ballwinningcentrehalf Posted April 7 Report Share Posted April 7 1 hour ago, TonyTonyTony said: I cant honestly say i watch scottish football so i have no idea of his current form to be fair. However, he did play in the PL for Norwich (40 odd games) and over 80 in the Champ. So clearly he has already had a career above Championship level. In the future. He still has plenty of ability but not sure he’ll ever get the pieces together consistently to make much of a go at PL level again. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Three Lions Posted April 7 Report Share Posted April 7 (edited) 3 hours ago, Robbored said: Did anyone see the Wolves equalising goal from a cross that was ruled out by VaR because a Wolves player ‘was blocking the goalkeeper’s vision’ - wtf!? None of the pundits on MOTD could understand it. All the keeper had to do was step either way……jeez …… no wonder O’Neill was livid yes and the player is in an offside position and walking back into the GK nearly stood on the keepers toes and clearly effecting A. the keepers ability to make a save B the keepers vision. its not offside once its offside twice if this wasnt offside i dont know what is. Once the ref sees it on Var he can see its a . massive offside a lord of offsides. pundits dont seem to know the laws of the game poor for the big money their on time they sat some tests on the game!! Edited April 7 by Three Lions 2 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maltshoveller Posted April 7 Author Report Share Posted April 7 3 hours ago, Robbored said: Did anyone see the Wolves equalising goal from a cross that was ruled out by VaR because a Wolves player ‘was blocking the goalkeeper’s vision’ - wtf!? None of the pundits on MOTD could understand it. All the keeper had to do was step either way……jeez …… no wonder O’Neill was livid The keeper only had to step either way Why? because a player who was in an offside position was blocking his vision so that player was interfering with play So off side 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Three Lions Posted April 7 Report Share Posted April 7 (edited) 6 minutes ago, Maltshoveller said: The keeper only had to step either way Why? because a player who was in an offside position was blocking his vision so that player was interfering with play So off side The player as a tactic is blocking the keeper off in a OFFSIDE position. The motd pundits might want to debate how stoopid that numpo tactic is!! Edited April 7 by Three Lions Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Markthehorn Posted April 7 Report Share Posted April 7 3 minutes ago, Maltshoveller said: The keeper only had to step either way Why? because a player who was in an offside position was blocking his vision so that player was interfering with play So off side Yes seems like a lot of fans think that but pundits say it was harsh . Or maybe they felt sorry for Wolves who have had a lot of tough decisions against them ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robbored Posted April 7 Report Share Posted April 7 4 minutes ago, Maltshoveller said: The keeper only had to step either way Why? because a player who was in an offside position was blocking his vision so that player was interfering with play So off side That wasn’t the VaR explanation Malt. The official VaR reckoned that the player ‘was blocking the keepers view’ How ridiculous is that? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cidercity1987 Posted April 7 Report Share Posted April 7 I don't really understand the overreaction to the Wolves goal not given. It seems a clear case of offside. The Wolves player was deliberately obstructing the goalkeeper, it wasn't even an accident. If you are gonna do that, stay onside. I thought the West Ham goal disallowed in that game for a 'foul' at the back post looked more dubious. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maltshoveller Posted April 7 Author Report Share Posted April 7 Just now, Robbored said: That wasn’t the VaR explanation Malt. The official VaR reckoned that the player ‘was blocking the keepers view’ How ridiculous is that? That is what i was saying He was blocking the keepers view in an offside position So offside Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Three Lions Posted April 7 Report Share Posted April 7 6 minutes ago, Robbored said: That wasn’t the VaR explanation Malt. The official VaR reckoned that the player ‘was blocking the keepers view’ How ridiculous is that? Yeah it is ridiculous hes in an offside position and backs into the keeper to block his view and deny his team an equaliser with a tactic he will have been tod to do by his manager O'neil who is then out of shape with the ref!