got back onside before playing the ball.
-
Aside from the offside shambles, credit to the team for putting in a terrific shift after only three days of training. I thought tiredness might have been an issue as the game wore on but we seemed to get more into it and probably should have scored before they did. Special mention to Targett, he was immense.
-
This is just opening up another can of confusing worms, trying to justify shit decisions and mistakes, it's going to come back and haunt everyone and piss more and more people off when they get robbed by a top 6 wank decision themselves.
Only solution for us is to become a top 6 club! On our way!
Hopefully we will soon be in the top six but let’s face it we will never be “the top six”
Just as Leicester will never be in “the top six”
-
Sterling didn't get any change out of Targett all evening, what a transformation. Matt has got to be on thinking about an England call up soon.
-
I don't know if Pep has said anything about their offside goal. He's got his 3 points so if he has any integrity he should. Not to say anything shows compliance that his team will get decisions like this in their favour no matter what and he doesn't wish to rock the boat. If that was Watkins tackling Stone from an offside position (resulting in a goal) he would be throwing his dummy out of the pram. Pep, Jose, Steffan, Ogs would all be throwing dummies out of prams and the likes of sky, bt and the bbc would be falling in line right behind them to curry favour. The integrity of the game is fading fast and with it my patience for it.
-
We were great in defence I thought, did well in attack too. They were the better team but that decision just glosses over it all.
Just seen the pen too. I understand why it was given but that was a close call too.
I'm royally pissed off but on to Saturday.
-
The rule they're clinging on to ''A player in an offside position receiving the ball from an opponent who deliberately plays the ball''. Rodri didn't receive the ball from the opponent, he tackled him. This musical chairs to gloss over another VAR fuck up is farcical.
Can anyone honestly state that they've enjoyed VAR being part of football?
-
On seeing other examples of the rule in action, I can see the confusion on the deliberately playing the ball. Most examples is that unless it is blasted at the defender and deflects naturally then the attacker is onside. Anything where you go to control the ball (unless it is a goal line clearance) means it is onside. So if the ball was blasted at Mings, hit him and deflected to Rodri = offside. If he had gone to head it and just misjudged and it had flicked back = onside.
Then you have the normal if they are coming back from play they are not normally flagged initially. I still think it was offside as Rodri went to an area to make the challenge from an offside position on the anticipation of Mings making his normal one per game ballsup. I also think the Lino would have flagged as well but are told not to because "VAR will pick up the offside if a goal is scored" and flagging stops that option.
-
Regarding our performance. I was delighted with many aspects - what a way to return from an enforced 2-week absence!!
All I'd say is that if we are planning to attack on the break, we need to be more clinical with the few chances we get.
Apart from that, let's move on and rip the Jawdies a new one.
My immediate reaction to the first goal was that Mings had screwed up by dilly-dallying on the ball.
The offside really only dawned in the replay, and then the interpretation of the rules is all: when Mings chests the ball, have we moved into a new phase of the game, thereby legitimising Rodri's involvement in what took place? That's the issue in a nutshell, for me.
i.
If you look at the extracts of the Laws of the Game posted here earlier phases doesn't come into it. The nub of the question is whether Rodri received the ball from Mings (not offside) or challenged him for it (offside). I think it's fairly clear that it's the latter - I really don't see how anyone can argue otherwise - and PL et al are quoting the wrong part of the law to try and justify their latest failure.
-
Rodri gains an advantage from an offside position. Fact.
Any other "ifs, buts and maybes" don't come into it.
Does Rodri gain an advantage from an offside position?
Yes.
Then he's offside.
-
Can I just say, we were all lauding VAR as the nail in the coffin of dodgy Sky 6 decisions, but how many dodgy decisions can you remember now that have been given against them using VAR, it just feels like a big fuck you, right in your face with these muppets sitting in the darkened room fucking you over big time and then coming out with some codswallop that didn't make sense last week but does this week.
I'm still raging, my breakfast hasn't calmed me down at all. I need a bloody walk.
-
I think we all know that, had this been Watkins coming back from an offside position, tackling Stones, then laying it off for Grealish to score, it would have been chalked off instantly.
-
What's galling is players have been given offside by the hair of an armpit but then they'll pull this 10 yards offside bullshit on you and excuse it away.
