Of course. And I’m entitled to call it ridiculous.
Football will never be black and white. It simply has to involve opinion and the more ‘we’ attempt to change that, the more we ruin the game.
I find most people who’ve played at any reasonable level would call tonight offside and expect it to be called offside.
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 18 minutes ago
comment by Boris 'Inky’ Gibson (U5901)
posted 15 seconds ago
It's only a mess if it doesn't benefit United.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
zzzzzz
Some of us are capable of commenting on decisions objectively on decisions for our team and others.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Really? If it had benefited United you'd be all over it with a gushing endorsement of the rule.
comment by Boris 'Inky’ Gibson (U5901)
posted 6 seconds ago
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 18 minutes ago
comment by Boris 'Inky’ Gibson (U5901)
posted 15 seconds ago
It's only a mess if it doesn't benefit United.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
zzzzzz
Some of us are capable of commenting on decisions objectively on decisions for our team and others.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Really? If it had benefited United you'd be all over it with a gushing endorsement of the rule.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Judging others by your own standards is generally a mistake.
This excuse of players not knowing the law is baffling. For £100k a week, you really ought to know the rules.
To play devils advocate a bit, I do wonder what the reaction would have been if instead of chesting it, Mings had deliberately tried to head the ball back to the keeper but it didn’t reach and went to Rodri instead.
I do think in that scenario, as much as the law would still be discussed a bit, there’d be more likelihood of some focussing on Mings making a mistake instead.
The only question in my mind is was Rodri aware of the rule once Mings had touched the ball?
Not sure, he might have been doing it so the offside was called and he could get back in position. I may be doing him a disservice there though!
comment by meltonblue (U10617)
posted 6 minutes ago
To play devils advocate a bit, I do wonder what the reaction would have been if instead of chesting it, Mings had deliberately tried to head the ball back to the keeper but it didn’t reach and went to Rodri instead.
I do think in that scenario, as much as the law would still be discussed a bit, there’d be more likelihood of some focussing on Mings making a mistake instead.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Depends if he’s just standing there and Mings heads it to him.
In that case it’s nothing like what happened tonight.
People seem to have forgotten that there was a lot of play before Bernardo actually scored.
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 7 minutes ago
comment by meltonblue (U10617)
posted 6 minutes ago
To play devils advocate a bit, I do wonder what the reaction would have been if instead of chesting it, Mings had deliberately tried to head the ball back to the keeper but it didn’t reach and went to Rodri instead.
I do think in that scenario, as much as the law would still be discussed a bit, there’d be more likelihood of some focussing on Mings making a mistake instead.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Depends if he’s just standing there and Mings heads it to him.
In that case it’s nothing like what happened tonight.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Ultimately it is though, unless people’s issue with the law is around the definition of interfering with play rather than the defender deliberately playing the ball.
No melts, I’m not talking about the law.
You said you wonder how much it’d be talked about and I’m saying they’re not comparable, so any difference in them being mentioned is due to that.
Well done to the referee, applying the correct decision as per the literal laws of the game and not based on what they think the laws of the gam should be
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 11 minutes ago
No melts, I’m not talking about the law.
You said you wonder how much it’d be talked about and I’m saying they’re not comparable, so any difference in them being mentioned is due to that.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Right, but they’re only not comparable because in one of them Rodri hasn’t done anything himself to subsequently interfere with play though, I’m assuming?
Having watched it again, I'm more than happy that the laws of the game were upheld.
comment by meltonblue (U10617)
posted 9 hours, 54 minutes ago
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 11 minutes ago
No melts, I’m not talking about the law.
You said you wonder how much it’d be talked about and I’m saying they’re not comparable, so any difference in them being mentioned is due to that.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Right, but they’re only not comparable because in one of them Rodri hasn’t done anything himself to subsequently interfere with play though, I’m assuming?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yes.
I mean consider it like this.
If Rodri was on the other side of the pitch, behind the line of Mings and Mings sliced his clearance to Rodri then that is entirely different to Rodri running across the pitch and challenging Mings as he controls the ball.
Not necessarily different to the law, but to anyone with a modicum of common sense, surely?
Yes I was just clarifying it, that’s what I thought you meant. I agree and it’s another instance where IFAB haven’t helped themselves tbh.
does anyone remember Gary Crosby stealing the ball from behind Andy Dibble and the goal stood. or Dion Dublin behind Shay Given. The player was behind tackled and scored. The difference here is.... The player is behind tackled and layed it off to another player to score.
Everyone blamed the keepers for not realising those aforementioned players were lurking. Yet no one criticised Mings for not being aware of his surroundings and just followed the ball.
Oh.
https://www.birminghammail.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/aston-villa-man-city-offside-19702781
Sign in if you want to comment
Executive VAR Committee Needed?
Page 3 of 3
posted on 20/1/21
Of course. And I’m entitled to call it ridiculous.
Football will never be black and white. It simply has to involve opinion and the more ‘we’ attempt to change that, the more we ruin the game.
