Man City

[scawsby steve]

When the f*ck is someone within the running of football and the officiating of football going to stand up to these tw*ts?

That goal was a disgrace. VAR bottled it and then the ref bottled it.

They must not let City fail to win the title under any circumstances.

[Spud]

I thought it was the correct decision tbf, not really sure why they called the ref over. Opinions eh?

[scawsby steve]

I thought it was the correct decision tbf, not really sure why they called the ref over. Opinions eh?

Then we'll have to agree to disagree. There was also a foul on a Wolves player in the build up to the sequence of corners that led up to the goal.

As regards my opening sentence, is anything ever going to be done about the 115 charges?

[Spud]

I thought it was the correct decision tbf, not really sure why they called the ref over. Opinions eh?

Then we'll have to agree to disagree. There was also a foul on a Wolves player in the build up to the sequence of corners that led up to the goal.

As regards my opening sentence, is anything ever going to be done about the 115 charges?

Now that is the big question, I'm not that confident, are you?

[Spud]

I'm not sure how that second Liverpool pen is overturned either tbh, if that went against us we'd be fuming.
I need to get out more on Sundays....

[donnievic]

Tbf I don’t think they look at silva possibly impeding the keeper to start with but the correct decision regarding offside as he isn’t in the eyeline of the keeper sight

[donnievic]

I'm not sure how that second Liverpool pen is overturned either tbh, if that went against us we'd be fuming.
I need to get out more on Sundays....

clumsy but keeper gets the slightest of touches 1st on that one then was always gonna be contact after that

[DonnyBazR0ver]

Just seen the highlights but it's not clear to me whether the goal was chalked off originally before VAR stepped in.  If VAR stepped in then I would say it's controversial to intervene in that situation.

On the incident itself, it'll probably divide opinions but for me, the was enough interference from Silva to distract the keeper which could have affected his positioning. As it was, it looks like the keeper had a decent view but it would have been some reaction save to keep that out but, the foul came first.

[Goole Rover]

Tbf I don’t think they look at silva possibly impeding the keeper to start with but the correct decision regarding offside as he isn’t in the eyeline of the keeper sight

I first thought that it was a goal but on the replay I changed my opinion as it looked to me that the goalkeeper was impeded.

[Spud]

Just seen the highlights but it's not clear to me whether the goal was chalked off originally before VAR stepped in.  If VAR stepped in then I would say it's controversial to intervene in that situation.

On the incident itself, it'll probably divide opinions but for me, the was enough interference from Silva to distract the keeper which could have affected his positioning. As it was, it looks like the keeper had a decent view but it would have been some reaction save to keep that out but, the foul came first.

The ref gave the goal initially, then was called over to the screen & he stuck with his decision.

[Spud]

I'm not sure how that second Liverpool pen is overturned either tbh, if that went against us we'd be fuming.
I need to get out more on Sundays....

clumsy but keeper gets the slightest of touches 1st on that one then was always gonna be contact after that

Getting a touch on the ball doesn't mean you can wipe the player out as well though, or at least I thought that's how it works these days?

[DonnyBazR0ver]

Just seen the highlights but it's not clear to me whether the goal was chalked off originally before VAR stepped in.  If VAR stepped in then I would say it's controversial to intervene in that situation.

On the incident itself, it'll probably divide opinions but for me, the was enough interference from Silva to distract the keeper which could have affected his positioning. As it was, it looks like the keeper had a decent view but it would have been some reaction save to keep that out but, the foul came first.

The ref gave the goal initially, then was called over to the screen & he stuck with his decision.

Ah right. Cheers. So do we assume he ignored the foul and deemed it not interfering just for the offside?

[Dutch Uncle]

Tbf I don’t think they look at silva possibly impeding the keeper to start with but the correct decision regarding offside as he isn’t in the eyeline of the keeper sight

I first thought that it was a goal but on the replay I changed my opinion as it looked to me that the goalkeeper was impeded.

I believe rules and interpretations of them should follow the maxim ‘cheats should not prosper’

Below all my opinion and to be shot down from many angles

I have a problem with City’s goal. Silva clearly nudges the keeper very early, not just stand in his way, actually moves into him, just a little, knowing exactly what he is doing, probably well practised. The keeper is temporarily and briefly unbalanced with very nearly but not quite enough time to recover fully. It is taking cheating to the edge of ‘how far can I go and stop just short’ – IMHO it is still cheating. The commentators were even saying ‘he got his timing just right’ – that is the timing of his foul play on the keeper, i.e. the timing of his cheating

If the keeper had made a meal of it and gone down – very risky of course – very probably the goal would have been disallowed, with Silva deemed to ‘have just done enough to impede the keeper’. Cheating by the keeper rewarded.