-
I think we all know that, had this been Watkins coming back from an offside position, tackling Stones, then laying it off for Grealish to score, it would have been chalked off instantly.
Almost certainly.
-
I'm still raging, my breakfast hasn't calmed me down at all. I need a bloody walk.
An aggressive, angry walk just after breakfast often does it for me. Nine times out of ten I drift straight back to sleep.
-
I think we all know that, had this been Watkins coming back from an offside position, tackling Stones, then laying it off for Grealish to score, it would have been chalked off instantly.
Almost certainly.
And nobody would have argued about it as it would have been blatant.
-
Looking at the various options for awarding an offside decision, I think I would go for "Making an obvious action which has a clear impact on the ability of an opponent to play the ball". So offside but I would have to say that Rodri did appear to wait for Mings first touch before challenging so maybe he was aware.
For me though, as soon as Rodri, plays that ball, he has gained an advantage from being in an offside position and therefore he must be offside. Anyway, the media and the rest of football have moved on now - apart from the off " you would have been relegated.........Yes etc. A lot to be proud of but sadly another potential point lost
-
The rule that is being put forward to justify this appalling decision (receiving the ball from an opponent) is really on the books for one principal (only) purpose, which is to allow an attacking player to be in a position where he might legitimately prevent or intercept an intended back pass to the goalkeeper. It is not to allow or encourage the sort of thing that did us last night and, as others have said, the shite that has been spouted since then, by the so-called experts, is to miss the point entirely, probably deliberately.
-
Rodri gains an advantage from an offside position. Fact.
Any other "ifs, buts and maybes" don't come into it.
Does Rodri gain an advantage from an offside position?
Yes.
Then he's offside.
Not if he received the ball from a deliberate touch by Mings, in which case there is deemed no gaining of advantage. So onside if Mings had played it to him. This is what the PL are claiming. But he clearly didn't receive it from Mings he took it off his foot.
-
I do not agree that there is a so called top 6 bias out there and to say so makes us look small time. This is how our neighbours talk about us. There is general incompetence and confusion emanating from muddled rule making and misuse of technology. To harp on about top 6 bollocks is feeding the monster that is top 6. Fuck them and anyone else let's just sort ourselves out.
-
I want us to try this on Saturday night.
-
As for the performance itself there was one brilliant pass from from Jack that was pure De Bruyne, the one where he threaded a pass between two defenders to find McGinn free in the box. Who then did an air shot when he should have scored.
-
On Saturday, to reinforce the absurdity of this decision, Smith should instruct Ollie Watkins (or any one of our players) to go and just stand in the Newcastle penalty box for the first 10 minutes of the game, and only move when the ball comes near him. See what the referee (and the opposition) makes of that.
-
If you seriously think there isn’t the slightest bias towards the traditional sky four/six that has been going on since time immemorial then I think you are mistaken. 27 penalties for manure since clooob man joined alone is enough to determine it. The only time I can think it’s worked against them this season was when Manure fan David Coote overruled Salahs ridiculous non offside against Everton.
-
12 Jan 2020 Villa 1 Man City 6
Re the above we gave one of the most pathetic performances, I have seen from a Villa side for a long time, just over 12 months later last night's performance just highlights the massive improvement we have made in that time. We were playing against the best team, by some margin presently in the league, and gave them one of the toughest games they've had all season.
Gotta mention Matt Target, absolutely superb last night, not only is he the most improved Villa player this season, but must also be one of the most improved players in the league, hopefully he'll be ok for Saturday.
-
Its that sort of season that I cant wait for the next game, championship era aside i probably havent felt like that since the O'Neill days. I expect Saturday to be similar to the Palace game on Boxing Day or even the game against the Toon last season, score first and we will be in complete control (albeit with eleven men unlike the Palace game).
-
This is just opening up another can of confusing worms, trying to justify shit decisions and mistakes, it's going to come back and haunt everyone and piss more and more people off when they get robbed by a top 6 wank decision themselves.
Only solution for us is to become a top 6 club! On our way!
Hopefully we will soon be in the top six but let’s face it we will never be “the top six”
Just as Leicester will never be in “the top six”
Why not? We used to be before someone arbitrarily decided it was Everton.
-
12 Jan 2020 Villa 1 Man City 6
Re the above we gave one of the most pathetic performances, I have seen from a Villa side for a long time, just over 12 months later last night's performance just highlights the massive improvement we have made in that time. We were playing against the best team, by some margin presently in the league, and gave them one of the toughest games they've had all season.
