A&H

Everton

Status
Not open for further replies.

JH

RefChat Addict
How can a player who is sat on the floor, obstruct the line of vison of a goalkeeper who is standing up, for a deflected shot that he was never going to save? I'd like to see a replay of to what extent De Gea's view was obstructed.
 
The Referee Store
Absolutely massive decision. Not interfering for me , De Gea fooled due to the deflection. He was on the floor and not interfering, but can understand why it was given
 
Last edited:
When the shot was taken, the player wasnt in his line of signt. A deflection doesn’t change the phase of play so I’ve no idea why the offside was given
 
VAR buckling under player power. In doing so, interfering in matters that are Clearly not Obvious again, spoiling games in the process
 
"VAR confirming Sigurdsson was in De Gea's line of sight"

Apparently no goals are allowed if the goalkeeper can see an opposition player...
 
I'm undecided.

He was in an offside position. He affected play by pulling his legs out of the way in order to allow the deflection to go into the net. Had he not, the shot would have hit him and offside given surely?
 
Just seen the replay, De Gea was looking over Sigurdsson's LEGS which were on the GROUND. If only the match officials could see it in slow-mo to make sure...
 
I'm undecided.

He was in an offside position. He affected play by pulling his legs out of the way in order to allow the deflection to go into the net. Had he not, the shot would have hit him and offside given surely?
That's not why it was given though.
 
De Gea was unsighted apparently
 

Attachments

  • 491C75A4-A8F1-4AE1-B2A0-20275D457CF1.png
    491C75A4-A8F1-4AE1-B2A0-20275D457CF1.png
    4 MB · Views: 39
  • Haha
Reactions: JH
Not sure you can blame VAR for this, he was in an offside position (clear and obvious isn't a factor), the only question is whether you think he had an impact on De Gea's ability to play the ball.

As pointed out above, he had to move his legs, so its debatable that his legs were potentially blocking De Gea's view of the ball.

I think it is a decision that is going to divide opinion. Some will give it, some won't. Others will just use it as a stick to beat VAR with.

Its a tricky one, in my games I'd probably be giving the goal, unless the shot was taken very close to the player on the floor. As an AR I'd flag, and then hopefully between me and the ref we'd get to the correct decision.
 
That's not why it was given though.

I know. But let's face it, he was directly in DeGea's view and affecting play. I can see both points of view but I now think the right decision was reached.
 
I'm undecided.

He was in an offside position. He affected play by pulling his legs out of the way in order to allow the deflection to go into the net. Had he not, the shot would have hit him and offside given surely?
A case could be made for offside (a fairly weak case IMO)
But that's not the point. This was not a factual call. No way can anyone say that a C&O mistake had been made
Unfortunately, player protestations (aimed towards getting VAR involved) had a big say in matters
I felt a bit sorry for CK as he faced an onslaught (after the final whistle) he didn't bring upon himself
 
Never under any circumstances was that offside. It is not an offence to be in an offside position it is only an offence if he plays the ball or interferes by stopping the opponent from playing the ball. In no way has this been done. The goalkeeper De Gea should understand this law and move towards the side the ball was going to. Rather, the keeper didn’t move because after the deflection he knew he had no chance of even getting close to it (not because the player put him off) any one with experience of watching and / or playing the game knows this. Clear and obvious. Not offside. Referees are humans we all learn and move on.
 
I'm baffled as to how they have reached that decision. For it to be offside for interfering with an opponent it has to meet one of these conditions ...

• 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

Keeper has full sight of the shot at all times. He hasn't challenged an opponent. He hasn't attempted to play the ball and has actually done the opposite. And his movement has zero impact on De Gea's ability to play the ball as by that time he has already dived the wrong way.

The original decision by Con Hatzidakis was spot on and I suspect we will have another "VAR got it wrong" message coming out from PGMOL.
 
A case could be made for offside (a fairly weak case IMO)
But that's not the point. This was not a factual call. No way can anyone say that a C&O mistake had been made.

Don't agree.
Referee should have blown for the fact that Sigurdsson was offside and affected play.
 
I don't see what the players protesting has to do with anything.

VAR checks every goal as a matter of course, so even if there were no complaints and everyone was happy with the goal they would still have looked at this for possible offside offences.
 
I'm baffled as to how they have reached that decision. For it to be offside for interfering with an opponent it has to meet one of these conditions ...

• 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

Keeper has full sight of the shot at all times. He hasn't challenged an opponent. He hasn't attempted to play the ball and has actually done the opposite. And his movement has zero impact on De Gea's ability to play the ball as by that time he has already dived the wrong way.

The original decision by Con Hatzidakis was spot on and I suspect we will have another "VAR got it wrong" message coming out from PGMOL.
I don’t think VAR got it wrong. The referee got it wrong because he makes the final call. The VAR is there to assist the referee and after looking at it he should have stuck with his original decision. Not offside!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top