2024/25 David Moyes

[Toffe3m4n]

The key decision in that game was the ref not sending Tarkowski off. Their goal was always going to be given because the attacker didn't actually challenge for the ball. Annoying but that's the offside rule these days.

Is it..?

How many times have we & other teams in the league had goals chalked off for having players in Diaz's position during the build up?

Whilst I agree that it's a bit of a crap rule that needs binning anyway - it's still a rule. It should be followed for all clubs..

Diaz was affecting the play/the defender in that build-up, so should've been flagged. Simple as that.

 

[NSNO1878EFC]

If we have any kind of a budget I agree, but not sure that we do, so a more forward looking appointment might have to wait for a year or two.

What manager would come here knowing that even if you do the job asked of you (and much better than that), you might still be sacked 6 months into a 2.5 year contract.

I disagreed with him getting that length of contract but now that he’s got it, he won’t be going anywhere as long as we stay up.

 

[hallamblue]

Is it..?

How many times have we & other teams in the league had goals chalked off for having players in Diaz's position during the build up?

Whilst I agree that it's a bit of a crap rule that needs binning anyway - it's still a rule. It should be followed for all clubs..

Diaz was affecting the play/the defender in that build-up, so should've been flagged. Simple as that.

That's simply not the case. How many times do you see a through ball played to someone in an offside position. They then don't play the ball and another attacking player makes the most of the confusion and gets to the ball and there's no offside given. It's a stupid rule and they should just go back to if you're offside it's offside.

 

[hallamblue]

What manager would come here knowing that even if you do the job asked of you (and much better than that), you might still be sacked 6 months into a 2.5 year contract.

I disagreed with him getting that length of contract but now that he’s got it, he won’t be going anywhere as long as we stay up.

It depends. I remember feeling really sorry for Nigel Adkins who got Southampton into the Premier League and was then sacked for some bloke I'd never heard of called Pochettino. If there's a better manager available who wants to come we should get them. Moyes didn't think twice about shafting us.

 

[b-rad]

Is it..?

How many times have we & other teams in the league had goals chalked off for having players in Diaz's position during the build up?

Whilst I agree that it's a bit of a crap rule that needs binning anyway - it's still a rule. It should be followed for all clubs..

Diaz was affecting the play/the defender in that build-up, so should've been flagged. Simple as that.

I agree that should be the case, the law is written:

"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"

He didn't interfere by playing or touching a ball passed or touched by a team-mate
He didn't prevent an opponent from playing the ball or clearly obstructing the line of vision
He didn't challenge for the ball
He didn't attempt to play the ball when this action impacts on an opponent
He didn't make any obvious action whatsoever.

I agree that this should be offside, but under the rules as they are written it isn't.

I'd suggest the rule has become so complicated over time and now needs to cover a multitude of possibilities, but that this case has been unintentionally missed (I dare say there are many others too). Any defender will tell you that being the intended target of a pass makes you "involved in active play", but the rules as they are written state otherwise.

 

[Lanolin]

I agree that should be the case, the law is written:

"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"

He didn't interfere by playing or touching a ball passed or touched by a team-mate
He didn't prevent an opponent from playing the ball or clearly obstructing the line of vision
He didn't challenge for the ball
He didn't attempt to play the ball when this action impacts on an opponent
He didn't make any obvious action whatsoever.

I agree that this should be offside, but under the rules as they are written it isn't.

I'd suggest the rule has become so complicated over time and now needs to cover a multitude of possibilities, but that this case has been unintentionally missed (I dare say there are many others too). Any defender will tell you that being the intended target of a pass makes you "involved in active play", but the rules as they are written state otherwise.

It's been the case for ages aswell, I've moaned about it at length on here in the past because I think it's stupid, but it undoubtedly is the rule and has been for a long time now.

 

[NSNO1878EFC]

It depends. I remember feeling really sorry for Nigel Adkins who got Southampton into the Premier League and was then sacked for some bloke I'd never heard of called Pochettino. If there's a better manager available who wants to come we should get them. Moyes didn't think twice about shafting us.

