All that proves is the rules need looking at to be less ambiguous
Bluemoon goes into Meltdown
- Thread starter Logan!
- Start date
Direction of the ball is important. It was traveling diagonally, fast, towards Bruno and the other defender. I don't think Akanji could have intercepted before Bruno.
As did Walker.
Neo-Shakespearean swearing such as “cockwomble” and “cuntpuffin” is incredibly cringe and I always imagine the people using such twee insults to be wearing waistcoats and rocking ponytails with a Nokia N-Gage in a holster on their hip.
Absolutely. The City players ignored Bruno and that’s on them.
Micah Richards was incredibly salty on MOTD last night, saying it was a shocking decision, on the basis that Akanji made poor decisions. Twonk.
Well no former player was more stupid to listen to than Fredrik Ljungberg - whose hatred for United is well-known.
1. He said it was a shocking decision - has to be offside yada yada yada
2. He also said - it was the reason why United scored the second goal - because (and this is funny) - Kyle Walker was too far forward when United countered. His reasoning was that if City were 1-0 ahead, Walker would never push forward - and Garnacho would never have so much space.
So according to him - Walker making a stupid decision was because United got a goal - if United hadnt score, Walker would not make a stupid decison.
Brilliant logic
1. He said it was a shocking decision - has to be offside yada yada yada
2. He also said - it was the reason why United scored the second goal - because (and this is funny) - Kyle Walker was too far forward when United countered. His reasoning was that if City were 1-0 ahead, Walker would never push forward - and Garnacho would never have so much space.
So according to him - Walker making a stupid decision was because United got a goal - if United hadnt score, Walker would not make a stupid decison.
Brilliant logic
I love the fact that it’s bringing out all the ABUs frothing at the gash: Ljubgberg, Richards, Sutton and the other “pundits”.
I’ll take these decisions every week even if it’s just to drink their salty tears.
I’ll take these decisions every week even if it’s just to drink their salty tears.
I'll counter this by saying if City hadn't scored then we'd have won it 1-0. Seeing as purely hypothetical arguments are being presented as fact by city advocates.
Haaland is an issue for them, he's undroppable and the whole team has to be built around him, which is a sea change from how they have played previously. It was interesting to see him dropping deeper yesterday and do a short interchange of passes with the CB's, pointless action, but it's potentially him and the team changing their approach.
Pep has certainly got his work cut out to get the best out of the team, i'm sure they'll come back in full force in time, but there's some work to do to piece it together.
Pep has certainly got his work cut out to get the best out of the team, i'm sure they'll come back in full force in time, but there's some work to do to piece it together.
This just proves the rules are shit. The rules shouldn’t be up for interpretation at all.
I disagree, calling someone a cnut aggressive, whereas calling someone a cuntpuffin is definitely more humiliating
Spot on.
Rules and will always be open to interpretation
One of the most amusing things for me as a football fan on forums and social media is that every top team is convinced that the media are biased against their team. Bluemoon and Rawk. The Arsenal fan pages I see on twitter. United fans. Everyone thinks they're the victim of the media being biased towards their rivals and against them.
What needs to be done is a online petition to get the goal ruled out, the officials banned for life, Bruno and Rashford put in front of a fireing squad for being on the pitch. I've heard some crap off these guys . Ffs wake up piss poor club until Arabs wanted a play thing.
Really that seems hard to believe and really commendable I guess if it's true.
It's a difficult one with City fans I know 2 in particular one a real genuine City fan all his life for like fifty years or so and it's hard for me to knock his joy now at what's happening . It's like begrudging someone you know for winning the lotto
The other fan though is the same age as the first yet never had any interest in football at all till City won their first league with the money. Now he's going over to watch them is in the fan club and talks absolute rubbish about them all day long slagging everyone off when they win a match
He's a guy you wish a piano would fall on though his huge head would probably absolve any impact
Everybody keeps ignoring this. He actually argued on motd that he stopped to play rashford off.... Yeah you did and you didn't spot fernandes behind you. Watch the replays from every angle he packs it in and leaves fernandes to walker. Terrible defending. Any pressure at all and he'd force rashford into playing it or obstructing him
What is it with this offside that people don't understand? City always play a high line, the game is played until the ref blows the whistle and no they didn't stop because of the offside they just went with their normal high line. Walker was tactically placed higher up the field in the beginning of the second half to create a overload behind the DCM hence him being miles behind Bruno. Did Rashford touch the ball? No and was Bruno offside? No. Neither Akanji nor Walker were getting the ball and the ref called it. It wasn't an offside end off. If I was a City supporter I would be fuming by how badly they saw out the game.
