Whitey Grandad

Don’t be silly. There’s a perfectly valid case for concluding that Armstrong was interfering with play and an opponent. To say that he wasn’t is stretching the point more than somewhat.

That’s the point. It’s either offside or not offside. Somebody has to make a decision and it won’t always be clear cut.

They won’t necessarily be the same where a subjective decision is involved. There are plenty of circumstances where a decision could go one way or the other. There are a lot of Laws which state “in the opinion of the referee”. We were told that you can one necessary expect consistency from one game to another but you should aim for consistency within one match. The PGMOL try to achieve wider consistency by regular training seminars but still have a long way to go. Internationally there are probably more variations from one country to another than there are within a nation.

It’s a tough job but somebody’s got to do it 🥴

Of course he was watching the ball and he would have seen Armstrong coming from his left and making a run for the cross. He actually overruns the cross so he must have seen him? OldNick argues that Verbruggen says that he doesn’t know why the goal was disallowed but it’s not up to him. Whatever next? Shall we have referees asking the players what the application of the Laws should be?

Now don’t take that attitude with me. I’ve listened to it again and I hear the same things. He doesn’t say what you think he said. The decision wasn’t up to him. It wasn’t his to make. Take off your red and white striped glasses and accept the truth. Armstrong was comfortably offside and in the goalkeeper’s face.

But you weren’t refereeing this game.

What you are saying here is that his focus was on Armstrong so he didn’t see Archer. Yes it should. In most cases if there is any doubt then the flag should not be raised until after the ‘goal’. You are correct. That is the instruction. The idea is to prevent goals being ruled out by an incorrect flag.

Maybe that’s because he is extreme right?

Whoever this is knows nothing about the Laws of the Game. ’flicked his foot back’

Angry? Why? The onfield decision was offside. Which it was.

That says nothing about where he was looking. How did you know that he had tunnel vision?

I was at the home game against Leicester and you may well have been too. That game went seriously downhill after Mike Dean on VAR stuck his nose in where it wasn’t wanted or needed. That was never a red card.

You have changed the subject here. We were talking about Armstrong’s position. and how the hell can you tell where the keeper is looking?

But didn’t we have wins before and after those defeats? We’ve already lost 10 out of 13 this season and our goal difference is -15. Which is worse, the occasional 9-0 or the regular comfortable defeats?

I’m afraid you can’t pick and choose which elements of the game you’d like to use to support your argument.

So? “At the moment the ball is kicked”

#3

You are so wrong here. I suggest that you go and read the IFAB instructions regarding offside. Basically, you don’t have to touch the ball to be interfering with play or an opponent. Armstrong was well offside and before VAR (and TV) nobody in the ground would have questioned it.

You may very well think that. Others will differ. There is no right or wrong decision here. Just a decision.

No. A keeper watches everything including the scoring threats.

He has no choice with offsides. Was he sent to the monitor?

He almost runs over the penalty spot.

But that’s exactly the point. We made the mistakes. We lost.

They didn’t disallow the goal. They just didn’t allow it. You will never get consistency across different games with different interests at stake.