Bluemoon goes into Meltdown

If this is genuinely the interpretation of the rule, then frankly, the rule is wrong. How does "blocking" the line of sight of the goalkeeper NOT include a goalkeeper's positioning (and footwork) being affected by the offside player who looks like he's about to strike the ball? This needs reforming or it just looks like the guys making and applying the rules (the FA and the refs) dont understand football. Anyone who plays football will tell you that Rashford has an impact on the defenders and goalkeepers for the points I just made above; Bruno doesn't score that goal if Rashfords not offside basically.

It seems like the rule is designed to stop people playing the offside trap and/or if they do try to play offside then the advantage is to the attacking team.

That seems fair enough to me. The off-side trap always pissed me off anyway.
 
If this is genuinely the interpretation of the rule, then frankly, the rule is wrong. How does "blocking" the line of sight of the goalkeeper NOT include a goalkeeper's positioning (and footwork) being affected by the offside player who looks like he's about to strike the ball? This needs reforming or it just looks like the guys making and applying the rules (the FA and the refs) dont understand football. Anyone who plays football will tell you that Rashford has an impact on the defenders and goalkeepers for the points I just made above; Bruno doesn't score that goal if Rashfords not offside basically.
If the keeper misjudges who is onside and who is offside and positions himself towards the wrong player, it's his fault. If the offside player is standing between ball and keeper, so that the keeper just can't see what's going on, than that counts as active. While sometimes open to interpretation I do think that this is actually a good rule.
 
If the keeper misjudges who is onside and who is offside and positions himself towards the wrong player, it's his fault. If the offside player is standing between ball and keeper, so that the keeper just can't see what's going on, than that counts as active. While sometimes open to interpretation I do think that this is actually a good rule.
This isn't a bad point; and I accept it to a degree. But if we accept that then we must also accept that the attackers can gain an advantage, and can seek to do so lawfully, by flooding the offside area with attacking "decoy" options if they wish. The offside rule is intended surely to prevent the attackers from gaining an advantage from being offside; the whole dichotomy between "interfering/not interfering" is built around the idea of advantage. If you are right, then you can gain advantage, but only in an arbitrary way which seems no different to the fact that the player offside isn't allowed to block the goalkeeper's view, or to touch the ball. It is arguable that a minute touch of the ball might be LESS important than the player's mere position.
 
ancoats wrote,

"Was coming back from the vets with my racing pigeon, when this fat Rag in zebra trousers, was coming out of Maccy D's. He was inhaling a big mac, you should have seen the state of him. He looked at my pigeon and said summat, but I don't understand cockney, so I said to him, "I know you lot like your dodgy meat, but this is a 500 quid racing pigeon, so feck off back to London, and eat swamp rats, you fat cnut." Should have seen his face. Then he dropped his fries in a puddle and everyone cheered. Even my pigeon let out a whoop. I've been tugging away at myself ever since."

Liked by waspish, Kaz7, ric, manimanc, Colin Bells boots, Spanish Bob
 
I always get a kick out of the comments when MOTD post something about City and how easily riled up they get when it turns into a no fans, empty seats thread
 
jason-momoa-chair.gif
 
The story has to follow a certain criteria. The setting needs to be a really mundane, working class existence. For example...Gorton market, A bookies in Collyhurst or a factory in Audenshaw. The main protagonist is always just going about their own business, when they are suddenly confronted by an arm chair rag, in a full United kit. The rag blurts out a faux pas of cataclysmic proportions, and is suddenly put back into their place with hilarious consequences and with the full support of any other people who happen to be nearby. The altercation significantly improves their day.

"I was at the butchers, in Crumpsall, and this rag tw** was giving it the billy big bollix in his rag top. He's never been to a game in his life. The cockney cnut mouthed off that, "21 was coming", so I told him that ,"The only number 21 he's ever gonna see, is if he waits at the bus depo across the road! Should have seen his face, then he dropped his sausages and everyone cheered. I just walked down the street laughing to myself. Like a king."
:lol: Spot on. People who make up fake stories are so pathetic.
 
