Football
Welcome to Live View – Take the tour to learn more
Start Tour
There is currently 1 person viewing this thread.
14 Jan 26
20:59
Joined:
Date Joined:
24 Aug 04
Trossard push in back of GK & The fat swede in offside position...... Ruling for Arsenal - Goal
Haaland joustling with defender, making no attempt to play the ball & no obstruction on the GK.............Ruling no Goal for City as Haaland is deemed offside despite not playing any part in the finish
Welcome to the English game................Tainted results and outcome because the FA make up the rules as they go on.
After last night 90% of goals from corners should be disallowed for one reason or another. Time to scrap VAR, because the refs just dont do a job under this format because a man in a booth at a remote location is deciding the outcome of games as he sees fit!!
Football is dead
Haaland joustling with defender, making no attempt to play the ball & no obstruction on the GK.............Ruling no Goal for City as Haaland is deemed offside despite not playing any part in the finish
Welcome to the English game................Tainted results and outcome because the FA make up the rules as they go on.
After last night 90% of goals from corners should be disallowed for one reason or another. Time to scrap VAR, because the refs just dont do a job under this format because a man in a booth at a remote location is deciding the outcome of games as he sees fit!!
Football is dead
Show More
Gyokeres was not making any contact with a Chelsea defender, none of whom even tried to keep the ball out. Haaland’s mutual tugging with Thiaw from an offside position was viewed as preventing the defender from playing the ball.
From this angle it is clear Trossard was protecting himself as the keeper backed into him, there was no push of any significance:
https://youtu.be/lxKitei7TJY?t=144
It's not surprising VAR cleared the goal in seconds.
I hope this helps...
From this angle it is clear Trossard was protecting himself as the keeper backed into him, there was no push of any significance:
https://youtu.be/lxKitei7TJY?t=144
It's not surprising VAR cleared the goal in seconds.
I hope this helps...
There is never any corner taken these days which has no one being fouled. Pushing, shirt tugging , holding, obstructing, treading on feet , the authorities have no clue how to stop this rugby type maul. The game is gone.
Most defenders not even looking at the ball.
Most defenders not even looking at the ball.
Commentators badly describe games, and dont
understand laws of football leading to viewers
not understanding what is going on.
understand laws of football leading to viewers
not understanding what is going on.
I'd say Arsenal goal far better case for being
disallowed than Citeh goal.
The guy in offside position is actually preventing
Chelsea player being able to play the ball.
disallowed than Citeh goal.
The guy in offside position is actually preventing
Chelsea player being able to play the ball.
I don't think either incidents should have resulted in a disallowed goal. The Chelsea defender made things easier by hardly trying to make space for himself.
Var knocked itself into a hole with the liverpool
decision, these are factual rather than clear and obvious
and if you looked at a different incident you could give
a free kick to defence or pelanty to attack.
They are re refereeing and selecting their preferred outcome.
decision, these are factual rather than clear and obvious
and if you looked at a different incident you could give
a free kick to defence or pelanty to attack.
They are re refereeing and selecting their preferred outcome.
The city goal wasn't ruled out for impacting the keeper. Maybe try to understand why the decision was made before starting threads about it.
The Chelsea player had his back to the ball, couldn't see it and clearly had no intention of playing it at any stage. You can't impact a zero chance of playing or challenging for the ball. He was intent on pushing the Arsenal player into the goal instead of doing some actual defending. Clown.
I think they got both decisions right.
The Chelsea player had his back to the ball, couldn't see it and clearly had no intention of playing it at any stage. You can't impact a zero chance of playing or challenging for the ball. He was intent on pushing the Arsenal player into the goal instead of doing some actual defending. Clown.
I think they got both decisions right.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/articles/c7v0lz7q7q2o
Photo clearly shows defender looking at ball and blocked by gykores who is offside
Both decisions are marginal to me and goals, but what photo
are you looking at?
Photo clearly shows defender looking at ball and blocked by gykores who is offside
Both decisions are marginal to me and goals, but what photo
are you looking at?
https://x.com/CityDoctrine/status/2011532258273059179?s=20
I'm looking at a video. The chelsea player decides to turn his back on the ball and push the arsenal player into the goal. Nothing Gyok does prevents him from turning around, looking at the ball and clearing it. He isn't even looking at the ball
I'm looking at a video. The chelsea player decides to turn his back on the ball and push the arsenal player into the goal. Nothing Gyok does prevents him from turning around, looking at the ball and clearing it. He isn't even looking at the ball
Cheers
The photo clearly shows him looking at ball, the video shows him look towards the header
Hmm, still being obstructed, but partially his own fault, still a goal!
The photo clearly shows him looking at ball, the video shows him look towards the header
Hmm, still being obstructed, but partially his own fault, still a goal!
Also shows gykores move to allow ball to pass him, which was
cited as a reason Liverpool goal was disallowed
What a mess
cited as a reason Liverpool goal was disallowed
What a mess
Post Your Reply
Please login to post a reply.
Wonder
Instance ID: 13539