The Ref Stop

Derby vs Sunderland

Donate to RefChat

Help keep RefChat running, any donation would be appreciated

R

RustyRef

Administrator
Staff member
Pick the bones out of this one, from around 1:59. Sunderland score, it clearly isn't offside, referee and AR both move into positions expected following a goal, yet around 30 seconds later the goal is disallowed. I am genuinely baffled given there is no VAR.

www.skysports.com

Derby County 0-1 Sunderland: Eliezer Mayenda earns win for Black Cats

Eliezer Mayenda's first-half strike helped Sunderland move to within two points of the Sky Bet Championship automatic promotion places after they earned a 1-0 victory over Derby.
www.skysports.com www.skysports.com
 
The Ref Stop
Presuming theres nothing before the ball over the top, can only be for the collision in the edge of the PA, and a defensive DFK?

Can’t see what the restart was, which would be a useful clue.

Agree, the R/AR move how you’d expect after the awarding of a goal.

Potentially thought they got the offside wrong and tried to manage a way out of the situation? With no VAR there would be no reason for a delayed flag so pretty stumped.
 
I don't even think there was a foul there.
Clearly not an offside issue as both forwards were onside when original.ball came.
I, too, am stumped.
 
I can't quite work out, but could there be a handball offence by the attacker? Otherwise, maybe the 4O has called a foul on the defender on the edge of the penalty area.

I can't see anything else that would rule it out.
 
Whatever the decision here it looks like a poor one.

Definitely not offside, Definitely not a foul. Handball? If so why not give it straight away?

Without knowing the restart I'm assuming offside, nothing else needs discussion or delay (not that the offside does either really...)

Struggling!
 
It's been ruled out because the Sunderland 18, in moving into a central position, ran right across the front of the derby defender which trips him and takes him out of the game.

Not an expected decision especially when waiting such a long time between the goal being scores and the decision being arrived at.

Fwiw I don't think you can really argue with impeding progress of opponent with contact but I think it's probably a case of seeing too much and no one really expecting the goal to be ruled out. Can't see on the video but I'd be interested to see how Derby reacted it.
 
Last edited:
Derby players were chasing the referee asking for, I'd assume, the foul that ruled the goal out. Decision itself isn't the problem, it's the unclear or lack of communication/indication. It's just added unnecessary fuel to the "refs are clueless" brigade.

Worth noting that at full time the goalscorer goes to the referee and assistants asking why the goal wasn't given and I'd swear the referee says "offside" (not that I'm much of a lip reader).
 
I have already seen this one exploding on X. People at the game are claiming the 4th looked at a monitor and told the ref to rule it out. Obviously I haven't been able to find any video of this happening, but would be interesting if he did look at a screen 🤔
 
Samuel said:
I have already seen this one exploding on X. People at the game are claiming the 4th looked at a monitor and told the ref to rule it out. Obviously I haven't been able to find any video of this happening, but would be interesting if he did look at a screen 🤔
Click to expand...
I saw a video saying the same on Tiktok. I find it very hard to believe.
 
Samuel said:
I have already seen this one exploding on X. People at the game are claiming the 4th looked at a monitor and told the ref to rule it out. Obviously I haven't been able to find any video of this happening, but would be interesting if he did look at a screen 🤔
Click to expand...
In a world where it is a red card offense for team officials to use technology to complain about a decision, I believe there is zero chance that the match official has done this themselves. Far more likely is that s(he) has simply alerted the referee to the alleged offense over the comms and the delay is caused by them discussing / agreeing outcome. Certainly a strange one though
 
Given the expected position of the 4O, would it not be more likely that he has 'insisted' that there is an offside offence? Causing the AR to doubt themselves?? As you've all said, without the restart, it's hard to know...
 