Gotta mention Matt Target, absolutely superb last night, not only is he the most improved Villa player this season, but must also be one of the most improved players in the league, hopefully he'll be ok for Saturday.
Was just thinking that. It took a blatant bit of cheating from the ref to break us down last night, after we'd had a few chances ourselves. Compare that to last season when they'd scored three goals before we'd even realised the game had started and we had that wanker Drinkwater hauling his shit self around the pitch.
-
Rodri gains an advantage from an offside position. Fact.
Any other "ifs, buts and maybes" don't come into it.
Does Rodri gain an advantage from an offside position?
Yes.
Then he's offside.
Not if he received the ball from a deliberate touch by Mings, in which case there is deemed no gaining of advantage. So onside if Mings had played it to him. This is what the PL are claiming. But he clearly didn't receive it from Mings he took it off his foot.
Rodri is able to "tackle" Mings because he has come from an offside position and takes advantage of that position to get the ball.....so as you say he didn't "receive" it from Mings......therefore.....offside.
-
I have said it before and i will say it again For some reason Aston Villa seem to play to a different set of rules to everyone else in the Premier .Brighton,West Ham,Arsenal Man Utd and Man City are five matches this season that we have been on the wrong end of big decisions I also notice the fat bastard Moss did, not give City a single yellow card last night but could'nt get his cards out quick enough for McGinn, Taylor and of course a yellow then a red for Deano As i said last night Moss is up there along with Friend for his obvious anti bias towards Villa and shoud never be allowed to referee another Villa game
-
12 Jan 2020 Villa 1 Man City 6
Re the above we gave one of the most pathetic performances, I have seen from a Villa side for a long time, just over 12 months later last night's performance just highlights the massive improvement we have made in that time. We were playing against the best team, by some margin presently in the league, and gave them one of the toughest games they've had all season.
Gotta mention Matt Target, absolutely superb last night, not only is he the most improved Villa player this season, but must also be one of the most improved players in the league, hopefully he'll be ok for Saturday.
Was just thinking that. It took a blatant bit of cheating from the ref to break us down last night, after we'd had a few chances ourselves. Compare that to last season when they'd scored three goals before we'd even realised the game had started and we had that wanker Drinkwater hauling his shit self around the pitch.
It shouldn't, but thinking of that game makes me laugh as my brother had a fair wedge coming his way for the 6-0, then we got that consolation at the death.
-
I think there's another part that's being missed. When the ball is played Rodri is 15-20 yards from Mings but he then runs towards the ball clearly intending to challenge for it and is 3-4 yards away when Mings plays it, by his actions he's clearly involved in play and the tackle is just a continuation of it. Quoting a rule that was clearly written for different circumstances to justify it is ridiculous.
What's annoying me even more though is the amount of fans on twitter, etc who 'knew' that the rule was exactly as described and think Villa are just sulking about it as if they wouldn't have any complaints if it happened to them. I hope at least some of the more vocal ones get ripped to shreds next time they moan about a decision not going their way, hypocritical twats.
-
On Saturday, to reinforce the absurdity of this decision, Smith should instruct Ollie Watkins (or any one of our players) to go and just stand in the Newcastle penalty box for the first 10 minutes of the game, and only move when the ball comes near him. See what the referee (and the opposition) makes of that.
What any striker should do now is just stalk the last defender and stand 4-5 yards behind him at all times. Any time the ball goes anywhere near him stay offside, but then make the tackle as soon as he controls the ball. You can guarantee the rule will be 'clarified' as soon as that starts happening, but only when it works to the advantage of someone other than the likes of Liverpool or Manure.
-
Last night's incident kind of reminded me of playing football in the park as a boy, with jumpers for goalposts. Even then we were able to recognise the goal hanger for what he was, and invariably a lad with very few friends.
