EPL Matchday 28

[pantskyle]

He probably just gave him his regards and things were misinterpreted.

CARLO IS BLOODBATH?

 

[Zidane98]

zero percent chance of saving it. If there had been even a 1% chance that he could pull of a worldlie then I would agree with you that it was offside. As it was he was in mid air as the shot was deflected and basically landed as the ball went past him

That's irrelevant to the offside law but in any case not true either. He's offside under the laws of the game.

 

[peternorth]

If the goal was scored against my team in the same manner, and VAR'd Id be in total agreement.

If the goal was scored by my team and VAR'd. Id be livid

 

[jod23]

Quite ridiculous to say that the goalkeeper had zero percent chance of playing the ball. Siggurdson had to dummy the ball, you can see on the replay that De Gea is distracted by that so it has to be offside. You won't find too many situations where a player is positioned right in front of a keeper when a shot on goal goes in the net where a goal is given.

Must disagree here. De Gea is going the other way. He's been done by the deflection. He absolutely has 0% chance to save that.

Whether it's offside or not is another issue. But Siggy being there doesn't hinder De Gea's chance to save it.

 

[Blueboys11]

That's irrelevant to the offside law but in any case not true either. He's offside under the laws of the game.

I’m not sure it’s irrelevant as there have been many cases a goal keeper has had a player in an offside position in his eyeline but the goal stood as they had no impact on the goal being scored.
The Rule as I understand it is denying the keeper a chance to make a play at the ball. A ball that is so far from him that he has no play on it would seem to fall outside this

 

[Zidane98]

I’m not sure it’s irrelevant as there have been many cases a goal keeper has had a player in an offside position in his eyeline but the goal stood as they had no impact on the goal being scored.
The Rule as I understand it is denying the keeper a chance to make a play at the ball. A ball that is so far from him that he has no play on it would seem to fall outside this

Those goals usually involved offside players who were positioned either side of the line between the goalkeeper and the person shooting. The VAR officials rightly determined that the offside player literally right in front of the goalkeeper that dummied the ball influenced play.

 

[Bojan KantKick]

You can't lie down in front of the keeper and say that because the shot was deflected into the corner that it's not offside. If you don't think sigurdsson was distracting De Gea then you are lying to yourself.

 

[SM]

You can't lie down in front of the keeper and say that because the shot was deflected into the corner that it's not offside. If you don't think sigurdsson was distracting De Gea then you are lying to yourself.

I mean, the beach ball distracted Reina..

 

[Bradesmaen]

You can't lie down in front of the keeper and say that because the shot was deflected into the corner that it's not offside. If you don't think sigurdsson was distracting De Gea then you are lying to yourself.

Certainly distracted him so much that De Gea watched the ball all the way

 

[Procrastinator35]

Quite ridiculous to say that the goalkeeper had zero percent chance of playing the ball. Siggurdson had to dummy the ball, you can see on the replay that De Gea is distracted by that so it has to be offside. You won't find too many situations where a player is positioned right in front of a keeper when a shot on goal goes in the net where a goal is given.

So you're saying that the 'cushion' was in motion, ergo active off-side, as opposed to passive.

 

[Bojan KantKick]

I mean, the beach ball distracted Reina..

Should that have been offside?

 

[Bradesmaen]

Should that have been offside?

The ball made an obvious motion

 

[SM]

Should that have been offside?

I mean, Reina couldn't track the ball because the beach ball was in the way. Clearly unfair obstruction of his line of sight.

 

[Sozabarus]

The ball hit the beachball.

 

[Bradesmaen]

The ball hit the beachball.

Exactly, the beachball didn't make an obvious action

 

[Bojan KantKick]

I mean, Reina couldn't track the ball because the beach ball was in the way. Clearly unfair obstruction of his line of sight.

If the beach ball played for the opposition then it would have been offside

 

[Red Black and Blue]

I’m not sure it’s irrelevant as there have been many cases a goal keeper has had a player in an offside position in his eyeline but the goal stood as they had no impact on the goal being scored.
The Rule as I understand it is denying the keeper a chance to make a play at the ball. A ball that is so far from him that he has no play on it would seem to fall outside this

This. It’s an wording of the rule vs the intention of the rule argument. The correct call depends on the perspective. In a court of law I think both could be argued successfully.

 

[SM]

If the beach ball played for the opposition then it would have been offside

Because the ball hit the beach ball.

 

[99 Problems]

As an Everton fan I’m fine with that being offside. The ball gets close enough to Gylfi that there will be a point he’s obstructing De Gea’s view. Do I think he would’ve saved it anyway? very unlikely. But the onus In that situation has to be on the attacker to not be in the direct line between the keeper and ball, and add the distraction of moving his legs at the last moment, even though his intent was to get out of the way.

 

[Bojan KantKick]

Because the ball hit the beach ball.

So if the ball missed the beach ball by a half a foot then it would be fine then?

 

[Magma]

leave the poor beach ball alone

 

[SM]

So if the ball missed the beach ball by a half a foot then it would be fine then?

Think you're missing the joke here.

 

[Zidane98]

Ancelotti charged for misconduct under Rule E3 - “A Participant shall at all times act in the best interests of the game and shall not act in any manner which is improper or brings the game into disrepute or use any one, or a combination of, violent conduct, serious foul play, threatening, abusive, indecent or insulting words or behaviour.”

 

[pantskyle]

Well I guess we'll find out what was said soon enough.

 

[SM]

But refs are allowed to say insulting things?