Rightdm00

2 hours ago, villalad21 said:

1st goal a bit similar to the City one. 

If the defender let's it go the goal does not stand but since he intentionally touches it the goal is fine. 

Definitely not how the offside rule works. Defection, shanks, and what not do not reset an offside attacker.  It has to be a delibrate attempt to CONTROL and play the ball. 

Watkins was behind the ball when Targett struck it. Thats why he is onside.  Same reason no one can be offside on a corner kick. 

Keeps finding himself in amazing goal scoring opportunities. That's no mistake he has that bit of instinct that can't be taught. He's going bang in one eventually and it will be glorious. 

1 hour ago, JAMAICAN-VILLAN said:

Emi doesn't strike me as the type who is a disloyal money grabber who would just jump ship right now.

Seems an extremely genuine bloke who wants to be where he is loved and respected, and feels a part of something.

Also, we are allowed to have and KEEP top players, since we are trying to get where those clubs are.

It's actually frustrating to see this type of post in every well performing player thread we have without fail .lol

Our owners are no mugs.

By no means am I saying we have to accept the bid nor that Emi wants away. 

More so that he is just playing so well I'm struggling to think of any GKs who you can say are better than him. That by itself is going to attract the attention of top teams. 

Gives everything for the shirt yet people want him to act like a emotionless robot when he gets subbed. For me, it just shows how much he cares. 

Last time I remember him finishing a game on the bench was that amazing 1-0 at St Andrews. Probably just forgot how the whole subbing thing works. 

I hate being negative but I don't see how one of the big champions league clubs don't come in this summer with a huge bid. How many years did he sign for?

1 minute ago, One For The Road said:

Dion Dublin, whilst staring at a graphic that showed the ball being played BACK to Watkins, saying he was offside when the ball was played. 

NO! NO! NO! You are not offside if you are behind the f***** ball! 

The rest of it is irrelevant.

I'm in the states but their is no way actual footballers are saying Watkins is offside on the initial touch. Have they completely forgotten one of the simplest parts of the offside law. 

Next thing we know they will be calling people offside on throw ins or goal kicks.

7 minutes ago, KentVillan said:

As I tried to say in the post. It's not about whether he was or wasn't offside. It's that they clearly didn't do the "laser line" millimetre analysis that usually pops up when there's a tight offside call. That's separate from whether they "check" a replay quickly for infringements.

And according to the Sky broadcast team, that was because of Schar's touch.

Forget about whether you think Watkins was behind the ball as it was played - he might have been, but that's irrelevant. It wasn't checked in the same way it normally would be. The referees are rewriting rules to cover their own arses.

I can't believe Sky would say something that stupid, if they did that's hilarious. 

Watkins was onside because he was behind the ball, nothing to do with the defenders touch.

The real talking about that goal is what was the Newcastle goalie doing when he came out?  Did he forget he had hands?  Also, when he jumps he gets like half a foot off the ground. All around awful attempt at a save there. 

It's a cold, boring night where I'm at. Good thing I have the first 30 or so pages of this thread to provide me hours of entertainment while i sit by the fire. 

"But the Lyon fans think he is sh*t...."

I have a feeling Nakamba was occupying much of the space Douglas usually occupies. He works much better with Mcginn playing ahead of him. 

19 minutes ago, Indigo said:

 MAY YOUR APOLOGY TO HIS RIGHT FOOT BE AS LOUD AS YOUR DISRESPECT 

Double praise.  Get to posting. You know who you are. 

2 hours ago, OutByEaster? said:

 

 

Notice he flags as soon as the cheltanham players moves towards the ball. Should have done the same to Rodri. 

Targett getting himself subbed to preserve my FPL clean sheet was next level. 

Seriously though I hope that sub was just a precaution due to fitness levels following his covid quarantine. Love how he has grown as a defender.

Cant wait for the next prem game. This type of offside is given multiple times a game. This isn't some rare occurrence. The ref just blew it and the next time it happens, which will be soon, they will rule it offside and pretend the Mings call never happened. 

Otherwise if they were to persist with this interpretation they have literally created a new game different and distinct from the game that we have all been watching/playing for decades. Call it whatever you like but don't call it football. 