-
I have said it before and i will say it again For some reason Aston Villa seem to play to a different set of rules to everyone else in the Premier .Brighton,West Ham,Arsenal Man Utd and Man City are five matches this season that we have been on the wrong end of big decisions I also notice the fat bastard Moss did, not give City a single yellow card last night but could'nt get his cards out quick enough for McGinn, Taylor and of course a yellow then a red for Deano As i said last night Moss is up there along with Friend for his obvious anti bias towards Villa and shoud never be allowed to referee another Villa game
It's not just that but in at least two of those incidents it's as if they've had to re-write or re-interpret the rules on the hoof, and have then started interpreting things differently after that. The Brighton pen didn't stand because it grazed the players toe as Trez knocked it past him. He didn't win the ball or take it away from Trez, he barely touched it and Trez would have still been in control of it had he not been kicked. he clearly impeded Trez. Previously they had been saying it doesn't matter if you get the ball if your follow through is a foul. I wonder if the pen had been give if he'd touched the ball but gone straight over the top and broke Trez's leg? No foul cos he touched the ball? Bollocks would it. Ollie's goal at Spam was supposedly offside because of his arm and they are now less likely to consider the arm. Then last night - and it arguably wasn't even the worst decision - there is no way that is a pen given that they are supposed to not give them if it's hit at the player form very short range.
It does seem that if there is any room for interpretation or subjectivity at all, either at the time or in retrospect, it goes against Villa. You could even say the same about Mings red against Palace - if a Villa player had raised his hands like Zaha did on Mings he'd have been off. Zaha did similar in a subsequent game ang got away with it again. I can only think of Fulham's disallowed goal that has gone in our favour this season - honestly can't think of another one that's gone our way.
-
The penalty decision was just as bad to be honest. Cash was really close to the player, and had his back to him. You know, exactly the sorts of decisions that they said wouldn't be given any more.
-
On Saturday, to reinforce the absurdity of this decision, Smith should instruct Ollie Watkins (or any one of our players) to go and just stand in the Newcastle penalty box for the first 10 minutes of the game, and only move when the ball comes near him. See what the referee (and the opposition) makes of that.
What any striker should do now is just stalk the last defender and stand 4-5 yards behind him at all times. Any time the ball goes anywhere near him stay offside, but then make the tackle as soon as he controls the ball. You can guarantee the rule will be 'clarified' as soon as that starts happening, but only when it works to the advantage of someone other than the likes of Liverpool or Manure.
2 min 05 for Dermot Gallagher comments
https://youtu.be/Vzcr0aSWvgU
NEw Phase?
The offside law makes no mention of phases :
https://www.thefa.com/football-rules-governance/lawsandrules/laws/football-11-11/law-11---offside#:~:text=A%20player%20is%20in%20an,and%20the%20second%2Dlast%20opponent
-
Rodri is offside, he never becomes onside. You are not allowed to be active if you are offside.
Its fucking nuts and dishonest.
-
Ex-premier leagure referee Mark Halsey says: No Goal! https://talksport.com/football/821182/
-
The "phase of play" is absolute horseshit, where is the definition between phases? It seems that since the introduction of VAR, it's been used as a cover all to excuse mistakes. "It was a different phase of play" my arse.
Surely the ball played forward and played by Mings is within one phase?? You can't just let the ref "guess".
Fucking bollocks.
-
Ex-premier leagure referee Mark Halsey says: No Goal! https://talksport.com/football/821182/
Well he can Fcukin do one as well. He scored a free kick against us for Arsenal once.
-
The penalty decision was just as bad to be honest. Cash was really close to the player, and had his back to him. You know, exactly the sorts of decisions that they said wouldn't be given any more.
And VAR was decided within 30 seconds !!
I dont want us to become a team that other fans think we just whine about VAR decisions (although there is enough evidence to prove we have had some shockers against us) as they will always throw the Sheffield united "ghost goal" against us.