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Davefevs Posted April 7 Report Share Posted April 7 24 minutes ago, Three Lions said: yes and the player is in an offside position and walking back into the GK nearly stood on the keepers toes and clearly effecting A. the keepers ability to make a save B the keepers vision. its not offside once its offside twice if this wasnt offside i dont know what is. Once the ref sees it on Var he can see its a . massive offside a lord of offsides. pundits dont seem to know the laws of the game poor for the big money their on time they sat some tests on the game!! 17 minutes ago, Maltshoveller said: The keeper only had to step either way Why? because a player who was in an offside position was blocking his vision so that player was interfering with play So off side 6 minutes ago, cidercity1987 said: I don't really understand the overreaction to the Wolves goal not given. It seems a clear case of offside. The Wolves player was deliberately obstructing the goalkeeper, it wasn't even an accident. If you are gonna do that, stay onside. I thought the West Ham goal disallowed in that game for a 'foul' at the back post looked more dubious. When I heard SSN saying GO was furious with the offside, I was expecting something very different to what I was then showed. Even more so when I heard GO use “anyone who’s played the game will know it’s offside”. And then I watched it. Offside. I honestly couldn’t believe GO or SSN thought it wasn’t . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grifty Posted April 7 Report Share Posted April 7 5 hours ago, The Original OTIB said: On what basis? Where would you place them then? Rangers got the Round of 16 in the Europa League last year losing out to an odd goal to Benfica. You reckon QPR would have done the same? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robbored Posted April 7 Report Share Posted April 7 5 minutes ago, Davefevs said: When I heard SSN saying GO was furious with the offside, I was expecting something very different to what I was then showed. Even more so when I heard GO use “anyone who’s played the game will know it’s offside”. And then I watched it. Offside. I honestly couldn’t believe GO or SSN thought it wasn’t . I didn’t think it was offside and that’s not why VaR ruled the goal out. According to them it was the player ‘was blocking the keepers view’. Had it been offside that’s what VaR would have said. 2 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Original OTIB Posted April 7 Report Share Posted April 7 5 minutes ago, grifty said: Rangers got the Round of 16 in the Europa League last year losing out to an odd goal to Benfica. You reckon QPR would have done the same? See other posts about players. Nothing more to say from me. Not sure why you somewhat randomly pluck QPR to make your case but there you go. All hypothetical in any case. All opinions of one sort or another. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Super Posted April 7 Report Share Posted April 7 32 minutes ago, cidercity1987 said: I don't really understand the overreaction to the Wolves goal not given. It seems a clear case of offside. The Wolves player was deliberately obstructing the goalkeeper, it wasn't even an accident. If you are gonna do that, stay onside. I thought the West Ham goal disallowed in that game for a 'foul' at the back post looked more dubious. Have to agree I was expecting a shocker of a decision after hearing so much. Easy decision for me Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grifty Posted April 7 Report Share Posted April 7 (edited) 18 minutes ago, The Original OTIB said: See other posts about players. Nothing more to say from me. Not sure why you somewhat randomly pluck QPR to make your case but there you go. All hypothetical in any case. All opinions of one sort or another. Because you said lower championship, probably lower relegation so I chose QPR as they fit that. Edited April 7 by grifty Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elhombrecito Posted April 7 Report Share Posted April 7 47 minutes ago, Robbored said: That wasn’t the VaR explanation Malt. The official VaR reckoned that the player ‘was blocking the keepers view’ How ridiculous is that? Not ridiculous in the slightest. If he's blocking the keeper's view, and he's in an offside position, it's offside. Not sure how that's even debatable 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MarcusX Posted April 7 Report Share Posted April 7 1 hour ago, Robbored said: That wasn’t the VaR explanation Malt. The official VaR reckoned that the player ‘was blocking the keepers view’ How ridiculous is that? Why is that ridiculous? That’s offside, has been for a long time it’s literally interfering with the keeper Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Markthehorn Posted April 7 Report Share Posted April 7 (edited) I wonder if this will be picked up as an error or VAR would have still given a penalty? https://twitter.com/terryflewers/status/1777023116742406206 Edited April 7 by Markthehorn Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Three Lions Posted April 7 Report Share Posted April 7 (edited) 1 hour ago, Davefevs said: When I heard SSN saying GO was furious with the offside, I was expecting something very different to what I was then showed. Even more so when I heard GO use “anyone who’s played the game will know it’s offside”. And then