Chelsea v Arsenal

[ladbroke8745]

Lots of feigning by players in this match, which is making it a difficult game that Taylor is handling quite well actually, even if im still shocked he missed the red incident live.

But the Chelsea goal..

How can, let's use VVD as an argument here, a goal be chalked off for blocking a keeper even if the defender isn't actually in his eyesight yet when Chalobah head that ball on (and scored) there was a Chelsea player impeding a defender from getting the ball and even looked like he attempted to get it.
What's the difference?

This freeze frame was at the point he headed the ball.

 

[es1]

He's 100% interfering, assuming they checked it with lines, he might be on? Can't tell on tv angles

 

[JamesL]

He's 100% interfering, assuming they checked it with lines, he might be on? Can't tell on tv angles

Agree. Not enough info in the picture, not is it the exact frame required to make a judgement but as described a possible offside offence that I hope would be checked to be sure.

 

[WillH]

Overall very good performance by taylor imo. Doesnt help when everyone wants to cheat

 

[RustyRef]

Lots of feigning by players in this match, which is making it a difficult game that Taylor is handling quite well actually, even if im still shocked he missed the red incident live.

But the Chelsea goal..

How can, let's use VVD as an argument here, a goal be chalked off for blocking a keeper even if the defender isn't actually in his eyesight yet when Chalobah head that ball on (and scored) there was a Chelsea player impeding a defender from getting the ball and even looked like he attempted to get it.
What's the difference?

This freeze frame was at the point he headed the ball.
View attachment 8465

The freeze frame is most definitely not at the point he headed the ball, at least not unless he has an invisible head. We know from previous occasions that fractions of a second can be the difference between on and offside, plus we don't know where Mosquera's right foot is. Given his body shape I'd be very surprised if it isn't very close to Fernandez's upper arm or right foot.

 

[bester]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1995199968165204044

 

[ladbroke8745]

The freeze frame is most definitely not at the point he headed the ball, at least not unless he has an invisible head. We know from previous occasions that fractions of a second can be the difference between on and offside, plus we don't know where Mosquera's right foot is. Given his body shape I'd be very surprised if it isn't very close to Fernandez's upper arm or right foot.

Think you'll find, it was.
But im just a lowly simpleton that's not allowed to have an opinion.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1995186595788423573

 

[one]

Think you'll find, it was.
But im just a lowly simpleton that's not allowed to have an opinion.
View attachment 8468

View attachment 8470

https://twitter.com/x/status/1995186595788423573

I'm with Rusty on this. Images on your first post and second post are at different points of time and neither are at the point of contact with the ball. I have shown below your first image, second image and actual point of contact.

Image in your first post



Image in your second post



Actual contact



May I humbly suggest to let go of whatever it is (which I think I know) that made you post the last sentence. It will make for a better experience on this forum.

 

[JamesL]

Think you'll find, it was.
But im just a lowly simpleton that's not allowed to have an opinion.
View attachment 8468

View attachment 8470

https://twitter.com/x/status/1995186595788423573

But there is very clearly a gap between the ball and his head so this is either a moment before or a moment after the first contact with the ball and these small moments can change the outcome dramatically.

Having caught it briefly last night, without much attention paid, it does look as though it should have been an offside offence.

You would really have to get the SOAT involved because there is a stray foot closer to the corner taker and the angle of the broadcast can distort what we see.

 

[RefereeX]

Everyone on this forum is 100% entitled to have an opinion, but there are 2 things that you can't do...
1. Insist your opinion is correct and other people's invalid on subjective decisions.
2. Insist your opinion is correct because it backs up your arguments when it is very clearly factually incorrect on a non-subjective decision.

It's hard to see Chalobah's head on the more recent images posted but on the initial post it's very clear and there is very clear daylight between the ball and the head. It's at least a couple of frames out from the point of contact.

 

[Hilly1618]

As an Arsenal follower from a purely football point of view if the Arsenal defender had concentrated more on the ball than pulling and tugging then he would have stopped the goal! Taylor reffed a difficult game well , although I thought it was a reckless yellow and not a red Far too much cheating going on though throughout

 

[easytiger]

As an Arsenal follower from a purely football point of view if the Arsenal defender had concentrated more on the ball than pulling and tugging then he would have stopped the goal! Taylor reffed a difficult game well , although I thought it was a reckless yellow and not a red Far too much cheating going on though throughout

He leaves the floor with both feet and lands on his ankle... what more do you need to happen for it to be a red?

