Aston Villa v AZ Alkmaar Post-Match Thread

[Brend'Watkins]

I didn't see last nights game, reading reports it seemed to be another lack lustre performace until Dougie came on. We may be suffering the West Ham experience where our squad is not quite good enough compete in both competitions. We seem to have run out of energy and options in last couple of games, the spark is missing. I hope put half a dozen past Fulham at the weekend to make me look an idiot.

We didn't perform to our best for sure but credit has to be given to AZ.  They weren't going all guns blazing to beat us because if they had we would have picked them off and they knew it.  They bided their time and exploited where and when they could.  It's how they got their goal. The stand out thing for me was that the game was evidence of how important a player Luiz is for us. 

I'm really looking forward to the Warsaw game now.  It should be far more open with both teams going for the win.

[LeeB]

Forgive me if I'm being spectacularly thick, but Tielemans header is going in, isn't it? Therefore doesn't the AZ defender's headed clearance count as a save and, with Bailey being in an offside position at the point of Youri's attempt, make the offside decision correct?

"A player in an offside position receiving the ball from an opponent who deliberately played* the ball, including by deliberate handball, is not considered to have gained an advantage, unless it was a deliberate save by any opponent.

*‘Deliberate play’ (excluding deliberate handball) is when a player has control of the ball with the possibility of:

passing the ball to a team-mate;
gaining possession of the ball; or
clearing the ball (e.g. by kicking or heading it)"

Reading the rule, I see it as it is either a deliberate play or a deliberate save - they then define what is a deliberate play, which is what the defender did (ergo, not a deliberate save)

Basically the rule is badly written and contradicts itself in this instance, they could make it just explicitly a save from the keeper (which I think is the intention).

[Lastfootstamper]

I'm assuming the interpretation is that only a goalkeeper can make a save, that the action(s) of a goalkeeper making a save are different to those of an outfield player intercepting a goal bound effort. It saved a goal, but it wasn't a save, it was just a headed clearance.

[Martyn Smith]

Forgive me if I'm being spectacularly thick, but Tielemans header is going in, isn't it? Therefore doesn't the AZ defender's headed clearance count as a save and, with Bailey being in an offside position at the point of Youri's attempt, make the offside decision correct?

"A player in an offside position receiving the ball from an opponent who deliberately played* the ball, including by deliberate handball, is not considered to have gained an advantage, unless it was a deliberate save by any opponent.

*‘Deliberate play’ (excluding deliberate handball) is when a player has control of the ball with the possibility of:

passing the ball to a team-mate;
gaining possession of the ball; or
clearing the ball (e.g. by kicking or heading it)"

Reading the rule, I see it as it is either a deliberate play or a deliberate save - they then define what is a deliberate play, which is what the defender did (ergo, not a deliberate save)

Ah OK, so it wasn't just a matter of the AZ defender getting his body in the way of the ball, it was - I guess by dint of the fact that he twisted his neck whilst heading in order to put some deliberate direction on the ball - counted as a clearance. Understood... although this does bring a subjective judgement into play as to when such a contact is a save rather than a clearance, how deliberately does a defender deal with the incoming ball...

[Percy McCarthy]

Forgive me if I'm being spectacularly thick, but Tielemans header is going in, isn't it? Therefore doesn't the AZ defender's headed clearance count as a save and, with Bailey being in an offside position at the point of Youri's attempt, make the offside decision correct?

"A player in an offside position receiving the ball from an opponent who deliberately played* the ball, including by deliberate handball, is not considered to have gained an advantage, unless it was a deliberate save by any opponent.

*‘Deliberate play’ (excluding deliberate handball) is when a player has control of the ball with the possibility of:

passing the ball to a team-mate;
gaining possession of the ball; or
clearing the ball (e.g. by kicking or heading it)"

Reading the rule, I see it as it is either a deliberate play or a deliberate save - they then define what is a deliberate play, which is what the defender did (ergo, not a deliberate save)

It was a deliberate save, which to me, unlike ‘deliberate play’, doesn’t need further definition. So offside.

[Martyn Smith]

Forgive me if I'm being spectacularly thick, but Tielemans header is going in, isn't it? Therefore doesn't the AZ defender's headed clearance count as a save and, with Bailey being in an offside position at the point of Youri's attempt, make the offside decision correct?

"A player in an offside position receiving the ball from an opponent who deliberately played* the ball, including by deliberate handball, is not considered to have gained an advantage, unless it was a deliberate save by any opponent.