The story has to follow a certain criteria. The setting needs to be a really mundane, working class existence. For example...Gorton market, A bookies in Collyhurst or a factory in Audenshaw. The main protagonist is always just going about their own business, when they are suddenly confronted by an arm chair rag, in a full United kit. The rag blurts out a faux pas of cataclysmic proportions, and is suddenly put back into their place with hilarious consequences and with the full support of any other people who happen to be nearby. The altercation significantly improves their day.

"I was at the butchers, in Crumpsall, and this rag tw** was giving it the billy big bollix in his rag top. He's never been to a game in his life. The cockney cnut mouthed off that, "21 was coming", so I told him that ,"The only number 21 he's ever gonna see, is if he waits at the bus depo across the road! Should have seen his face, then he dropped his sausages and everyone cheered. I just walked down the street laughing to myself. Like a king."

:lol: Magnificent.
 
I was leaving the Middleton branch of help for hero's, when to my amazement, right there in the mall was Bryan Robson and Fred the Red selling tickets for rags games, and he was practically giving them away for a couple of quid, most of it going into his own pocket for pints. I went over and said to him, "I know you spent most of your career on your arse, but I never thought you'd stoop this low." And no word of a lie, Fred the Red took his head off and it was Peter Schmeichel, and we all ended up having a scrap. Robson was done after one punch because his shoulder immediately dislocated, but Schmeichel kept lunging at me like a starfish, so I kicked him in the bollix and he went down like a sack of shit. I stood over him and said, "This is our city, you pig botherer, so feck off back to London, before I take my belt off." And I casually picked up my carrier bag of shopping, and walked over to the bookies and all the blokes in there cheered and gave me a pat on the back, because all of them are top blues like me. I even got a free bet out of it. Couldn't make it up!
 
On Cancelo leaving:

Feels like something is rotten in the dressing room at the moment and if its cancelo then get rid for sure.
But he was one of our best players last year, whoever has jointly contributed to that no longer being the case shares blame here.
I include all coaches and Pep specifically

To think we’re not replacing him is unbelievable. He also had problems with Portugal and was dropped for Dalot who isn’t at his level when on form.

Dalot is the greatest fullback in history (second only to fatty mcshaw). He is untouchable, unstoppable and simply one of the greatest players I have ever been lucky enough to watch play. Another 10 men in red are also far superior to every one of our players.

Apparently they also have the best striker in the world too.

:lol: the bitterness is strong with that one.

Ake gets injured we are fecked. Gomez who can't defend at left back in a title fight. We have just weakened ourselves. Our season now relies on if Ake can continuously stay fit. Gomez is shocking defensively

It is a bit like the Gündoğan leaving thread last season.

Time for him to leave etc. the general consensus, and then he said it is bollocks and wins the league.

Glad I finally can say that he's got a face like a slapped arse and comes across as a prima Donna. Glad we've got rid!

The only bad news is we didn't do it in June. Ended up picking a sulking out of form mardarse who turned up for a month a season over a solid squad player who would have died for the shirt and just didn't want to be a redundant 3rd choice.

I literally predicted he would demand a transfer in January at the time as well.

Pep's biggest fan here, but I'm not sure Pep is completely blameless. Overplayed Cancelo and then was harsh on him when he lost form and made mistakes. Cancelo didn't take it well and the rest....
Highly bold decision, hopefully will bolster team morale. I'm worried about the season, though.

2 things that may upset some on here

firstly realy not arsed he is going, never rated him anyway never felt good whe. he was a starter that he wouldn't gift a goal.

Secondly, please to god I hope the zinchenko fanclub won't start crying even more now we are one less a fullback
 
Seriously, the levels of revisionism over there right now. Here's a few reminders for any of you sanctimonious cretins.

guardiola-and-mendy-city-414x271.jpg


Sunderland-vs-Manchester--001.jpg


3690.jpg



maxresdefault.jpg


Kolo%20Toure


200406-daily-mail-kyle-walker-sex-party.png
 
What's this about? :lol:
I think it’s w/re: to them jumping on their high horse about the ‘rag cnuts’ supporting Greenwood (even though most I’ve seen are condemning him…) and how the club have no morals and integrity and ‘paid off the girl’ blah blah blah
 
I think it’s w/re: to them jumping on their high horse about the ‘rag cnuts’ supporting Greenwood (even though most I’ve seen are condemning him…) and how the club have no morals and integrity and ‘paid off the girl’ blah blah blah
No I meant Kolo in the shower