Rival watch

[littleDinosaurLuke]

POGBA

 

[PowerSpurs]

He challenges him before the ball's even hit the ground. The rules aren't consistently applied in the way that they were here.

That doesn't matter. As soon as Mings chests it deliberately the offside is moot.

 

[PleaseNotPoll]

That doesn't matter. As soon as Mings chests it deliberately the offside is moot.

So any time that somebody deliberately attempts to block a cross and gets a touch, everyone is now onside?

 

[PowerSpurs]

So any time that somebody deliberately attempts to block a cross and gets a touch, everyone is now onside?

I think if it just hits you that isn't deliberate.

 

[PleaseNotPoll]

I think if it just hits you that isn't deliberate.

It's not just hitting you, though. If you try to block a cross, then you're deliberately playing the ball.
To use another example from the Prem board, what if you're in a wall, jump to block a shot and head it? Now offside is no longer an issue.
This is not how the game is refereed.

 

[PowerSpurs]

It's not just hitting you, though. If you try to block a cross, then you're deliberately playing the ball.
To use another example from the Prem board, what if you're in a wall, jump to block a shot and head it? Now offside is no longer an issue.
This is not how the game is refereed.

Well I did say the Law was bonkers. In those cases there is some scope for interpretation. But tonight's case was crystal clear....he chested it down.

 

[PleaseNotPoll]

Well I did say the Law was bonkers. In those cases there is some scope for interpretation. But tonight's case was crystal clear....he chested it down.

What's the difference?

 

[PowerSpurs]

What's the difference?

Same as the old handball rule. It wasn't blasted at him from a few yards away. He had time to decide exactly what to do.

 

[PleaseNotPoll]

Same as the old handball rule. It wasn't blasted at him from a few yards away. He had time to decide exactly what to do.

The rule doesn't mention anything about that, though.

 

[PowerSpurs]

The rule doesn't mention anything about that, though.

That's one of the many reasons it's a daft rule.

 

[PleaseNotPoll]

That's one of the many reasons it's a daft rule.

It's not just daft, though. It's not used in the vast majority of matches, at least not how it's being interpreted for that goal.

 

[vimhawk]

As long as Manure are top of the PL it's a joke. Although perhaps more of a joke are the pundits who will talk about any reason for them being there apart from being gifted points. And not just the pens, there's also "impossible to get a red card" Shaw for example.

 

[littleDinosaurLuke]

Utd should be safe now with 40 points

 

[littleDinosaurLuke]

As long as Manure are top of the PL it's a joke. Although perhaps more of a joke are the pundits who will talk about any reason for them being there apart from being gifted points. And not just the pens, there's also "impossible to get a red card" Shaw for example.

 

[Diego]

The rule probably needs to be changed, but by the letter of the law currently, it was the correct decision to allow the goal.

You must log in or register to see media

Yep, the man was back onside before the defender touched the ball

 

[Dier Hard]

I've just seen the goal, ****ing hell .

Seeing as it was given, that could now easily encourage teams to play goal hangers and essentially challenge the CB the moment they've got the ball.

Playground football's making its way to the big leagues, you love to see it!

 

[Treble]

As long as Manure are top of the PL it's a joke. Although perhaps more of a joke are the pundits who will talk about any reason for them being there apart from being gifted points. And not just the pens, there's also "impossible to get a red card" Shaw for example.

Dry your eyes fella

 

[Diego]

I've just seen the goal, ****ing hell .

Seeing as it was given, that could now easily encourage teams to play goal hangers and essentially challenge the CB the moment they've got the ball.

Playground football's making its way to the big leagues, you love to see it!

Watch it again, at least two other players were playing him onside before Mings touched the ball therefore when he challenged he was onside.

 

[PleaseNotPoll]

Watch it again, at least two other players were playing him onside before Mings touched the ball therefore when he challenged he was onside.

What does being onside when he challenged have to do with anything?

 

[Diego]

What does being onside when he challenged have to do with anything?

Maybe the fact that he challenged for the ball from an onside position?