I watched it. Offside. I honestly couldn’t believe GO or SSN thought it wasn’t . O'Neil reckoned the keeper could see over the offside Wolves players head. The FA need to be telling O'Neil to stop being such a belter and being able to see the ball over a offside players head isnt in the laws of the game, and to stop making his own laws up. Edited April 7 by Three Lions 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MarcusX Posted April 7 Report Share Posted April 7 21 minutes ago, Markthehorn said: I wonder if this will be picked up as an error or VAR would have still given a penalty? https://twitter.com/terryflewers/status/1777023116742406206 100% penalty, again, asking for trouble if you go to ground like that in the box and nowhere near the ball. He’s always been a liability 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Super Posted April 7 Report Share Posted April 7 6 minutes ago, MarcusX said: 100% penalty, again, asking for trouble if you go to ground like that in the box and nowhere near the ball. He’s always been a liability I can't see it is it the Liverpool pen? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MarcusX Posted April 7 Report Share Posted April 7 Just now, Super said: I can't see it is it the Liverpool pen? I can’t either but judging by replies I assume it is… apologies if I’m wrong of course! 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Super Posted April 7 Report Share Posted April 7 Just now, MarcusX said: I can’t either but judging by replies I assume it is… apologies if I’m wrong of course! I've seen the clip not sure what Elliott could have done with his right foot. It's a clear pen. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
transfer reader Posted April 7 Report Share Posted April 7 (edited) 1 hour ago, grifty said: Because you said lower championship, probably lower relegation so I chose QPR as they fit that. Do you think QPR players might approach games with a lot more confidence in their approach if they were tonking teams like Livingston for the majority of the season? Rangers weren't in the round of 16 in any European competition last year either, they were knocked out the Champions League group stage, having finished bottom of their group with 0 points. Edited April 7 by transfer reader Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rocking Red Cyril Posted April 8 Report Share Posted April 8 15 hours ago, Midred said: The laws are there, it's their interpretation by humans that is the problem and some officials don't help the situation. Yes I do agree with you there. Well apparently we get to review vaf first hand next season in the championships 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
42nite Posted April 8 Report Share Posted April 8 12 hours ago, Three Lions said: O'Neil reckoned the keeper could see over the offside Wolves players head. The FA need to be telling O'Neil to stop being such a belter and being able to see the ball over a offside players head isnt in the laws of the game, and to stop making his own laws up. Maybe the keeper could have dropped to the ground and got a better view through the players legs? Come on O'neil, get a grip! 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roe Posted April 8 Report Share Posted April 8 (edited) This Wolves one has annoyed me all weekend. It's one of the clearest cases of offside you'll get. It doesn't matter how tall you are ffs, you can't stand directly in front of the goalkeeper in the middle of the goal about a yard away from him in an offside position while the ball goes into the net O'Neil, Wolves and the pundits on MOTD are a disgrace for acting the way they have about such a simple decision Edited April 8 by Roe 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Genghis Khan's pants Posted April 8 Report Share Posted April 8 Thank you to everyone (who has said it was offside). I watched the pundits' "discussion" and was worrying that I was losing my sanity - one of the most clear offsides you'd see! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Markthehorn Posted April 8 Report Share Posted April 8 6 minutes ago, Genghis Khan's pants said: Thank you to everyone (who has said it was offside). I watched the pundits' "discussion" and was worrying that I was losing my sanity - one of the most clear offsides you'd see! It certainly wasn’t a disgraceful decision or as outrageous as made out really . i think the incident was hyped up as it was Wolves again who have had some rough calls and an injury time goal denied . 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roe Posted April 8 Report Share Posted April 8 7 minutes ago, Genghis Khan's pants said: Thank you to everyone (who has said it was offside). I watched the pundits' "discussion" and was worrying that I was losing my sanity - one of the most clear offsides you'd see! I'm not sure which of the experts it was on match of the day but one of them even suggested that the keeper should just change his own position so that he can see 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.