Russell Jones said:
In a world where it is a red card offense for team officials to use technology to complain about a decision, I believe there is zero chance that the match official has done this themselves. Far more likely is that s(he) has simply alerted the referee to the alleged offense over the comms and the delay is caused by them discussing / agreeing outcome. Certainly a strange one though
Click to expand...
Although the same Ref had a mare recently (was it Sheff Wed?), it looks like he's merely been tucked up by one of the AR's or 4O on this occasion.
That said (and I've regretted doing this myself), it demonstrates the Referee is accountable if he/she acts upon unwanted/unhelpful advice.
Actually, come to think of it, I've been on both ends of this. I've wrongly acted upon poor advice and I've wrongly given it FFS!
On reflection, I'd rather be a taker than a giver if you catch my drift
 
Ok, I’ve watched the tactical footage. Looks like an absolutely cracking decision with regard to offside position (less than 10cm off, based on his left foot). The debate would then be whether the subsequent collision between that attacker and the defender constituted an offside offense .. in my opinion it absolutely is. Net net, likely a difficult and unusual correct decision, unfortunately not sold as cleanly as it might have been ….
 
Russell Jones said:
Ok, I’ve watched the tactical footage. Looks like an absolutely cracking decision with regard to offside position (less than 10cm off, based on his left foot). The debate would then be whether the subsequent collision between that attacker and the defender constituted an offside offense .. in my opinion it absolutely is. Net net, likely a difficult and unusual correct decision, unfortunately not sold as cleanly as it might have been ….
Click to expand...
Too clever for me. Not in keeping with my philosophy of how the game 'should' be refereed'. No surprises please etc... Leave all that to VAR
 
If the goalscorer was in an offside position from the original ball of the top, then I'd say it is correct to give the offside as he did interfere with play when he collided with the defender, and I'm saying that as a Sunderland fan too!

Great shout if that's what happened. Terrible comms and indication of decision though. The AR putting the flag up and/or referee signalling for IDFK would have stopped this becoming the talking point of the game.
 
Big Cat said:
Too clever for me. Not in keeping with my philosophy of how the game 'should' be refereed'. No surprises please etc... Leave all that to VAR
Click to expand...
It’s only a surprise, generally, because players, spectators and team officials can’t be bothered to learn the basics of offside (2 part decision .. position then offense) and what actually constitutes an offense (and what doesn’t). Overall, they prefer being able to whinge and moan about decisions and blame referees for their own, or their team’s shortcomings.

In this case, I have a little sympathy, because it’s at the more complex end and could have been communicated more clearly
 
benmc said:
If the goalscorer was in an offside position from the original ball of the top, then I'd say it is correct to give the offside as he did interfere with play when he collided with the defender, and I'm saying that as a Sunderland fan too!

Great shout if that's what happened. Terrible comms and indication of decision though. The AR putting the flag up and/or referee signalling for IDFK would have stopped this becoming the talking point of the game.
Click to expand...

🚨pedantry alert🚨

IF he was offside then he did not interfere with PLAY, he interfered with an OPPONENT.

Just saying 🙂
 
Russell Jones said:
It’s only a surprise, generally, because players, spectators and team officials can’t be bothered to learn the basics of offside (2 part decision .. position then offense) and what actually constitutes an offense (and what doesn’t). Overall, they prefer being able to whinge and moan about decisions and blame referees for their own, or their team’s shortcomings.

In this case, I have a little sympathy, because it’s at the more complex end and could have been communicated more clearly
Click to expand...
OK, I've watched it again. Assuming the player who impeded an opponent was in an offside position when the ball was played (and we seem to be working on that assumption for now) (and I don't believe he was offside), why did the AR turn tail to half way as if to indicate a goal?
If the AR had thought offside position, the impeding the opponent bit was fairly obvious

Probably, the pre-occupation with 'keep your flag down and buzz me and we'll piece it together mentality', has left Sam in a bad situation
We have to assume that the AR's reluctance to make a decision that was his to make, has led to confusion and problems. Sometimes Comms seems to be a hinderance. If either the flag had gone up or Sam had bombed over to the AR for a conflab, the controversy wouldn't have made headline material. Ultimately, a lot has gone wrong here regardless of whether the decision was correct (which I think the VAR lines would discredit anyway)
Sack the AR IMHO - Harsh but fair
 
Based on the tactical camera footage on MOAS, I believe he is very marginally in an offside position. It's clear from the body language of the Referee and the active AR that they didn't believe an offence had been committed. The 'good' news is that (one of) the other two officials, most likely the semi active AR, has then got involved, leading to the correct IMO (but messy) disallowing of the goal.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top