City vs Liverpool
- Thread starter Joshref
- Start date
Donate to RefChat
Help keep RefChat running, any donation would be appreciated
- Status
santa sangria
RefChat Addict
Is it an obvious action that affects the opponent’s ability to play the ball?
“making an obvious action which clearly impacts on the ability of an opponent to play the ball”
I don’t think so. The GK has a great view and makes a great attempt at a save. I don’t see how an offside offence decision is supportable here.
“making an obvious action which clearly impacts on the ability of an opponent to play the ball”
I don’t think so. The GK has a great view and makes a great attempt at a save. I don’t see how an offside offence decision is supportable here.
santa sangria
RefChat Addict
The sad thing for football is that was a season defining moment. The kind of 100 million pound error that VAR was supposed to prevent.
What is the VAR protocol. Is Michael Oliver allowed to make that decision? Shouldn’t the ref be sent to the screen at least?
Not going to comment on the apparent interference
Not going to comment on the apparent interference
I’m afraid I am with Mike Dean on this one - offside. If the ball was headed to the opposite side of the goal then not a problem, but with Robinson in an offside position, within the goal area and in front of the goalkeeper, I can’t see anything else but offside. The fact that Robinson ducked and it may not have had any bearing on what the goalkeeper actually saw is neither here or there.
No, because Stuart Bert flagged it on-field, therefore no pitch side review is required. Had he not flagged it and VAR felt it was offside Kavanagh would have had to go to the screen.
santa sangria
RefChat Addict
clearly impacts on the ability of an opponent to play the ball… can anyone please educate me how this was fulfilled?
I have a horrible feeling Webb is going to be apologizing for this tomorrow.
I have a horrible feeling Webb is going to be apologizing for this tomorrow.
I'm a bit torn on this. In ducking to get out of the way of the ball he definitely made an obvious action, but I don't think it stopped the keeper saving it. But as Mike Dean said the ball passed straight over him and that is likely to affect a keeper. Had Burt not flagged it I would be criticising VAR if they got involved, but I think the fact he did has made the decision for them. There was a lengthy delay before he flagged so he was obviously discussing with Kavanagh and I'd guess that discussion played a part in the VAR decision. If Burt has said on comms that he clearly ducked in an offside position that might make it difficult for VAR to say otherwise.
Roy Keane is also spot on in that if Robertson hadn't been lazy and had moved out we wouldn't be having the discussion.
Roy Keane is also spot on in that if Robertson hadn't been lazy and had moved out we wouldn't be having the discussion.
Runner Ref
RefChat Addict
Mike Dean didn’t have a clue. He changed his mind as soon as offside was confirmed
Thanks
Possibly, though he did say it pretty quickly. Interesting that Robinson continues to do the same thing in the 2nd half except that he moves upfield and away from the goalkeeper quicker.
Possibly, though he did say it pretty quickly. Interesting that Robinson continues to do the same thing in the 2nd half except that he moves upfield and away from the goalkeeper quicker.
May I just clarify. With any offside decision referred to VAR, is it the VAR Assistant Referee who makes a decision eg Michael Oliver or the Additional VAR Assistant Referee - in this case Tim Wood?
I don’t see offside here, your position on the field is not a criteria, did he impact an opponent (GK)?
He did the opposite of ‘clearly attempting to play the ball’?
Mike Dean says it’s offside because it was inside the six yard area?
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
He did the opposite of ‘clearly attempting to play the ball’?
Mike Dean says it’s offside because it was inside the six yard area?
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
The challenge I see is do we know that it didn't affect the keeper? Is it possible he delayed his dive slightly because of the position of Robertson? Probably not, but it is subjective and given that I don't really see how VAR could say that Burt was clearly and obviously wrong. Had he not flagged I'm pretty sure VAR would have checked and cleared it.
From the four offside criteria, are any fulfilled?
Did VAR havng already be involved in earlier penalty, count against Liverpool here, given required low involvement of VAR?
That might be the case but the VAR is judging whether Robertson is interfering with the keeper or not. No doubts Robertson is offside and he ducks but he makes no movement towards the ball or the keeper and and the keeper has a clear view of the ball! I think this is a really harsh call on Liverpool and I have a suspicion if offside was not given, VAR would not of got involved.
Season defining?
in that it would have meant Liverpool lost 3-1 not 3-0?I know it’s a changed game at 1-1, but anyone who watched that first half could see it was a matter of time before Man City went on to win the match.
I also don’t think it’s possible for VAR to intervene there.
I do agree that it’s probably a legal goal and should probably have stood, but with Robertson that close to the goalkeeper you could never say it’s a clear and obvious error. Robertson is the man most at fault here.
- Status