I understand that but if it means we unnecessarily waste half the transfer budget on changing manager, no thanks. If we don’t seriously improve the squad, we’re going nowhere, arguably the best manager in the history of football only just managed to get us in the top 10.

 

[Delargeinho]

This is the whole thing in a nutshell.

A lot of people couldn't wait to crow about how 3 wins in 4 were irrefutable proof that we had actually been a top 10 side all along and the only reason we were struggling was because of Dyche but we've very quickly regressed to the mean and are somewhere around 14th or 15th in the form table because that's how good we are. Dyche was underperforming and Moyes has improved us, but he can only improve this group of players so far because ultimately they are just not very good.

For me, last night wasn't a bad effort truth be told. They're the best side in the league and we gave them something to think about for long periods and still could have nicked something at the end. Realistically, I don't think we can expect any more than that at the moment.

We are a top bottom half side, this is the reality. Surely have sincerely missed McNeil and Ndiaye in the last few weeks that also showed in the result.

The good thing is we are safe, and we have the financial possibilities to move on from players like Doucoure and Harrison this summer.

 

[heatmeiser]

Plus another draw.

Just a quick reminder of the last 9 games or so before last night and people are saying he's in danger of getting the boot.

Hilarious stuff. 10/10

 

[Toffe3m4n]

I agree that should be the case, the law is written:

"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"

He didn't interfere by playing or touching a ball passed or touched by a team-mate
He didn't prevent an opponent from playing the ball or clearly obstructing the line of vision
He didn't challenge for the ball
He didn't attempt to play the ball when this action impacts on an opponent
He didn't make any obvious action whatsoever.

I agree that this should be offside, but under the rules as they are written it isn't.

I'd suggest the rule has become so complicated over time and now needs to cover a multitude of possibilities, but that this case has been unintentionally missed (I dare say there are many others too). Any defender will tell you that being the intended target of a pass makes you "involved in active play", but the rules as they are written state otherwise.

Still all completely subjective tosh, at the end of the day..

My point still stands - there's been absolutely no consistency applied this season where this rule has been concerned.

Based on the multitude of previous decisions we've witnessed against other clubs this season, including ourselves, Diaz should've been flagged there..

 

[b-rad]

Still all completely subjective tosh, at the end of the day..

My point still stands - there's been absolutely no consistency applied this season where this rule has been concerned.

Based on the multitude of previous decisions we've witnessed against other clubs this season, including ourselves, Diaz should've been flagged there..

I have no idea about other decisions. Don't tend to care about games we're not part of.
Consistency would be good though. Even better would be laws that make sense.

 

[Lanolin]

We are a top bottom half side, this is the reality. Surely have sincerely missed McNeil and Ndiaye in the last few weeks that also showed in the result.

The good thing is we are safe, and we have the financial possibilities to move on from players like Doucoure and Harrison this summer.

I wouldn’t necessarily go that far. Depends what you class as top bottom half I suppose but I don’t think we’re clearly better than the majority of the bottom half. I’ve said before I’d expect us to be in the bracket of 12th-15th, I think we need a significant injection of quality if we’re going to push into the areas we want to be in next year.

 

[MikeH72]

He cant even get himself to the new stadium. It' an insult to all supporters who haven't been in it yet.

He's jaded and needs replacing.

Time for Southgate again is it Dave?

 

[GrandOldTeam]

I wouldn’t necessarily go that far. Depends what you class as top bottom half I suppose but I don’t think we’re clearly better than the majority of the bottom half. I’ve said before I’d expect us to be in the bracket of 12th-15th, I think we need a significant injection of quality if we’re going to push into the areas we want to be in next year.

Long shared a view of 12th-17th to me - an depends on fortune with injuries.

Wolves an West Ham are below us currently - would I have been surprised to see them sit above us? Nope.

 

[Lanolin]

Long shared a view of 12th-17th to me - an depends on fortune with injuries.

Wolves a West Ham are below us currently - would I have been surprised to see them sit above us? Nope.

Yeah I think that’s fair. I certainly think we’d be closer to 17th than 8th put it that way.