Today’s Football 2020/21 Season

[kenada_blue]

That was genuinely embarrassing. As is PGMOL ignoring the actual section of the rule that deals with what happened to try and excuse shocking officiating.

They're not held to account, ever.

It's the whole farce with VAR IMO and the fact there is now another official that overrules the official on the pitch.

People whinge and moan but don't actually put any steps in to get it changed or even removed.They just sit off and go "is what it is".

if Fergie was still about, he'd have the whole thing pulled out

 

[Alan Whittle]

He is like Zaha joey ,he will only ever be happy playing for a South London Club

Fixed

 

[Lanolin]

That was genuinely embarrassing. As is PGMOL ignoring the actual section of the rule that deals with what happened to try and excuse shocking officiating.

They're not held to account, ever.

Which section do you believe deals with it? Genuine question by the way, just from my reading I'm not really sure there is one.

 

[duncs pigeon]

This might sound harsh, but I do wonder if there's soem racism in play with Pogba. To me he's a luxury player, who tend to be hot and cold. We tend to view black footballers as destroyers and pbysically very strong, so he's held to a different standard. I wonder if there is a subtle racism there, in that he would be judged differently? I don't know.

He could be the best player in the league, and he wins United games on his own a lot. The word "world class" is banded about too much, but him and Fernandes are both world class.

I wouldnt say Fernandes is world class, not yet imo. A very good player yes and a good 12 months in the PL. To me though, he does go missing in big games, ie against the rs and a couple of games in the CL. This is when you want your top players to pull you through.

 

[twoblue]

I wouldnt say Fernandes is world class, not yet imo. A very good player yes and a good 12 months in the PL. To me though, he does go missing in big games, ie against the rs and a couple of games in the CL. This is when you want your top players to pull you through.

For me, Fernandez has been one of the top five players in the premier league since he joined.
Walks into any side in The world. That’s world class.

 

[kenada_blue]

Well i'm only answering your point? You said 'nobody can explain' and i'm saying everybody can explain, it's incredibly obvious. I'm not sure why you're now saying 'of course it is' when I was literally responding to you saying it wasn't?

Pretty much every law and rule is open to interpretation. There'd be no point in the majority of criminal trials if it was just a straightforward case of 'that's against the law and that's the end of it'; good lawyers get paid the big bucks because they are able to argue that the law can be interpreted in a way that means their client hasn't broken it. Again, I don't like the way the current offside law works, but in fairness i'm not sure it's that easy to come up with an alternative solution. I don't really want everybody flagged offside everytime they ever stray offside, regardless of where the ball ends up.

I meant as in I was agreeing it wasnt an effective tactic. But the idea the players knew/know they can do that I find hard to believe (as evident by players admitting that). Even though, as a lot of folk seem to mention, it's as clear as day... apparently.

As for the law being interpreted... surely that's down to context and much you can make your interpretation more believable to accept? Which is why lawyers get paid. They can persuade you the sky isnt blue. Again...that doesn't make it right or correct.

Hence the debate.

 

[catcherintherye]

I think it is certainly a fair question, especially when it comes to punditry surrounding him & for sure has an influence on the wider perceptions.

But it is also clear he phones it in when he is not in the mood, he pretty much said as much in his interview last night, which really must be a bit of a nightmare for a coach, it's one thing having a lazy winger but a Centre mid field not bother can kill you. So I would argue both can be true.

You see, I don't think he's really a central midfielder. I see him as a creative player, a 10. Thats where he should play. He should just be given a free role, and have others doing the donkey work for him.

 

[duncs pigeon]

For me, Fernandez has been one of the top five players in the premier league since he joined.
Walks into any side in The world. That’s world class.

I respect your opinion mate, but I just feel he lacks consistency to be judged as world class, and as I said I do think he is a very good player. As a matter of interest, who are your other four players you think are world class in the prem?

 

[Lanolin]

I meant as in I was agreeing it wasnt an effective tactic. But the idea the players knew/know they can do that I find hard to believe (as evident by players admitting that). Even though, as a lot of folk seem to mention, it's as clear as day... apparently.

As for the law being interpreted... surely that's down to context and much you can make your interpretation more believable to accept? Which is why lawyers get paid. They can persuade you the sky isnt blue. Again...that doesn't make it right or correct.

Hence the debate.

