Man Citeh XIV 2 v Aston Villa 0 Post Match Thread.

[The Edge]

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.

[Clive W]

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

[Morleys left boot]

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

[exigo]

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

[RamboandBruno]

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.

[ktvillan]

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.

[Somniloquism]

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

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.

[ktvillan]

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.

[Legion]

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.

[The Edge]

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

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?

[TonyD]

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.

[aj2k77]

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.

[Nunkin1965]

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.

[andyh]

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?

[The Edge]

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.