Since when has that been the standard for a player being offside?
VAR, Refs and Linesmen | General Discussion
- Thread starter Samid
- Start date
It has to have an affect on an opposition player, he doesn't stop De Gea from attempting to save the ball.
Yeah, that's the problem. He should've dove at him.
Yeah or stood on him or something. Richarlison is on the floor and not touching De Gea so there isn't really much argument as to why DDG can't make an attempt for the ball.
If he tries to dive on top of him he could injure himself or the player on the goal line.
Unfortunately our Dave isn't that smart
Yet when Bruno complains to refs about decisions, he is called a moaner by many.
He can injure himself anytime he makes a save, just do it.
But again that isn't the reason he dives, he has no clue he's even there.
As much as I like to agree I don't really think it would've made a difference. Even if De Gea threw himself at Richardlison after the ball was in the net, ran mad up to the ref beat himself on the chest "I am De GEA the god and I would have made that save" you really think they'd change it?
I mean, it is interference because the keeper can only reach that ball with a reaction save, and the player in the offside position directly interferes with the keepers ability to perform such a reaction save. I mean, De Gea's natural reaction to making a save isn't to jump head first into another player standing right where he needed to land. If Richardlison wasn't offside, maybe you could demand more from De Gea but the player who impeded his ability was in fact offside.
They wouldn't have given the goal either way. If obstructing the line of view is enough, then clearly standing on the goal line between the keeper and the ball is enough. They wanted it to happen, so no reason to pump the breaks and ruin the spectacle. You ever think Bruno would get this goal through a VAR review against City? Nah, never and It's ridiculous.
Last edited:
Yeah, all he needed to do was trip over him. But when you’re as averse to physical contact as DDG…
I clutch at straws as much at most for the goals we concede, he’s not interfering, he doesn’t move, isn’t in the eye line or the goal keeper and doesn’t impact anything.
True.
Good god
This is De Gea we're talking about. Guy can't even slide on the ground to collect the ball with his hands, like we saw in the semifinal vs Brighton when Mitoma fouled him.
He couldn't get to the ball because it was a sublime finish in the top corner. He only knew the player was there after.
He's right though. He only interferes if he prevents de Gea from attempting to save the ball, so if de Gea takes one step into Richarlison and then pretends he stumbled over him then they'll be hard pressed to not overturn it. But if he just stands there and looks at the ball they can't overturn it saying that he was interfered with. You can't interfere with somebody attempting to play the ball (which is what the law says) if the player doesn't attempt to play the ball. If that were the case, then Shaw or any other United player could've claimed to have been distracted by Richarlison as well.
I absolutely refuse to believe any fan of ours on here would be happy if we scored that goal and it was disallowed.
This thread would be baying for blood.
This thread would be baying for blood.
No complaints about that goal, AWB was shite, the defending in the box was shite.
Richarlison is only there because he gets shoved in the back. If anything it's a penalty.
You can make a legit case for De Gea by saying that reaching that ball it would take a special reaction save. Something he is capable of, but is only possible with that reaction. He could not make this save because his first reaction was watching the player in the offside position, realising he could not attempt to save the ball with him in the way. Expecting a keeper to jump towards and onto a player in his way to pretend this 'clear and obvious' bullshit is working is going in the wrong direction. Might not be fair to disallow a beautiful goal, but it would have been disallowed if Bruno scored that against City. With 10 replays and discussions the rule is clear as day.
Exactly correct.
De gea looked round when the ball hat hit the net.
Never in a million years is that interfering
He didn’t fecking move. Goal all day long
Come on. His reaction was watching the ball go in the net and as he kept turning around he spotted Richarlison sitting next to him. Had he tried to save the ball and made contact with him he would’ve had a case but as it is now Richarlison was interfering as much with de Gea as he was interfering with Antony.
Why the shock? He wasn’t interfering.
if de Gea runs into him, or even touches him, it would have been disallowed
This is spot on. Sadly he just doesn't have the street smarts to do this. As much as I hate City and Liverpool's dark arts, wish we had that streak in us.
The question if he could have saved it if not for the player in the offside position. If the keeper didn't move because he was there, then that is interfering. He is not blocking his eyes when the shot is taken, and that is always interference yet he is in the offside position on the line where keeper needed to move to make a save, he is blocking the path to a possible save. If your claim is that De Gea wouldn't have made that save, then that is the discussion. I've known De Gea to make incredible reaction saves, so I wouldn't put it past him, but whether or not he is a pussy shouldn't be a deciding factor during a VAR process.
Totally agree. I have no idea why that goal was allowed to stand. DeGea knew he was there because he almost fell into him. Then Richarlison decides to stay there complaining and now DDG can’t get across the line.
The next time you watch Dermot Gallagher trying to justify a poor refereeing decision against United, remember that he only gave a yellow card for one of the worst fouls ever.
"Thats got to be on the brink of a red" , who the feck is that on the commentry?
Sounds like it's Tony Gale
Not his greatest punditry moment.
How the feck was that foul on Rashford not a pen? literally contact on his ankle..
Don’t worry, Fred just trod on the back of Mcginn’s ankle. The ref saw that one.
Nothing will change unless Ten Hag starts talking about these decisions against us. You won't see many clearer penalties than that.
Leading with the forearm, no attempt to play the ball. It's assault not a tackle. Ferguson did jail time for much less than that !
There has got to be something intentionally disingenuous behind that commentary. It's plain as fecking day that the player literally charges in and punches the other player in the face, blatantly deliberate, without even attempting to pretend to be going for the ball. It's identical to when people fight in the street and someone delivers a running punch. That commentator then sits there going "oh, that challenge was late" as if it even remotely resembled an actual tackle. That had nothing to do with football, it was a player literally charging in to deliver a haymaker. That commentator did not think it was a late challenge, but he found the need to downplay what happened and try to fool viewers into seeing it as less than it was. That's a commentator who is actively covering for a player's grossly violent conduct.
Did VAR even look at the foul on Rashford?? Was a penalty as clear as day. Just took him out from behind with absolutely no intention of getting the ball.
I thought Chambers on Rashford was a foul (it always is outside the box right?) but you're never ever getting that on VAR.
Hell you barely get the most blantant stonewall things on VAR.
Hell you barely get the most blantant stonewall things on VAR.
That was absolutely ridiculous that it wasn't given. Clearest penalty you'll see on football pitch.
That was inside the box.
That was inside the box.
Why did VAR and noted Newcastle fan Michael Oliver not award an obvious penalty to the team in contention with his for the Champions League places? Hm, I wonder.
I don't think it even makes the top 3 for clearest pen's we've been denied this season!