Cybereagles

Aston Villa no gree Man City .

Still 0-0

1-0 -Man City.

Penarity!!

2-0 Man City

How was that first goal allowed?

txj wrote:How was that first goal allowed?

Anything wrong with the goal?
Now I understand your question, after rewatching the goal.

Kako wrote:

txj wrote:How was that first goal allowed?

Anything wrong with the goal?
?

Just the small matter of Rodri coming from an offsides position to win the ball...

txj wrote:

Kako wrote:

txj wrote:How was that first goal allowed?

Anything wrong with the goal?
?

Just the small matter of Rodri coming from an offsides position to win the ball...

I don't think you understand the offside rule.

Cito wrote:

txj wrote:

Kako wrote:

txj wrote:How was that first goal allowed?

Anything wrong with the goal?
?

Just the small matter of Rodri coming from an offsides position to win the ball...

I don't think you understand the offside rule.

If the interpretation is correct, managers all over the world would simply station their center forward in an offside position.

The moment Rodri moved towards the ball, he was taking an unfair advantage and should've been called offsides.

Poor ref mess the game

txj wrote:

Cito wrote:

txj wrote:

Kako wrote:

txj wrote:How was that first goal allowed?

Anything wrong with the goal?
?

Just the small matter of Rodri coming from an offsides position to win the ball...

I don't think you understand the offside rule.

If the interpretation is correct, managers all over the world would simply station their center forward in an offside position.

The moment Rodri moved towards the ball, he was taking an unfair advantage and should've been called offsides.

'A player in an offisde position, receiving the ball from an opponent who deliberately plays the ball, is NOT to be considered to have gained an advantage.'

Those are the key words. It's simple. He was kept on by the defender.

What a goalie Emiliano Martinez is.
Without him that score line would have read at
least four or five.
The Saves from point blank range that he made plus
his command of his box was exceptional.
Can’t believe Arsenal let him get away and for that cheap
Uv a price. What a foolish club.

Sleaky72 wrote:What a goalie Emiliano Martinez is.
Without him that score line would have read at
least four or five.
The Saves from point blank range that he made plus
his command of his box was exceptional.
Can’t believe Arsenal let him get away and for that cheap
Uv a price. What a foolish club.

He is the reason they are doing great and signing of the season so far.
He gave us two trophies something our number one is yet to give us...

Cito wrote:

txj wrote:

Cito wrote:

txj wrote:

Kako wrote:

txj wrote:How was that first goal allowed?

Anything wrong with the goal?
?

Just the small matter of Rodri coming from an offsides position to win the ball...

I don't think you understand the offside rule.

If the interpretation is correct, managers all over the world would simply station their center forward in an offside position.

The moment Rodri moved towards the ball, he was taking an unfair advantage and should've been called offsides.

'A player in an offisde position, receiving the ball from an opponent who deliberately plays the ball, is NOT to be considered to have gained an advantage.'

Those are the key words. It's simple. He was kept on by the defender.

On the same day, in the Super Cup final between Juve and Napoli, a similar situation was called offsides.

Once Rodri made a move towards Mings, he was taking an unfair advantage. That's when the call should've been made...

To then make the call after Mings touches the ball, makes a complete mockery of the rule...

The argument is that Mings' deliberate play of the ball ended Rodri's phase offside. What would've been really interesting is, had Mings played the ball back to the keeper, the pass been intercepted by Rodri and the ball dispatched.

And yes, its a loophole that not enough people exploit. With teams playing out from the back and keepers playing further off their line, creating additional passing triangles, its a ploy which could reap huge reward.

Coach wrote:The argument is that Mings' deliberate play of the ball ended Rodri's phase offside. What would've been really interesting is, had Mings played the ball back to the keeper, the pass been intercepted by Rodri and the ball dispatched.

And yes, its a loophole that not enough people exploit. With teams playing out from the back and keepers playing further off their line, creating additional passing triangles, its a ploy which could reap huge reward.

The point as shown in the Juve game is that Rodri's move towards Mings, triggered an unfair advantage and therefoe offsides, ever before Mings touched the ball.

But Rodri was onside when retrieving the ball which was in his opponent’s possession.

Clear offside.

The YeyeMan wrote:Clear offside.

And yet neither VAR nor the "top brass" Ref who reviews decisions in the post-match preamble, has called it such.

Coach wrote:

The YeyeMan wrote:Clear offside.

And yet neither VAR nor the "top brass" Ref who reviews decisions in the post-match preamble, has called it such.

They are reviewing the decision from after Mings touched the ball.

The offsides was triggered once Rodri moved towards Mings and ahead of the latter's touch.

I saw this called in the Juve game last night. The English are just dumb and stupid!

It was never a VAR decision and was therefore not adjudicated by VAR.

If this was a valid play, half the managers would station their forwards offsides permanently...

Can’t remember who it was, but can vaguely recall a striker returning from an offside position, running onto a miscued header from a defender and tucking it away one vs one.