That doesn’t matter though, as the ball never got to him. Had it just bounced off Mings and gone to him, it’s offside, but Mings controlled it on his chest and then moved the ball with his foot. He just got caught on the ball in possession the original pass doesn’t come into it.
They should sack off the interfering with play nonsense. If you're in the opponents half then you're interfering with play.
That’s a different argument really. But I don’t think he was anyway, he was nowhere near the ball and he wasn’t unsighting the keeper.
The important thing is that VAR has removed the doubt from decision making and meant we're only dicussing the football nowadays.
TBH it's Villa so **** em. They financially cheated their way to promotion and John Terry is their coach. They deserve every **** decision that comes their way
Intent. Regardless of how good they control it (or not). Did they intend to play the ball? Another example - City v Liverpool in CL QF 2nd leg at the Emptyhad: crucial turning point when a cross comes in and a City player is offside (forget whom), and Karius flaps it against Milner, and it then goes to the offside player who taps it in. Mayhem ensues when the goal is disallowed, with City saying Milner attempted to play it. He did, in a reflex sort of way, off his thigh, and had there been VAR that season it probably would have stood. So actually, it's quite a good rule.
They've much improved and have a better goal difference than Newcastle so they won't concede many that's for sure
If they intend to play it, yes. I think it stinks too = as said, if the defender lets it go and the opposition score he'd be crucified for letting it go and not playing to the whistle. Garbage rule.
