It's not up to the officials to determine whether he's making the save or not. It's their job to determine whether the offside player is interfering with the keeper's ability to make a save, and you don't get much more clear cut interference than a player stood directly next to the keeper, blocking any possible route to the ball.
VAR and Refs | General Discussion
- Thread starter Samid
- Start date
-
In the latest episode of the United Hour Podcast, Nik (@Rood) and Jamie (@Vault Dweller) are here to talk about United's dreadful home defeat at the hands of Big Ange's Tottenham Hotspur. Should this have been the end of Ten Hag? How long does he actually have left? And does Nik finally want ETH out?!
It's not up to the officials to determine whether he's making the save or not. It's their job to determine whether the offside player is interfering with the keeper's ability to make a save, and you don't get much more clear cut interference than a player stood directly next to the keeper, blocking any possible route to the ball.
I agree with Alex and I don't think the call is remotely controversial. The Dutch 22's between the keeper and where he has to dive to save the ball, quite clearly interfering with play.
The decision took that long he might just have done that, definitely called a friend anyway.
That leads to another point; added on time. Surely with all the subs and the delay for the check it should have been longer than 5mins. Do they calculate different under UEFA rules?
The argument for it not being interference falls apart as soon as it relies on the French keeper's balance and the minutia of his exact positioning.
If it's offside if he was set slightly better, then it's offside. It's not like he was prone, on the far side of the goal, facing the complete wrong way.
I thought at first it was offside, the keeper would have dived had there not been a player in his way. I don't think he was saving it however, but he's definitely been obstructed.
Lineker, Shearer and Rooney all think it should be a goal
- french defender blocking the view
- french defender deflecting the ball into the goal, out of reach from Maignan
- rear view shows the keeper only ever went the Dutch defenders way once the goal was already in the net; he was never having that with or without anyone standing there
- french defender blocking the view
- french defender deflecting the ball into the goal, out of reach from Maignan
- rear view shows the keeper only ever went the Dutch defenders way once the goal was already in the net; he was never having that with or without anyone standing there
We've had endless complaining about how much subjectivity remains in VAR, and yet when it's used to make an objective call, where an offside attacking player is clearly blocking any possible attempt the goalkeeper may make to save a shot, we're suddenly asking the officials to consider how likely they think the goalkeeper is to make the save, how aware he is of the attacking player, and how much he knew about the shot.
It was the correct call, and we'd be up in arms if we conceded one like that and it wasn't chalked off.
This was a subjective offside so it's not an objective decision.
I cannot understand the reactionary level against VAR, it’s only a tool, nothing more than that.
He was objectively blocking any potential path between the goalkeeper and the ball.
He was also objectively offside.
It's only subjective when you start asking the officials to determine whether they think the goalkeeper was sufficiently sighted and balanced to make the save, and whether he was sufficiently aware of the player about to become directly in the way of the ball. None of these things should be considered.
Was offside to me, pretty easy decision.
I'm 99% sure we wouldn’t have had this level of outrage if the officials had been anything but English.
That's offside.
Surprised it took so long to sort out, and surprised at the reaction. Very clearly offside. Correct decision.
It's offside for me. As Alex99 says, the officials shouldn't have to start looking into it in terms of keepers positioning, body shape, weight on which foot, likelihood of making the save, etc. Especially when the clamour is for decisions to be made quicker!
The player was definitely in between the keeper and where he'd have to dive if he was going to reach the ball, so for me that should just be active and therefore offside, rather than the officials having to guess whether they think the keeper would have made the save or not.
The media definitely look to build up / manufacture controversy in situations like this. I'm very confident that had the goal been given, a few of them on the panel would've adopted the 'How is that not interfering!? He's stood exactly where the keeper needs to dive!" viewpoint instead.
The player was definitely in between the keeper and where he'd have to dive if he was going to reach the ball, so for me that should just be active and therefore offside, rather than the officials having to guess whether they think the keeper would have made the save or not.
The media definitely look to build up / manufacture controversy in situations like this. I'm very confident that had the goal been given, a few of them on the panel would've adopted the 'How is that not interfering!? He's stood exactly where the keeper needs to dive!" viewpoint instead.
Feck me guys that is such an obvious offside call. 
can’t believe people will try and argue it.
can’t believe people will try and argue it.These calls about whether a player is interfering when offside are literally called subjective offsides because they have to make a call if the action of the attacker is impeding the defender from taking another action.