Whole bunch of pretzels being made with people trying to wave away this controversy. 

For me it's simple. If Mings actions are impacted by an offside player then that player is affecting play. 

Are we really arguing that Mings has to clear the ball because he is being pressured by a player in an offside position. How does that make any sense?  Might as well bin the entire law.  

I can't wait for the exact same situation to be flagged offside multiple times in the next couple prem games. No way this interpretation stands otherwise you have broken the game of football. 

4 minutes ago, Vive_La_Villa said:

I reckon a lot of players in Rodri’s position wouldnt have even tried to win the ball back as would know they miles offside.  This new interpretation of the law they’ve just decided so can justify a mistake may change our strikers and defenders behave. Although in most cases the solution is just clear the ****.

Please believe this interpretation is for this case alone. The offside rule will go back to way it's always been tomorrow.This is all just CYA from the prem.

Hilarious that the exact same situation in Italy was given as offside and now everyone on Twitter is twisting themselves in knots trying to explain both. 

2 minutes ago, Tomaszk said:

If a player is stretching for the ball and just touches it, that's deliberate.

Watkins will get blown for offside. And he would have been tonight if that was him.

This is even worse than Palace.

Played the game a long time, Mings performed as we were all coached to do from U8s. Reinterpreing the offside rule in this manner fundamentally changes the game. Refs got it wrong and now they are hiding behind an awful interpretation that will be immediately binned once the controversy dies down. 

6 minutes ago, tonyh29 said:

Of course if Mings does what Owen is  saying sarcastically what  he has to do , a different Man City player could then have run onto the ball unchallenged ... it’s completely farcical 

So if he let's it bounce and Rodri stays away but a different ManC player runs on to it what then?  The rule is fine, the ref screwed up and now they are struggling for an explanation. 

If an offside player makes a deliberate movement towards the ball then that player has to be declared offside. The flag should have went up the minute Rodri makes a beeline for Mings. Awful, awful call. 

6 minutes ago, NurembergVillan said:

The man heading the ball is closer to him than the man who tackled him.

That's all I wanted was VAR to draw the lines. Thank you!

4 minutes ago, tomav84 said:

apparently. genuinely cannot think of a single howler from mings that has led to a goal. and no, i'm not rewatching highlights from every game this season. agree to disagree here.

This is the first one of the season. At least it will be attributed to Mings but we all know who to blame. Deano knew as well. 

4 minutes ago, Danishlad said:

He isn't offside cause Mings decides to bring it down and play. therefore it is a new situation.

Before Mings brings it down he makes a deliberate motion towards the ball from an offside position. The linesman should have flagged right there before Mings even touched it. 

On 1/18/2021 at 17:56, Follyfoot said:

He constantly brings a smile to my face

Absolutely. Love the man. Loved how he made sure he got the red. That was the worst call I have seen in some time. 

https://twitter.com/villareport/status/1351988938236428290?s=19

They didn't even look. Now I'm pissed all over again. 

3 minutes ago, richp999 said:

Ok just for clarity, from the FA website, rules of offside:

 

Offside offence

A player in an offside position at the moment the ball is played or touched* by a team-mate is only penalised on becoming involved in active play by:

• interfering with play by playing or touching a ball passed or touched by a team-mate or
• interfering with an opponent by:
• preventing an opponent from playing or being able to play the ball by clearly obstructing the opponent’s line of vision or
• challenging an opponent for the ball or
• clearly attempting to play a ball which is close when this action impacts on an opponent or
• making an obvious action which clearly impacts on the ability of an opponent to play the ball

 

So there we have it - he clearly did all three of those bolded points.

It is offside, by the rules. We were cheated.

I don't think i've ever seen such a blatant case of corruption in football.

He is running towards Mings from an offside position. That's about as obvious an action as you can get. How is this missed with VAR. Did they even look?

VAR loves to draw the lines and then in the most obvious offside ever they can't even be bothered. Fuming!

A defender must DELIBERATELY play to reset a offside player. A touch is not enough. When did the rule change. 

They use VAR to stare at shirt sleeves more than correct an obvious error. I am so pissed. So glad Deano got that red. Ref has to know how awful a decision that is.