I dunno if I’d say it’s commendable. A lot of them just jumped on the bandwagon when Abu Dhabi took over and they started spending stupid money to climb the table. Now the novelty has worn off.
I know plenty who’ve followed all their life, but I also know a few others who conveniently realised they’re CTID during Mancini’s reign. Many were more United-haters than anything else, knowing our result if we’d lost but having no idea how their own “team” did.
All I see is 3 defenders not doing their job in picking up a late runner, then having a go at the referee because he didn't do their job for them.
He was making good runs into space but nobody was picking him out. They were rotating the ball in their usual way instead of playing to his strengths by being a bit more direct. It's kind of baffling they bought him at all. He's really not suited to their style of play.
yeah exactly, they showed it quite well on MOTD, but it’s whether they change that and Haaland has to change his approach.
PR signing, just like Grealish.
Given his goal scoring prowess I'd say the approach has to change but I bloody well hope they don't!
I wish I could like this and relay it into a post in the ‘Things that annoy you’ thread in General. Annoying British hipster swearing thinking they’re quirky and zany.
Photoshopping players out of still images now. Absolutely love it. Scruffy cnuts.
After such a gratifying result, I suppose we really shouldn't begrudge them the privilege to engage in their favorite pastime. We all know there's nothing they love better than feeling victimised and hard done by. Projection, probably - deep down, they know they deserve it.
I hope we get a dodgy penalty on Wednesday
Exactly. If Akanji had played to the whistle, as any 8 year old would tell you, he would have forced Rashford to play the ball, instead of allowing an onside player, Fernandes, to run through, get the first touch and score.
Last edited:
Problem was Ederson was playing to the whistle and closed Rashfords shooting angle down rather than Brunos. Look, I love it and all...but it was offside.
Self entitled plastic wankers. Irrelevant before oil money.
Wasn't offside. Was a goal. Ends there.
Wasn't offside. Was a goal. Ends there.
Just watched a ref on TV explaining the definition of interfering with play.
* Blocking the line of site of the goalkeeper.
* Physical contact with an opposition player (whilst not touching the ball)
Rashford did neither of those things. He didn't touch the defenders or the ball, and when Bruno struck the shot, Rashford was behind him, so Ederson had a clear line of sight. Neither of those defenders were able to stop the ball reaching Bruno, as they had moved up to play the offside trap. So regardless of who they were tracking, they weren't getting to that ball before Bruno hit it. Walker actually realised that Rashford hadn't touched it, which is why he is desperately trying to block the shot.
what is this rumour of an alleged incident in the tunnel city v ref on Stretford paddock?
Remove Citeh from Premier League and the league is 100% changed. The FA got it majorly wrong.
Yeah pretty much this. I don't understand the controversy surrounding this goal. If you watch it back, factor in how the ball is moving, it is very obvious that even if Rashford is or isn't there, the outcome would be the same. Their defenders weren't getting to the ball and the goalie would be positioned the same.Just watched a ref on TV explaining the definition of interfering with play.
* Blocking the line of site of the goalkeeper.
* Physical contact with an opposition player (whilst not touching the ball)
Rashford did neither of those things. He didn't touch the defenders or the ball, and when Bruno struck the shot, Rashford was behind him, so Ederson had a clear line of sight. Neither of those defenders were able to stop the ball reaching Bruno, as they had moved up to play the offside trap. So regardless of who they were tracking, they weren't getting to that ball before Bruno hit it. Walker actually realised that Rashford hadn't touched it, which is why he is desperately trying to block the shot.
They did mention something about the tunnel when Pep was interviewed on MOTD but he didn't refer to it in his answer and it wasn't brought up again.
Akanji’s point was that his own position on the pitch was affected by Rashford, as they were holding the line to play him offside.
Maybe so, but if we extend that logic then Rashford could have been stood by the corner flag and theoretically by extension still impacted where everyone decided to position themselves.
You have to draw the line somewhere and you have to have hard rules about whether an offside player is interfering with play or not, in this case we didn’t break any of them so they can feck off.
The referees deserve credit for applying the rule correctly, even if instinctively it feels wrong.
Maybe so, but if we extend that logic then Rashford could have been stood by the corner flag and theoretically by extension still impacted where everyone decided to position themselves.
You have to draw the line somewhere and you have to have hard rules about whether an offside player is interfering with play or not, in this case we didn’t break any of them so they can feck off.
The referees deserve credit for applying the rule correctly, even if instinctively it feels wrong.