A radical suggestion to remove all these shenanigans at corners: no-one other than the goalkeeper allowed in the 6-yard box until after the moment the corner is taken
   

[Spud]

I don't mind that idea, Dutch, would be interesting to see how that works if trialled at some level.

[danumdon]

A lot of this misinterpretation began after they changed the offside rule from what it used to be, ie, players all needed to be in a position of being onside before the ball is kicked.

If this rule was still in place this would have never happened as the player could not have been in a position to "ease" himself into the keeper just before the header (which was a very good one by Stones) and in all intents would of been a good gaol without Silva's assistance.

Some of these rule changes have not benefitted the game in the manner they thought they would.

[Dutch Uncle]

Maybe a modification to my suggestion to allow max two defenders if they are standing within touching distance of the posts, one on each.

[drfchound]

I'm not sure how that second Liverpool pen is overturned either tbh, if that went against us we'd be fuming.
I need to get out more on Sundays....

clumsy but keeper gets the slightest of touches 1st on that one then was always gonna be contact after that

Getting a touch on the ball doesn't mean you can wipe the player out as well though, or at least I thought that's how it works these days?

Don’t reckless tackles count as a foul in the modern game.

[DonnyBazR0ver]

Tbf I don’t think they look at silva possibly impeding the keeper to start with but the correct decision regarding offside as he isn’t in the eyeline of the keeper sight

I first thought that it was a goal but on the replay I changed my opinion as it looked to me that the goalkeeper was impeded.

I believe rules and interpretations of them should follow the maxim ‘cheats should not prosper’

Below all my opinion and to be shot down from many angles

I have a problem with City’s goal. Silva clearly nudges the keeper very early, not just stand in his way, actually moves into him, just a little, knowing exactly what he is doing, probably well practised. The keeper is temporarily and briefly unbalanced with very nearly but not quite enough time to recover fully. It is taking cheating to the edge of ‘how far can I go and stop just short’ – IMHO it is still cheating. The commentators were even saying ‘he got his timing just right’ – that is the timing of his foul play on the keeper, i.e. the timing of his cheating

If the keeper had made a meal of it and gone down – very risky of course – very probably the goal would have been disallowed, with Silva deemed to ‘have just done enough to impede the keeper’. Cheating by the keeper rewarded.

A radical suggestion to remove all these shenanigans at corners: no-one other than the goalkeeper allowed in the 6-yard box until after the moment the corner is taken
   

Totally agree with your interpretation.

I think your 6 yard box suggestion is an interesting one but, I think it just might create more difficulties re encroachment, like at Penno's when players might cross the line before the ball is kicked etc. An extra rule for officials to cram in.

[donnievic]

Just seen the highlights but it's not clear to me whether the goal was chalked off originally before VAR stepped in.  If VAR stepped in then I would say it's controversial to intervene in that situation.

On the incident itself, it'll probably divide opinions but for me, the was enough interference from Silva to distract the keeper which could have affected his positioning. As it was, it looks like the keeper had a decent view but it would have been some reaction save to keep that out but, the foul came first.

The ref gave the goal initially, then was called over to the screen & he stuck with his decision.

no I thought the linesman actually put the flag up for offside after the ball went in,that’s the ref did the tv signal after reviewing the incident,what gets me is they didn’t really look at the impeding part on the VAR screen only if thought silva was in the way of the keeper from the header

[donnievic]

I'm not sure how that second Liverpool pen is overturned either tbh, if that went against us we'd be fuming.
I need to get out more on Sundays....

clumsy but keeper gets the slightest of touches 1st on that one then was always gonna be contact after that

Getting a touch on the ball doesn't mean you can wipe the player out as well though, or at least I thought that's how it works these days?

was always going to collide though but it wasn’t with reckless or excessive force though where you see a lot of free kicks given elsewhere on the field,is a hard one though looking where the ball ends up as though the keeper completely misses it

[Butchers Red]

I thought it was the correct decision tbf, not really sure why they called the ref over. Opinions eh?