 

[Hilly1618]

He leaves the floor with both feet and lands on his ankle... what more do you need to happen for it to be a red?

We differ in opinion and that’s fine because clearly Refs at the top differs as well , a tackle in the Wolves Villa game ?

Form me both players at the ball with a split second causing the impact. So for me (and I see I’m in a minority here) it’s reckless and not serious foul play.

 

[DavidObs]

I get it that we are in the world of micro-managing VAR toe nail offsides or very close to it, but we often say what the intention of Law is. The initial & only intention of the original offside Law was to prevent goal-hanging. Just saying.

 

[bester]

@DavidObs Did you say that with the Andy Robertson offside?

 

[DavidObs]

@DavidObs Did you say that with the Andy Robertson offside?

No, but positioning oneself in front of the goalkeeper within the 6 yard box and ducking is a version of goal-hanging & in most cases always was unless it was Sammy Lee in the 1981 League Cup Final!!

 

[DavidObs]

This is also annoying about the modern game - the charge of lack of consistency by Referees by a Manager who was at both games and not seeing the obvious differences:

“Chelsea boss Enzo Maresca was frustrated. Not because of the dismissal of Moises Caicedo against Arsenal on Sunday, but about what he perceived to be a lack of consistency.
You can see his point. Last month Tottenham midfielder Rodrigo Bentancur was booked for a foul on Reece James, which the video assistant referee (VAR) agreed with. Yet when Caicedo was cautioned for a similar challenge on Mikel Merino there was an intervention for a red card.
"It's a red card, but why was Bentancur's against Reece [James] not a red card when we were at Spurs away?" Maresca asked.
"So us, as a manager, we struggle to understand why they judge in a different way.
"Moises' is a red card, yes. Bentancur's is a red card, yes. Why don't they give him a red card? It's just that we struggle to understand. The reality is that it's a red card. But why do they judge it differently?"
So, what was the difference?
Well, outcomes are partly dependent upon who the VAR is - which makes consistency very difficult.
No two fouls are ever the same and there are subtle differences between the two. Bentancur was only really stepping in, while Caicedo jumped a little and his contact point was slightly higher.
There was also a pronounced buckle of Merino's ankle, which is something a VAR is looking for to indicate excessive force, and his boot was shifted back on the turf.
In Bentancur's case, the Premier League's Key Match Incidents (KMI) Panel supported the yellow card for Bentancur by four votes to one, and unanimously backed no VAR intervention "on the basis that the challenge was low, just slightly late and reckless".
The KMI panel will back the decision to send off Caicedo but it will not be too long before another tackle of its type is deemed just a yellow card.
Since the start of the 2023-24 season the KMI Panel has logged 12 errors on serious foul play reviews”.

 

[RustyRef]

Think you'll find, it was.
But im just a lowly simpleton that's not allowed to have an opinion.
View attachment 8468

View attachment 8470

https://twitter.com/x/status/1995186595788423573

In the first image there's clear a gap, and in the second image I'm struggling to even make out a head. But my point was also that you couldn't see feet in the image, so how can you use an image to prove an offside when said image is missing half of the supposedly offside player's body?

From what I have seen today in the media I suspect it was offside and a miss by the officials and VAR but, again, that wasn't my point.

As for your final sentence, everyone is entitled to have an opinion, I know that you were unhappy about your temporary suspension but you really need to let it go. We would have been perfectly entitled to issue another one for what you changed your signature to (yes, we did see it) but chose an alternate course of action.

 

[RustyRef]

As an Arsenal follower from a purely football point of view if the Arsenal defender had concentrated more on the ball than pulling and tugging then he would have stopped the goal! Taylor reffed a difficult game well , although I thought it was a reckless yellow and not a red Far too much cheating going on though throughout

Even Marsesca has said it was a clear red card, when the sent off player's manager agrees with the decision I'd say it is very likely to be correct, they normally argue against it even when it is the most blatant of red cards.