It was the right decision.
He was offside.
He was offside.
- Status
Adding Matt Murray to my shitlist.
Going wide anyway, should have just gone down as an OG and stood.
salty_as_hell
Player Valuation: Free Transfer
Keane being the first one springs to mind.
Log off you
Billysgingham.
Player Valuation: £40m
He moved his feet out the way so he was then offside.
Cookmysock
Player Valuation: £1.5m
as I said glass half full
I'm right, he was offside and useless.
TheBigIguana
Player Valuation: £100m
The people defending this are doing the infuriating thing where they look at the laws and say "Well technically yada yada yada." Even if it is technically correct (and I'm not saying it is) the current precedent of the game, which is what almost everything is based on at this point, is that is a goal.
If you are ruling that out then you should also be ruling out any goal from a crossed set play in which a player in front of the player who scores is offside. You should be stopping the play any time a through ball goes within a yard or two of an offside player before someone from deeper runs on to it. You should be ruling out any goal coming off a cross that goes past an offside player first. And you should be ruling out any curled shot that goes past an offside player.
But we all know that isn't how the game is officiated. We all have seen down the years that all of these scenarios are offside. And now it happens like it did today and suddenly a player being somewhat near the play while not actively involved is throwing the opponent off to the point that it matters? I think that's absolutely terrible. I can't really use the words on here for what I actually think.
If you are ruling that out then you should also be ruling out any goal from a crossed set play in which a player in front of the player who scores is offside. You should be stopping the play any time a through ball goes within a yard or two of an offside player before someone from deeper runs on to it. You should be ruling out any goal coming off a cross that goes past an offside player first. And you should be ruling out any curled shot that goes past an offside player.
But we all know that isn't how the game is officiated. We all have seen down the years that all of these scenarios are offside. And now it happens like it did today and suddenly a player being somewhat near the play while not actively involved is throwing the opponent off to the point that it matters? I think that's absolutely terrible. I can't really use the words on here for what I actually think.
Hickson9
Player Valuation: £30m
Then it should have been brought back for a pen.
An international play on the ball by a defender creates a second phase.
Theres yet another reason it's not offside.
Theres yet another reason it's not offside.
Timmyistop1
Player Valuation: £225k
You won’t get any postcards on that one.
TheBigIguana
Player Valuation: £100m
At first I thought it was a deflection but watching it back it certainly looks like he's tried to clear it and shanked it.
If there was any consistency to VAR decisions (HAHAHAHAHAHA) then if the goal is disallowed then it should be brought back for a penalty on Sigurdsson.
If they can disallow goals in other games for a foul that happened in the build up on the opposite end of the pitch, then continuity dictates we should have had a pen.
Incompetent arseholes.
If they can disallow goals in other games for a foul that happened in the build up on the opposite end of the pitch, then continuity dictates we should have had a pen.
Incompetent arseholes.
- Status
Welcome
Join Grand Old Team to get involved in the Everton discussion. Signing up is quick, easy, and completely free.
Shop