100% agreed - FFS when we reach the stage where MEN cannot compete physically in the box at the end of such a good game we may as well pack it all in.

[Donnywolf]

Tbf I don’t think they look at silva possibly impeding the keeper to start with but the correct decision regarding offside as he isn’t in the eyeline of the keeper sight

I first thought that it was a goal but on the replay I changed my opinion as it looked to me that the goalkeeper was impeded.

I believe rules and interpretations of them should follow the maxim ‘cheats should not prosper’

Below all my opinion and to be shot down from many angles

I have a problem with City’s goal. Silva clearly nudges the keeper very early, not just stand in his way, actually moves into him, just a little, knowing exactly what he is doing, probably well practised. The keeper is temporarily and briefly unbalanced with very nearly but not quite enough time to recover fully. It is taking cheating to the edge of ‘how far can I go and stop just short’ – IMHO it is still cheating. The commentators were even saying ‘he got his timing just right’ – that is the timing of his foul play on the keeper, i.e. the timing of his cheating

If the keeper had made a meal of it and gone down – very risky of course – very probably the goal would have been disallowed, with Silva deemed to ‘have just done enough to impede the keeper’. Cheating by the keeper rewarded.

A radical suggestion to remove all these shenanigans at corners: no-one other than the goalkeeper allowed in the 6-yard box until after the moment the corner is taken
   

Totally agree with your interpretation.

I think your 6 yard box suggestion is an interesting one but, I think it just might create more difficulties re encroachment, like at Penno's when players might cross the line before the ball is kicked etc. An extra rule for officials to cram in.

Yes and we know from experience how Penaty encroachment is rife

Even yesterday the Ref at Swindon was pointing at people to stay outside the Box and look where they all were by the time Ironside kicked it

It ought to be a one off deal. The taker scores or he doesn't.

If he scores it's a ko , if not it's a goal kick then none of the numpties need to ne running.into the area in.case of a save or a rebound

[Dutch Uncle]

Tbf I don’t think they look at silva possibly impeding the keeper to start with but the correct decision regarding offside as he isn’t in the eyeline of the keeper sight

I first thought that it was a goal but on the replay I changed my opinion as it looked to me that the goalkeeper was impeded.

I believe rules and interpretations of them should follow the maxim ‘cheats should not prosper’

Below all my opinion and to be shot down from many angles

I have a problem with City’s goal. Silva clearly nudges the keeper very early, not just stand in his way, actually moves into him, just a little, knowing exactly what he is doing, probably well practised. The keeper is temporarily and briefly unbalanced with very nearly but not quite enough time to recover fully. It is taking cheating to the edge of ‘how far can I go and stop just short’ – IMHO it is still cheating. The commentators were even saying ‘he got his timing just right’ – that is the timing of his foul play on the keeper, i.e. the timing of his cheating

If the keeper had made a meal of it and gone down – very risky of course – very probably the goal would have been disallowed, with Silva deemed to ‘have just done enough to impede the keeper’. Cheating by the keeper rewarded.

A radical suggestion to remove all these shenanigans at corners: no-one other than the goalkeeper allowed in the 6-yard box until after the moment the corner is taken
   

Totally agree with your interpretation.

I think your 6 yard box suggestion is an interesting one but, I think it just might create more difficulties re encroachment, like at Penno's when players might cross the line before the ball is kicked etc. An extra rule for officials to cram in.

Yes and we know from experience how Penaty encroachment is rife

Even yesterday the Ref at Swindon was pointing at people to stay outside the Box and look where they all were by the time Ironside kicked it

It ought to be a one off deal. The taker scores or he doesn't.

If he scores it's a ko , if not it's a goal kick then none of the numpties need to ne running.into the area in.case of a save or a rebound

If that had been the rule we would not have had the most dramatic moment in our history - Coppinger's goal at Brentford

Yes I know SFT's goal at Stoke was also dramatic and IMHO more important, but somehow the sheer unexpectedness of a missed penalty leading to a goal at the other end creates greater drama than a sudden death goal which one team or the other will score.

[Petche]

Who cares about elite football? It's become so removed from the working class sport it once was that I have little or no interest whatsoever. I'll stick with The Rovers every time!