I find most people who’ve played at any reasonable level would call tonight offside and expect it to be called offside.
posted on 20/1/21
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 18 minutes ago
comment by Boris 'Inky’ Gibson (U5901)
posted 15 seconds ago
It's only a mess if it doesn't benefit United.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
zzzzzz
Some of us are capable of commenting on decisions objectively on decisions for our team and others.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Really? If it had benefited United you'd be all over it with a gushing endorsement of the rule.
posted on 20/1/21
comment by Boris 'Inky’ Gibson (U5901)
posted 6 seconds ago
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 18 minutes ago
comment by Boris 'Inky’ Gibson (U5901)
posted 15 seconds ago
It's only a mess if it doesn't benefit United.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
zzzzzz
Some of us are capable of commenting on decisions objectively on decisions for our team and others.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Really? If it had benefited United you'd be all over it with a gushing endorsement of the rule.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Judging others by your own standards is generally a mistake.
posted on 20/1/21
This excuse of players not knowing the law is baffling. For £100k a week, you really ought to know the rules.
posted on 20/1/21
To play devils advocate a bit, I do wonder what the reaction would have been if instead of chesting it, Mings had deliberately tried to head the ball back to the keeper but it didn’t reach and went to Rodri instead.
I do think in that scenario, as much as the law would still be discussed a bit, there’d be more likelihood of some focussing on Mings making a mistake instead.
posted on 20/1/21
The only question in my mind is was Rodri aware of the rule once Mings had touched the ball?
posted on 20/1/21
Not sure, he might have been doing it so the offside was called and he could get back in position. I may be doing him a disservice there though!
posted on 20/1/21
comment by meltonblue (U10617)
posted 6 minutes ago
To play devils advocate a bit, I do wonder what the reaction would have been if instead of chesting it, Mings had deliberately tried to head the ball back to the keeper but it didn’t reach and went to Rodri instead.
I do think in that scenario, as much as the law would still be discussed a bit, there’d be more likelihood of some focussing on Mings making a mistake instead.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Depends if he’s just standing there and Mings heads it to him.
In that case it’s nothing like what happened tonight.
posted on 20/1/21
People seem to have forgotten that there was a lot of play before Bernardo actually scored.
posted on 20/1/21
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 7 minutes ago
comment by meltonblue (U10617)
posted 6 minutes ago
To play devils advocate a bit, I do wonder what the reaction would have been if instead of chesting it, Mings had deliberately tried to head the ball back to the keeper but it didn’t reach and went to Rodri instead.
I do think in that scenario, as much as the law would still be discussed a bit, there’d be more likelihood of some focussing on Mings making a mistake instead.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Depends if he’s just standing there and Mings heads it to him.
In that case it’s nothing like what happened tonight.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Ultimately it is though, unless people’s issue with the law is around the definition of interfering with play rather than the defender deliberately playing the ball.
posted on 20/1/21
No melts, I’m not talking about the law.
You said you wonder how much it’d be talked about and I’m saying they’re not comparable, so any difference in them being mentioned is due to that.
posted on 20/1/21
Well done to the referee, applying the correct decision as per the literal laws of the game and not based on what they think the laws of the gam should be
posted on 20/1/21
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 11 minutes ago
No melts, I’m not talking about the law.
You said you wonder how much it’d be talked about and I’m saying they’re not comparable, so any difference in them being mentioned is due to that.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Right, but they’re only not comparable because in one of them Rodri hasn’t done anything himself to subsequently interfere with play though, I’m assuming?
posted on 21/1/21
Having watched it again, I'm more than happy that the laws of the game were upheld.
posted on 21/1/21
comment by meltonblue (U10617)
posted 9 hours, 54 minutes ago
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 11 minutes ago
No melts, I’m not talking about the law.
You said you wonder how much it’d be talked about and I’m saying they’re not comparable, so any difference in them being mentioned is due to that.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Right, but they’re only not comparable because in one of them Rodri hasn’t done anything himself to subsequently interfere with play though, I’m assuming?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yes.
I mean consider it like this.
If Rodri was on the other side of the pitch, behind the line of Mings and Mings sliced his clearance to Rodri then that is entirely different to Rodri running across the pitch and challenging Mings as he controls the ball.
Not necessarily different to the law, but to anyone with a modicum of common sense, surely?
posted on 21/1/21
Yes I was just clarifying it, that’s what I thought you meant. I agree and it’s another instance where IFAB haven’t helped themselves tbh.
posted on 21/1/21
posted on 23/1/21
does anyone remember Gary Crosby stealing the ball from behind Andy Dibble and the goal stood. or Dion Dublin behind Shay Given. The player was behind tackled and scored. The difference here is.... The player is behind tackled and layed it off to another player to score.
Everyone blamed the keepers for not realising those aforementioned players were lurking. Yet no one criticised Mings for not being aware of his surroundings and just followed the ball.
posted on 26/1/21
Oh.
https://www.birminghammail.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/aston-villa-man-city-offside-19702781
Page 3 of 3