Search results

Enzo's action hardly in the same category as Rashford's stepovers... https://www.facebook.com/reel/920574539266195/?referral_source=external_link&surface_type=tab&in_reels_tab_context=TRUE

I was still AR in the best amateur league in our county FA at 70. Only once did someone say, "Isn't it about time you gave up, liner?" and that was when I was still in my 50s! I don't look my age.

Treat them as "on the ball" incidents (where you can't be certain they were deliberate attempts to deceive) - but treat this as blatant cheating.

39 seconds to take the previous throw-in. 30 seconds before they looked ready to take the corner. A great moment.

You have a wider interpretation of "clearly demonstrates" than I do. A cartoon bum hardly looks conclusive. What happened to 5cm "tolerance" (tolerarse)?

And just when you think confidence in VAR couldn't get much lower, this image appears on the big screen...

And what if the VAR ignores a C&O error, like a goal being scored when the scorer actually kicks the defender's leg which then knocks the ball into the goal? (Just saying...)

That works both ways. Why can't the referee think the VAR is making a clear and obvious error? Notwithstanding the principle that of only intervening for what the VAR thinks is a clear and obvious error, the final decision is always taken by the referee, either based on information from the VAR...

3 point deduction for Celtic for not controlling fans...

Is that because they need to be well placed to see any vital incidents in the case of a breakaway and nothing vital ever happens close to the goal?

The whole object of the fouls was to stop attackers getting to where the ball was dropping - of course there's no impact if they're wrestled to the ground instead!

If Raya himself was pushing and fouling the precedents all season have been to call it quits and play on.

Right at the start, isn't Raya pushing a West Ham player just to get near the ball?

What a time in the season to decide there are rules against fouling the keeper that should be enforced!

No, it was originally simply seeking to gain an advantage by being in an offside position. That was typically when a player was IOP behind the defence and an onside teammate got the pass and then passed to the player who had been IOP. Before "different phases of play" was invented.

And it's daft that they retained the "gaining an advantage" phrase at all as it just invites ignorant comments like "but Barry still gained an advantage". It should read: "This includes by playing the ball, or interfering with an opponent, when the ball has....."

The City fan site post match thread would be a lot shorter if people knew the offside law, or remembered when any touch by a defender cancelled any offside.

https://www.mancity.com/citytv/mens/everton-v-city-eight-minute-highlights-63913510 Can't give the minutes / seconds on the video but between first goal and half time there's a SFP call for a Keane foul on Doku. YC from Oliver and City commentator says "The reason it's not going to be a red...

"The ball would have gone in anyway" is I'm sure the one thing we can all agree on to be irrelevant.

You mean it was Haaland's fault for moving away?