*‘Deliberate play’ (excluding deliberate handball) is when a player has control of the ball with the possibility of:

passing the ball to a team-mate;
gaining possession of the ball; or
clearing the ball (e.g. by kicking or heading it)"

Reading the rule, I see it as it is either a deliberate play or a deliberate save - they then define what is a deliberate play, which is what the defender did (ergo, not a deliberate save)

It was a deliberate save.

Yeah, there's a whole lot of murky subjectivity going on here...

[Edvard Remberg]

Forgive me if I'm being spectacularly thick, but Tielemans header is going in, isn't it? Therefore doesn't the AZ defender's headed clearance count as a save and, with Bailey being in an offside position at the point of Youri's attempt, make the offside decision correct?

"A player in an offside position receiving the ball from an opponent who deliberately played* the ball, including by deliberate handball, is not considered to have gained an advantage, unless it was a deliberate save by any opponent.

*‘Deliberate play’ (excluding deliberate handball) is when a player has control of the ball with the possibility of:

passing the ball to a team-mate;
gaining possession of the ball; or
clearing the ball (e.g. by kicking or heading it)"

Reading the rule, I see it as it is either a deliberate play or a deliberate save - they then define what is a deliberate play, which is what the defender did (ergo, not a deliberate save)

It was a deliberate save, which to me, unlike ‘deliberate play’, doesn’t need further definition. So offside.

Yet the referee admitted it was a wrong call?

[LeeB]

The law is an ass if our goal last night is illegal and this is not:

In this instance Salah was offside when the pass was made directly to him, but apparently is onside because of the defenders header in between, what a farce.

[Percy McCarthy]

Forgive me if I'm being spectacularly thick, but Tielemans header is going in, isn't it? Therefore doesn't the AZ defender's headed clearance count as a save and, with Bailey being in an offside position at the point of Youri's attempt, make the offside decision correct?

"A player in an offside position receiving the ball from an opponent who deliberately played* the ball, including by deliberate handball, is not considered to have gained an advantage, unless it was a deliberate save by any opponent.

*‘Deliberate play’ (excluding deliberate handball) is when a player has control of the ball with the possibility of:

passing the ball to a team-mate;
gaining possession of the ball; or
clearing the ball (e.g. by kicking or heading it)"

Reading the rule, I see it as it is either a deliberate play or a deliberate save - they then define what is a deliberate play, which is what the defender did (ergo, not a deliberate save)

It was a deliberate save, which to me, unlike ‘deliberate play’, doesn’t need further definition. So offside.

Yet the referee admitted it was a wrong call?

Yes he did, but if you consider it was a deliberate save, the decision was right. That’s according to the rules you quoted.

[Martyn Smith]

It should be tidied up to mean any deliberate play except by the keeper

[London Villan]

Bailey is as infuriating as Dinge - both had a lot of the ball, but little end product.

[Axl Rose]

Bailey isn't very good.

I'm looking an upgrade on his hesitant nonsense come January.

[taylorsworkrate]

Forgive me if I'm being spectacularly thick, but Tielemans header is going in, isn't it? Therefore doesn't the AZ defender's headed clearance count as a save and, with Bailey being in an offside position at the point of Youri's attempt, make the offside decision correct?

"A player in an offside position receiving the ball from an opponent who deliberately played* the ball, including by deliberate handball, is not considered to have gained an advantage, unless it was a deliberate save by any opponent.

*‘Deliberate play’ (excluding deliberate handball) is when a player has control of the ball with the possibility of:

passing the ball to a team-mate;
gaining possession of the ball; or
clearing the ball (e.g. by kicking or heading it)"

Reading the rule, I see it as it is either a deliberate play or a deliberate save - they then define what is a deliberate play, which is what the defender did (ergo, not a deliberate save)

It was a deliberate save, which to me, unlike ‘deliberate play’, doesn’t need further definition. So offside.

Yet the referee admitted it was a wrong call?

That has what has muddied the waters, and lets be fair, there's been no official confirmation from the officials that they've got it wrong.

[paul_e]

Personally I think the interpretation of the rule to disallow the goal is the right one and the one that makes the most sense.

Our goal was on the extreme end of it because Bailey was clearly not in a goalscoring position but if you allow that goal then you have to accept that goals like the one Salah scored in the clip above or the one Rodri scored against us are correct interpretations of the law. I can't accept that, for me goals like that show how badly they've fucked the rule up over the last few decades. I'm generally in favour of most of the rule changes that come in but changing offside to 'interfering in play' and then adding all these silly little sub-clauses beyond that has made it open to far too much interpretation.

[London Villan]

To simplify it - when the ball is played - whether you are interfering or not - if you are in a technical offside position - you are offside.