No I agree with you. I said in my original post 'I think' because i'm fully aware that it's not an indisputable fact, I just believe that the wording of the law allows this situation. I think you'd be surprised at how many players don't know the intricacies of the laws, they know the basic outlines of what you can and can't do but they don't sit there studying the rulebook, why would they? You still get pundits, players and managers giving it the 'he got the ball' or 'intentional handball' shouts even those things are completely irrelevant in the laws, it's the same thing. Again, those things come down to interpretation, what constitutes an 'unnatural position' for handball, what constitutes 'excessive force' etc. That's why we debate whether penalties, red cards etc are right literally every single week. Very few laws just have a straightforward single interpretation, they're all subjective.

 

[catcherintherye]

Of course that can be answered; it's because it would be a rubbish tactic. It might get you the occasional chance but nowhere near as many chances as you could get by staying onside and playing the game normally. It's a bizarre line of argument.

I think the law was interpreted correctly. I think it's a rubbish law, but I don't really see why people are so surprised by it, this might be the first goal scored from this exact situation but stuff like this happens literally every week. Defenders having to make clearances because somebody is offside but the ball then going to someone else who scores is effectively the same thing, the player only played at the ball because someone was offside but they end up being punished for it. It's the way the rule has been for ages now. Again, I don't like it at all but I think they were right to allow the goal with the rule the way it's written.

Not only the way it's written, but also the way it's intepreted.

This has not been a new thing either, I remember 15 years ago Sam Allardyce's Bolton lining players up off free kicks beyond the defensive line to cause confusion, so defenders didn't know who was or wasn't onside. Liverpool do something similar now, watch Henderson, he runs 2-3 yards offside. What he's looking to do is drag 1 defender back a yard or so, so that his other attacking players can be half a yard ahead of their markers and gain an edge while being onside. I mean you could say it's cheating, you could say it's clever play.

However we all know the rules now. They have defined what "intefering in play" means, and have defined what the different phases mean. I can understand people saying those rules are strange but you know what they are as a defender, and what they've been for some time. Mings just defends that situation badly. Once he controls the ball, it's a new phase. He has to be more aware.

There's also a precadent here. If they flagged him offside, it sets a precadent that would fundamentally change the rules again, in a way away from how they are written and intepreted- in the middle of a season. That would cause more confusion in an area that is clearly a very grey area currently.

Say what you want about officials, but Mings should defend the situation properly. Then there's no problems.

 

[Lineker]

It was a different phase of play as Mings took control of the ball and intended to play out with it. AT that point, the Man City player had moved to an onside position and could therefore involve himslef in normal play again.

How long do we have to wait until a player in an onside position can involve himself in the play again? 10, 15, 20, 25, 30 seconds. Once you are onside and a different phase of play starts, you are NOT offside!

You havent addressed the basic point. Ive just watched it again.

He is offside as the ball is coming down from the clearance toward mings. He closes down mings at that point before mings has touched the ball. It is at that point he is offside.

When mings takes his first touch rodri is a foot away, because he saw where the ball is going and closed down (from an offside position). Before mings touches the ball.

 

[Lanolin]

You havent addressed the basic point. Ive just watched it again.

He is offside as the ball is coming down from the clearance toward mings. He closes down mings at that point before mings has touched the ball. It is at that point he is offside.

When mings takes his first touch rodri is a foot away, because he saw where the ball is going and closed down (from an offside position). Before mings touches the ball.

My take on it would be that he didn't 'close down' Mings as such, he just closed the distance between them. I don't think Mings believed Rodri was going to challenge him for the original ball, and so I wouldn't class that as closing him down.

 

[DanB90]

If Mings was smart, he’d have let the ball run through to the attacker who would’ve been offside, or even lump it back the way it came. Instead, he’s tried to control the ball, which then means the attacker can’t be offside, got dispossessed and paid for his mistake.

It happened in one of our games either this season or last iirc, ball was played to an attacker in an offside position, defender tries to play the ball, but it ricochets into the path of the attacker, who is no longer offside.

It’s the same thing.

 

[Tubey]

Which section do you believe deals with it? Genuine question by the way, just from my reading I'm not really sure there is one.

Here mate: https://www.grandoldteam.com/forum/...-2020-21-season.110926/page-1833#post-8435772

They ignore the second part of the rule which deals with the situation. I can only assume because they are embarrassed.

 

[number4.]

You see, I don't think he's really a central midfielder. I see him as a creative player, a 10. Thats where he should play. He should just be given a free role, and have others doing the donkey work for him.

Yep, but you still need to be switched on - if you have the time find Palace's winner at OT last season, that's the flip side of pogba