The Ref Stop

Wolves vs City

W

WillH

New Member
Level 7 Referee
I thought it was offside, sa still hadnt recovered from being pushed and silva was still offside. Weird decision so I’m not sure

Edit: did they also show the wrong replay that was needed on the monitor. Should have shown the shove as well as where he was standing?
 
Last edited:
The Ref Stop
WillH said:
I thought it was offside, sa still hadnt recovered from being pushed and silva was still offside. Weird decision so I’m not sure
Click to expand...
I’m with you here, clear interference, for me this should have been disallowed. But I’m sure some people on here will give clearer views including lotg

Edit : looking at behind goal image, I agree with var decision
 
Last edited:
VAR put CK under immense unnecessary pressure by sending him to the screen. Stupid
Is that how they justify having the screen being there in the first place?

I had no game yesterday and was driving. Every second word on the radio between 3 and 5 was VAR. Radio obsessed/possessed by it. I think it's an even worse listening experience than it is watching
That review keeps the News channels ticking over quite nicely for another week. Prattling on about a non-event
 
Not offside from corner, when impacting goalkeeper.

Now away from keeper & not impacting when the header is made.

For me well done CK.

Should VAR bring him to the screen, not sure on protocol, one for Rustyref?

Edit, on field call is not offside, goal given.
 
Matthew said:
Offside on the field, so not a rejected review.
Click to expand...

I've only seen the clip on Sky but the graphic said checking disallowed goal and the ref did the TV signal which seemed to suggest it was disallowed but nobody seemed to of noticed, did the linesman flagged?
 
Offside was called on the field (I think). VAR correctly saw this as C&O error. Interference was a subjective decision so CK was called to the screen. All done correctly for me.
 
Players are allowed to interact with the GK. At the moment of the header Sa had a perfectly clear view. So pleased to see ref not disallow goal. Not sure why VAR even sent him to the screen.
 
Haven’t seen the full clip yet, just some stills. But bear in mind the only potential offside offence starts on the header. On the point of contact on the header, Silva has moved at this point and goalkeeper has a clear unobstructed view of the ball

Guess it comes down to your interpretation of interference. But I’d say it’s a correct call

IMG_0835.jpeg
 
one said:
Offside was called on the field (I think). VAR correctly saw this as C&O error. Interference was a subjective decision so CK was called to the screen. All done correctly for me.
Click to expand...
Offside was definetly not given, AR signalled for the goal.
 
Runner Ref said:
Haven’t seen the full clip yet, just some stills. But bear in mind the only potential offside offence starts on the header. On the point of contact on the header, Silva has moved at this point and goalkeeper has a clear unobstructed view of the ball

Guess it comes down to your interpretation of interference. But I’d say it’s a correct call

View attachment 7675
Click to expand...
still unsure as sa is clearly off balance from the interference of silva (as you can see from other replay, he can see the ball but hes not fully prepared to go for it
 
Was waiting for thread...

Not offside for me. The 'push/interference' is before the header and by the time the header is made he is out of the way of Sa and no way can be considered interfering, nor is Sa still 'recovering' from the contact. By the time the header is made, Silva is completely passive.

a player moving from, or standing in, an offside position is in the way of an opponent and interferes with the movement of the opponent towards the ball this is an offside offence if it impacts on the ability of the opponent to play or challenge for the ball; if the player moves into the way of an opponent and impedes the opponent's progress (e.g blocks the opponent) the offence should be penalised under Law 12

Personally think it's a great decision by CK, but it falls in the category of "seen them given"
 
DJIC said:
Offside was definetly not given, AR signalled for the goal.
Click to expand...
I was there, they did give offside on field eventually. I’ve not seen it back yet, so can’t be certain, but I sit inline that area of the pitch and thought at first that he was offside, and then when they showed the replay in the stadium I really was surprised they gave the goal because it looks almost exactly the same as the incident in wolves vs West Ham last season.
Edit: just seen some stills and footage. They all lead me to different conclusions!
2nd edit: having watched it so many times now I’m bored of it, I think the right decision was reached. The process was messy though, which didn’t help, and as a team the officials didn’t have the best of games. I am wondering though why VAR gets involved there. Isn’t this the sort of decision where they’ve been instructed not to get over-involved? The review took a while so I would have thought the use of refs call would have been appropriate. Ultimately, I don’t envy them today!
 
Last edited:
WillH said:
still unsure as sa is clearly off balance from the interference of silva (as you can see from other replay, he can see the ball but hes not fully prepared to go for it
Click to expand...
That's irrelevant though, you can only judge offside from the point that Stones heads the ball, and the contact by Silva on Sa happened before that. If Silva was to be penalised for anything it could only be a foul, and it was nowhere near enough contact to make it that.

The issue here is that Tom Bramall flagged it as offside, can understand why as from his angle it may have looked like Silva was blocking Sa's view. Replays show he clearly wasn't, and had the flag not gone up I don't think there would have been a review at all, Attwell would have quickly cleared it. But they obviously felt that as it was given as offside on field it needed to pitch side review
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top