The goalkeeper made no attempt to reach the ball so in my mind that negates any potential interference.
You can't impede a goalkeeper much more than standing directly directly next to him, between him and the ball!
You also don't know how Dumfries' presence affected his movement, so lack of dive is proof of nothing.
You're looking for subjectivity where there basically is none.
The point that the other side is making is that the ball is already basically passed him and traveling at a direction and velocity to certainly go in so the outcome would be the same regardless of the position of the attacker
It’s offside. Don’t think it’s even that debatable (and I think English officials are woeful).
The point the other side is making is that they want officials to start judging whether they think goalkeepers are going to make the save, rather than simply looking at obvious things like "is there an opposition player in the way?"
Only 2 real controversial VAR moments so far and both involving English officials. Just a coincidence I'm sure......
In this case I'd say it is a coincidence.
You can blame the officials for how long it took to make the decision, but the controversy? Many people say it was offside and many people say it wasn't, so any decision by officials from any country could have been deemed controversial.
Feck me guys that is such an obvious offside call.
People wanted the goal to stood so they're trying to rationalize it.
The most depressing aspect of any of these debates are those that immediately go definitive with their assertion it was definitely this or definitely that. Every time there's a disputed call it happens.
Nobody says "I can see why they reached decision, but I disagree". Everything on Twitter is: "100% wrong, anyone who disagrees is a moron. Want a fight about it?"
Nobody says "I can see why they reached decision, but I disagree". Everything on Twitter is: "100% wrong, anyone who disagrees is a moron. Want a fight about it?"
I would get the controversy and issue if, for example, it had gone top left. I don’t get how, when the ball basically goes under the Netherlands player with the keeper next to him there’s any debate here.
Neh that’s not true us tweeters can see nuance and have pleasant conversations.
You’re 100% wrong and a moron, and I challenge you to a fight about it.
If Maignan had an idea to throw for the ball he would have done it despite of Dumphries being there.It was plain to se.
Keith Hackett the ex referee is on Talksport now and says it was a terrible decision. He isn't blaming Taylor as such he is going in on Atwell. Said if Atwell had doubts he should have asked Taylor to go to the screen.
I thought all subjective decisions need to be at the discretion of the primary referee anyway?
Every pro in the BBC studio disagreed with you, for what it’s worth.Feck me guys that is such an obvious offside call.
Seen a few referees sent to screen to look at this type of situation recently, surprised Atwell didn't send Taylor.
The state of punditry.
I’d agree with your statement other than the key variable “Atwell” being in there meaning I’m actually not surprised at all.
The fact that they're called subjective offsides would suggest it's not an objective decision and comes down to a judgement call.
This is a contentious one and is splitting opinion all over the place. Two of the pundits thought it should have stood and one didn't on Irish TV so it's not as black and white as you're making it out to be.
If you watch the video he didn't even see Dumfries til the ball was passed him and made zero attempt to dive. As Shay Given pointed out last night he would attempt to dive towards the ball, if he could, no matter who was there so disagree that he prevented him from getting there. He's potentially blocking an action that was never attempted which isn't enough for me.
As far as I'm concerned you can't prevent someone from doing something they aren't even trying to do.
Maybe worth listening to their rationale; first?The state of punditry.
I really like Rooney as a pundit, and I think his explanation made a lot of sense.
We constantly call out how shit the pundits are. They're also paid to stir up talking points. There's not much to discuss if they just agree with everything.
Right so their opinion is worthless because you disagree. Good lad.
Again, did you actually see the analysis?
I’ve seen pundits agree with decisions loads of times. It just seemed like they didn’t think it was the right decision, which many other pros and ex-officials seem to think too.
Yes, and the 'subjective' aspect is:
- Is Dumfries interfering with Maignan's ability to make save by standing directly next to him, in between him and the path of the ball.
The subjectivity is not:
- Has Maignan actually noticed Dumfries and was he actually likely to make a save?
I can't make it any clearer to you, @Posh Red or any anyone else (ex-pro, referee or otherwise) that asking officials to judge how likely elite-level, professional goalkeepers are to make saves is a can of worms we do not want to open if we actually want consistent officiating.
I am convinced that if the same decision had been made (more quickly) by a German official, for example, we wouldn't be seeing anywhere near the level of outrage.
To be fair that's generally the opinion on here whenever pundits say a decision that went against Utd was correct.