[Donnywolf]

Tbf I don’t think they look at silva possibly impeding the keeper to start with but the correct decision regarding offside as he isn’t in the eyeline of the keeper sight

I first thought that it was a goal but on the replay I changed my opinion as it looked to me that the goalkeeper was impeded.

I believe rules and interpretations of them should follow the maxim ‘cheats should not prosper’

Below all my opinion and to be shot down from many angles

I have a problem with City’s goal. Silva clearly nudges the keeper very early, not just stand in his way, actually moves into him, just a little, knowing exactly what he is doing, probably well practised. The keeper is temporarily and briefly unbalanced with very nearly but not quite enough time to recover fully. It is taking cheating to the edge of ‘how far can I go and stop just short’ – IMHO it is still cheating. The commentators were even saying ‘he got his timing just right’ – that is the timing of his foul play on the keeper, i.e. the timing of his cheating

If the keeper had made a meal of it and gone down – very risky of course – very probably the goal would have been disallowed, with Silva deemed to ‘have just done enough to impede the keeper’. Cheating by the keeper rewarded.

A radical suggestion to remove all these shenanigans at corners: no-one other than the goalkeeper allowed in the 6-yard box until after the moment the corner is taken
   

Totally agree with your interpretation.

I think your 6 yard box suggestion is an interesting one but, I think it just might create more difficulties re encroachment, like at Penno's when players might cross the line before the ball is kicked etc. An extra rule for officials to cram in.

Yes and we know from experience how Penaty encroachment is rife

Even yesterday the Ref at Swindon was pointing at people to stay outside the Box and look where they all were by the time Ironside kicked it

It ought to be a one off deal. The taker scores or he doesn't.

If he scores it's a ko , if not it's a goal kick then none of the numpties need to ne running.into the area in.case of a save or a rebound

If that had been the rule we would not have had the most dramatic moment in our history - Coppinger's goal at Brentford

Yes I know SFT's goal at Stoke was also dramatic and IMHO more important, but somehow the sheer unexpectedness of a missed penalty leading to a goal at the other end creates greater drama than a sudden death goal which one team or the other will score.

I agree to a degree but I am always perplexed by the things that have evolved into the game

The all in wrestling at Corners and Free kicks. Could that be solved or sorted. I suppose yes if every Referee was mandated to give a Free kick or Penalty every time they saw things which they started for a while and then " bottled" it

The inane practice of Corner takers putting the ball sightly out of the Corner Flag quadrant. Would half an inch make any difference ? OR is it just a time wasting take the heat out of the game ploy

Could they draw a square of say 50cm and then say all the ball has to be IN that square , or would that just lead to them then putting the ball deliberately touching the line

And Penalties . I advocate a one off "deal" just to stop the headlong pursuit into the area. When that numpty of a Ref v Chessie gave them a Pen I said , that's it. If he scores it's a goal , but if he misses the Ref will call encroachment by players and order a retake

He went up the 18 yard line warning everybody to stay out and even kicked 2 Rovers players feet from on the Line

But did any of it work ? According to the Video and reports on here NO

Someone should or could also do a screenshot of Super Joes Pen on Saturday at the point he is about to kick the ball and look at the red and light blue tidal wave of players swarming into the area. I'd love to see that

So what criteria does the Ref use ? It was a quite clear hand ball so would he have given us the benefit of the doubt if Joe had missed and citing encroachment

He could quite easily have ordered a retake but I guess the same thing would be repeated again and again and will till it's sorted

How to cure it ? I can only think draw a line 36 yards from goal and let em all run from there after the Refs whistle OR my original thought , make it like a Penalty shoot out kick with only the Keeper and taker involved

The game is being spoiled by escalating cheating and will continue to go that way until something is done

[Dutch Uncle]

Completely understand your thoughts Wolfie, especially that last comment about cheating. Difficult to know how to stop that when it so clearly works.

[drfchound]

Tbf I don’t think they look at silva possibly impeding the keeper to start with but the correct decision regarding offside as he isn’t in the eyeline of the keeper sight

I first thought that it was a goal but on the replay I changed my opinion as it looked to me that the goalkeeper was impeded.

