- Mane was in an offside position when the ball was played over the top, this gave him an unfair advantage to get to the rebound first, ahead of any Arsenal player.

As is the case for a lot of free kicks? so if its the rules why do players purposely stand offside at freekicks? Thats not the rules you can be offside for as long as you want surely aslong as when you join in play you're onside?

As for the game probably a fair result, both teams can feel they could have won it but can't really complain about a point.

For me he became active as soon as he went for the through ball. Correct decision - although the lino only flagged when he put it in so not sure if he got it right knowingly.

The actually rules (or laws) are not very clear and very open to interpretation.



Reminds me of the Alexis goal in the Cup final versus Chelsea. For me Ramsey was offside and active, should have been ruled out. But the officials, and some experts, felt he was not involved.

The rules as they are, with phases of play, mean the first goal should have stood. They aren't that difficult to understand. Agree that Fabinho was lucky to stay on the oitch. On the whole, I felt Liverpool slightly edged it but a draw wasn't an unfair result

comment by Inbefore (U20589)
As is the case for a lot of free kicks? so if its the rules why do players purposely stand offside at freekicks? Thats not the rules you can be offside for as long as you want surely aslong as when you join in play you're onside?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Well a lot of times when this happens i see offsides being given shortly after because a player has become involved in the play.

It's really down to the referee and his assistants to determine whether or not a team has gained an unfair advantage from the offside - in this case, starting in an offside position certainly gave him a big advantage to make the tap-in, in other cases, often them being offside beforehand makes no difference at all.

@DJ i believe he was waiting to see if Firminho tapped in the rebound himself.

But a former referee himself said the goal should stand. You would think a professional in the field would have better knowledge on the subject than a group of football fans, 99% of which have no experience in refereeing at a high level.

Yeah i'm sure if Fabinho had been sent off in the 93rd minute it definitely would have affected the outcome of the match

Blah blah blah blah nothing to see Liverpool maybe it ain’t your decade

comment by Coutinho's Mirkin 4.0 (U21880)
posted 1 minute ago
But a former referee himself said the goal should stand. You would think a professional in the field would have better knowledge on the subject than a group of football fans, 99% of which have no experience in refereeing at a high level.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
True he did, but again - as clear cut as rules can be written down in a book.. They are still somewhat open to the referees interpretation, even at the highest level. Hence why we end up with debates on big decisions. Who knows what allegiances this retired-ref may have as well.

comment by Neo (U9135)
posted 33 seconds ago
Yeah i'm sure if Fabinho had been sent off in the 93rd minute it definitely would have affected the outcome of the match
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Well, actually his first yellow should have been his second so he would have been hitting the showers much earlier on

As soon as a pass is played after the initial offside (in which the attacking player doesn't play or attempt to play the ball), it's a new phase and therefore the original incident is irrelevant.

I'm 50-50 on whether the rules should be changed. As defenders can't possibly legislate for a second phase. But then again, if they were able to, football would be an awful lot more boring, structured and risk averse.

I genuinely think the offside rule as it is now is best as it encourages attacking football. Though it is unfair on defenders and organisation to an extent

comment by You Can't Buy Class (U12019)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Coutinho's Mirkin 4.0 (U21880)
posted 1 minute ago
But a former referee himself said the goal should stand. You would think a professional in the field would have better knowledge on the subject than a group of football fans, 99% of which have no experience in refereeing at a high level.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
True he did, but again - as clear cut as rules can be written down in a book.. They are still somewhat open to the referees interpretation, even at the highest level. Hence why we end up with debates on big decisions. Who knows what allegiances this retired-ref may have as well.

comment by Neo (U9135)
posted 33 seconds ago
Yeah i'm sure if Fabinho had been sent off in the 93rd minute it definitely would have affected the outcome of the match
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Well, actually his first yellow should have been his second so he would have been hitting the showers much earlier on
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Likely wouldn't have been given the second yellow card had he been given it for the first one

Crying over spilled milk, come on rest it it’s obvious Liverpool aren’t gonna win anything this season just like Spurs nearly men of the decade

comment by merrysupersteve - Jose'd he wouldn't... (U1132)
posted 4 minutes ago
As soon as a pass is played after the initial offside (in which the attacking player doesn't play or attempt to play the ball), it's a new phase and therefore the original incident is irrelevant.