So - onto the game
Martinez - probably the best keeper in the league - as good with his feet as his hands 9/10
Targett = Most improved player by a country mile - not a lot of attacking flair last night but he was up against Sterling so last thing you needed was to give him space. The biggest difference is 50/50 balls - i used to wince everytime he seemingly bottled them - now i am surprised if he does not win them - fair play. Only LB better than him is Chilwell 8/10
Mings - i do think he has a cock up in him each game and sometimes thinks he is better than he actually is - but nothing bit praise how he led his warriors into battle last night. Awful ref decision decided the goal not him 8/10
Konsa - Just did what we expected - unassuming, totally professional 7.5/10
Cash - Love the guy but was targeted due to lack of support from Bert - Like MIngs let down by shit ref rather than himself 8/10
McGinn - worked tirelessly but air shot was awful after great opening created - be interesting now if Ramsey picks up the baton Saturday and claims the shirt - 7/10
Luiz - Clean and tidy in possession and works his nads off - great bit of professionalism to take one for team with an important foul when they broke. 7.5 / 10
Jack - Quiet for him but work very hard to help Targett - really wish Ross had put him in 1st half - great pass to SJM - 7.5 / 10
Bert - Typified his game - some tremendous bits some lazy bits - i think he could tear Jawdies a new arse - 7/10
Ross - obviously started to tire but first half was pulling city back line all over the place - sometimes tried a trick too far or a touch too much but match sharpness will return 7/10
Ollie - worked as usual with not a lot to feed on but never let the defence rest 6.5/10
Deano - fir play to him - love his passion and steely resolve even in the face of proper arsehole officals
This team and my love for them 2000000000000000 / 10
Bottle, guts, team work, work ethic, togetherness - been a long time coming but loving every minute of it
I want Newcastle to look like their manager face when we have finished with them
-
Just posted same in Jon Moss thread but on the motd comms Guy Mowbray said VAR check complete whilst City players still celebrating so being generous 10 seconds, they’d have never had time to watch 2/3 replays to check the decision was correct. I have no doubt they spent rest of that game looking up a rule to justify a poor decision by officials hence Walton’s post Stockley Park briefing u-turn
Sure I heard a commentator say in a game a few weeks ago that VAR no longer checks phases of play prior to the act of scoring. Don't know if I heard that right or if it is applicable in the csee tonight, but pretty sure that is what was said.
That said, the ref and lino should have been able to make that decision on the field between them without too much hassle.
Absolutely, this is what VAR is doing for linesmen, where before they would flag immediately they now keep the flag down knowing full well they can wait for VAR to make the call for them.
Moss would have taken this into account by not stopping play sooner, he cocked up knowing VAR would help him by not going against him.
A similar sort of thing to a foul on Grealish not being punished properly in the first quarter as it then gives the official a decision he doesn't want to have to make later in the game.
-
Rodri is offside, he never becomes onside. You are not allowed to be active if you are offside.
Its fucking nuts and dishonest.
Everyone understands that so why they are talking about phases and receiving the ball is all smoke and mirrors. A player has to get back onside to be active in the game again otherwise he is gaining a potential unfair advantage from being in that position. That’s always been at the core of the offside laws. The only exception is where a pass is intercepted (pretty much always to a goalkeeper).
-
I thought it was a penalty tbh even with the rule change that stopped the joke early season ones being given.
Yes close range but Cash didn't have his hand down, it was above his head and header was going back across goal towards another City player so don't have a big issue with that.
It was different to the incident first half when I think ball hit knee of one of their defenders and bounced up towards the hand.
He gave away a similar one just outside the box v Southampton I think which Ward Prowse scored from.
If it was 0-0 though I doubt that sort of incident would've occurred anyway as we'd have had more defenders in the box so all on the joke first goal.
-
Ex-premier leagure referee Mark Halsey says: No Goal! https://talksport.com/football/821182/
Just seen Mings twitter post about it. "In Hindsight I should have cleared it". Yes Mings, maybe if you realised that a lot the last two seasons we would have probably 10 goals less against us. Last night the Offside should have saved him but we wouldn't be talking about it at all if he remembered this more.
-
Interesting to read the offside rule introduced in 1925 (and which stood until 1990) and compare it with the current version.
The 1925-90 version was clear and unambiguous whereas the current version is a complete horlicks and can be interpreted to suit any agenda.
Incidentally I think under the old rule the goal would have stood as Mings “played” the ball and put Rhodri onside
Link to minutes of 1925 FA meeting adopting the new law
https://ssbra.org/ifab/assets/pdf/1925min.pdf
-
Burnley got what we didn't get last night - a decent ref.
-
Some interesting points raised on here.
Here's my take:
1. Having Halsey in our corner really isn't much of a help with his own history of crushing ineptitude.
2. If some see us as hypocritical VAR whiners, perhaps they might like VAR to review the two penalty shouts we had in the same game. Thanks, once again, Michael Oliver!!
3. Re Mings's sending-off v. Palace; had the VAR official wound the play back a few seconds, he would have seen borderline sociopath Zaha smack Mings in the stomach before the incident which saw both players booked. Zaha's was a clear red-card offence.