I believe rules and interpretations of them should follow the maxim ‘cheats should not prosper’

Below all my opinion and to be shot down from many angles

I have a problem with City’s goal. Silva clearly nudges the keeper very early, not just stand in his way, actually moves into him, just a little, knowing exactly what he is doing, probably well practised. The keeper is temporarily and briefly unbalanced with very nearly but not quite enough time to recover fully. It is taking cheating to the edge of ‘how far can I go and stop just short’ – IMHO it is still cheating. The commentators were even saying ‘he got his timing just right’ – that is the timing of his foul play on the keeper, i.e. the timing of his cheating

If the keeper had made a meal of it and gone down – very risky of course – very probably the goal would have been disallowed, with Silva deemed to ‘have just done enough to impede the keeper’. Cheating by the keeper rewarded.

A radical suggestion to remove all these shenanigans at corners: no-one other than the goalkeeper allowed in the 6-yard box until after the moment the corner is taken
   

Totally agree with your interpretation.

I think your 6 yard box suggestion is an interesting one but, I think it just might create more difficulties re encroachment, like at Penno's when players might cross the line before the ball is kicked etc. An extra rule for officials to cram in.

Yes and we know from experience how Penaty encroachment is rife

Even yesterday the Ref at Swindon was pointing at people to stay outside the Box and look where they all were by the time Ironside kicked it

It ought to be a one off deal. The taker scores or he doesn't.

If he scores it's a ko , if not it's a goal kick then none of the numpties need to ne running.into the area in.case of a save or a rebound

If that had been the rule we would not have had the most dramatic moment in our history - Coppinger's goal at Brentford

Yes I know SFT's goal at Stoke was also dramatic and IMHO more important, but somehow the sheer unexpectedness of a missed penalty leading to a goal at the other end creates greater drama than a sudden death goal which one team or the other will score.

I agree to a degree but I am always perplexed by the things that have evolved into the game

The all in wrestling at Corners and Free kicks. Could that be solved or sorted. I suppose yes if every Referee was mandated to give a Free kick or Penalty every time they saw things which they started for a while and then " bottled" it

The inane practice of Corner takers putting the ball sightly out of the Corner Flag quadrant. Would half an inch make any difference ? OR is it just a time wasting take the heat out of the game ploy

Could they draw a square of say 50cm and then say all the ball has to be IN that square , or would that just lead to them then putting the ball deliberately touching the line

And Penalties . I advocate a one off "deal" just to stop the headlong pursuit into the area. When that numpty of a Ref v Chessie gave them a Pen I said , that's it. If he scores it's a goal , but if he misses the Ref will call encroachment by players and order a retake

He went up the 18 yard line warning everybody to stay out and even kicked 2 Rovers players feet from on the Line

But did any of it work ? According to the Video and reports on here NO

Someone should or could also do a screenshot of Super Joes Pen on Saturday at the point he is about to kick the ball and look at the red and light blue tidal wave of players swarming into the area. I'd love to see that

So what criteria does the Ref use ? It was a quite clear hand ball so would he have given us the benefit of the doubt if Joe had missed and citing encroachment

He could quite easily have ordered a retake but I guess the same thing would be repeated again and again and will till it's sorted

How to cure it ? I can only think draw a line 36 yards from goal and let em all run from there after the Refs whistle OR my original thought , make it like a Penalty shoot out kick with only the Keeper and taker involved

The game is being spoiled by escalating cheating and will continue to go that way until something is done

Crikey Wolfie, ref the bit highlighted in red, the way some players “run up” to take a pen, players like Pogba for example, everyone would be past the taker before he kicked it.

[StocksArmy]

It’s all about lack of consistency in the decisions for me. The bigger clubs rarely get a shocker of a decision come their way and regularly get the benefit of the doubt such as this one.

Not that I give a toss about who wins the league, I’m a bit bored of seeing City win it now so I didn’t want the goal to count although I didn’t think Silva affected anything. If he wasn’t there it still would have gone in which is why I think the goal was given and rightly so.

[i_ateallthepies]

The rule could easily be enforced by simply reversing the advantage in the event of failure to comply with the rule.  Penalty kicker's team break the rule, no goal and goalkick awarded to the defending side, defending side break the rule goal is awarded regardless of the outcome of the kick.  Same could be used for corners, free kicks, throwins, just reverse the award the kick/throw and give it to the other side.  It would probably result in mayhem initially with players protesting but that would quickly settle down if no quarter is given by the refs.

[Filo]

Some rules are just ignored by refs, probably 75% of throw ins are foul throws, and the length of time the keeper holds on to the ball is another one