I'm 50-50 on whether the rules should be changed. As defenders can't possibly legislate for a second phase. But then again, if they were able to, football would be an awful lot more boring, structured and risk averse.

I genuinely think the offside rule as it is now is best as it encourages attacking football. Though it is unfair on defenders and organisation to an extent
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Hmm. However, a pass was not played - it was a shot and a rebound Surely the time-frame of which was too small to be considered a different phase of play as well.


----------------------------------------------------------------------
comment by Neo (U9135)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Likely wouldn't have been given the second yellow card had he been given it for the first one
----------------------------------------------------------------------
That is often the case, in my opinion both of those fouls deserved yellows though.

Shot or pass, fair enough. They are different phases of play. As soon as the ball comes off a keeper, it is always play on in any case, so still a new phase of play

And I also agree Fabinho should have been off. He deliberately stood on the Arsenal players's foot to stop a counter. Couldn't have been more clear cut and not even arguable tbh

I can't consider that to be different phases of play due to the whole thing being over in a matter of seconds in one quick flowing move.

Even if you believe those were two different phases of play, the unfair advantage of Mane's position in phase 1 was carried into phase 2.

But they are the actual rules. It's not about liking them, it's about being aware of what they are. It clearly was a new phase of play. He didn't attempt to play the ball in an offside position and was offside when he scored. There's no point in arguing on opinion, it's just the way the rules are

*onside when he scored

However, as we all know too well - our own interpretations are linked to our emotions and interests.

Had that goal been chalked off for Arsenal my initial reaction would have been to question it and i would have been less inclined to try and analyse it and support the referees decision.

Also, he doesn't need to be attempting to play the ball in an offside position - just changing his body direction/moving towards it is enough and he certainly did that from an initial starting position which was offside.

I wanted Arsenal to win btw, it certainly didn't want Liverpool to win. But I can see why Liverpool fans, pundits and most people think the Mane goal should have stood. It's based on phases of play. And I do prefer the rules as they are, regardless of the controversy they may cause, as I think it favours attacking play over regimented defending

comment by You Can't Buy Class (U12019)
posted 14 minutes ago
Also, he doesn't need to be attempting to play the ball in an offside position - just changing his body direction/moving towards it is enough and he certainly did that from an initial starting position which was offside.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I agree. It was clear offside. Even the Liverpool players didn't protest the decision.

Interfering with play
"playing or touching the ball passed or touched by a team-mate"[1]
Interfering with an opponent
"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 to them 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"[1]
Gaining an advantage by playing the ball or interfering with an opponent when it has
"- rebounded or been deflected off the goalpost, crossbar, match official or an opponent
- been deliberately saved by any opponent" [1]


Actual rules there. Mane's movements did not affect the Arsenal defenders' ability to play the ball. He didn't obstruct the players from getting the ball. There is nothing in the rule about a player making a decision to push up and not play the ball. They weren't obstructed

I hear what you are saying but of course - the written rules do not specifically account for every unique move or play that occurs in 90 minutes. That's why it's so often said that it's down to the referees interpretation of the rules and how he wants to enforce them.

Of course, there are black and white scenarios where the referee gets it totally wrong but i do not believe this was one of them, that is why i was surprised no one took a moment to consider that Mane's initial offside position gave him the advantage he needed to get to the rebound first. I believe this is why the offside was given and the referee didn't consider it to be different phases of play due to the short time-span of events from the ball being played over the top -> shot -> rebound.

Of course, people will argue both sides but at the end of the day the referee has to apply the written rules to a specific scenario to try and ensure the fairest outcome, i think he achieved that because like myself, he considered it one phase of play.

Or he got it wrong. I didn't take your point of view on board of course. I think it's more likely that Mane moves so fast and the gap to the defence was so big, that his inclination was to give offside. I still think he was wrong and the speed of play caught him out more than anything.

Arsenal looked on the ropes and out of it for a long time after the Milner goal btw. Showed how Emery has added a bit of steel to the team that you hung on and did come back by the way. Great finish from Lacazette too