City v Lyon
- Thread starter Ryanj91
- Start date
- Status
one
RefChat Addict
How was that offside call dodgy? Let's get passed that first. It does make your post sound like a fan post.
With trip, you can also assume the ref thought it was not careless. But I would have probably given it.
I'm an Arsenal fan - defo not City.
The other player is offside. Draws the city player across to defend the offside player. He dummies the ball and let it go through his legs. Not sure how that isn't interfering with play?
Trip is a trip. The referee gave so many softer free kicks to Lyon all evening with their casual falling about.
The other player is offside. Draws the city player across to defend the offside player. He dummies the ball and let it go through his legs. Not sure how that isn't interfering with play?
Trip is a trip. The referee gave so many softer free kicks to Lyon all evening with their casual falling about.
A player in an offside position at the moment the ball is played or touched* by a team-mate is only penalised on becoming involved in active play by:
interfering with play by playing or touching a ball passed or touched by a team-mate
or
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**
I'd say by going to play the ball, letting it then run through your legs is a combination of both the bottom two.
one
RefChat Addict
I suggest you re-read the law 11 and law 12.
Again your posts sound like fan post rather than a referee on a referee forum analysing why offside or a foul should or should not be given.
I am aware of Law 11.
You said he’s interfering with play but suggesting the its a combination of the last 2 which is interfering with an opponent. I agree with whats been said already. Your posts definitely sound like fan posts.
also he does not attempt to play the ball nor does he make an action which stops a defender from doing so
Anyone can post a copy and paste from the laws. If you want to choose to ignore relevant comments and counterpoints to yours and post laughing faces then wire in buddy.Alright my bad.
Just posted law 11 which backs up my claim, but if you feel that is a 'fan' comment, so be it
one
RefChat Addict
More that happy to discuss your post #6. That is how "we referees" should discuss referee decisionsAlright my bad.
Just posted law 11 which backs up my claim, but if you feel that is a 'fan' comment, so be it
Defo no impact on the ability of any defender to play the ball. The defender was still able to play the ball if he made a different choice.
Impacting an apponent was put in law for goalkeepers being 'drawn' by an offside player close to playing the ball into the net (or other defender in a similar situation as a goalkeeper). Defender making a choice to chase an offside player have never been cause for an offside offence unless the offside player interferes with the defender. This is the accepted interpretation at all levels of football, fair or not.
As for the trip, if you read law 12, DFK's there are two categories. The ones which have to be careless, reckless or URF, and the ones without those conditions. Tripping offence is in the former. So while a trip is a trip, it's not always an offence. In contrast, a hold is a hold (in the latter category) and is always an offence.
From one angle it looked like the player in an offside position might have touched the ball. If it wasn't deflected it was an optical illusion. But no touch = no offside.
City are used to CL matches where the cameras don't work or (e.g.) they don't look at the angle that shows a handball goal.
I'd started a separate thread about the VAR and not calling for an OFR.
The incident: https://www.mancity.com/citytv/mens/city-lyon-match-highlights-63733124
City are used to CL matches where the cameras don't work or (e.g.) they don't look at the angle that shows a handball goal.
I'd started a separate thread about the VAR and not calling for an OFR.
The incident: https://www.mancity.com/citytv/mens/city-lyon-match-highlights-63733124
Last edited:
Some people think anything that suggests City are hard done by by VAR must be a fan post. I'm afraid it's rather that as the law is worded, it's not interfering with play if he didn't touch the ball and it's not interfering with an opponent as no opponent was near him. Even Peter Walton thought it was a foul in the build up but the VAR didn't.Alright my bad.
Just posted law 11 which backs up my claim, but if you feel that is a 'fan' comment, so be it
Last edited:
onthebrink
Well-Known Member
Quite clearly no offside - no opponents near the offside player and he didn't touch the ball.
Trip is a closer call. I'd say foul but you could argue it wasn't clear and obvious.
I think City are a bit overrated when it comes to CL. BT have been talking all season as if they were one of the top 2 or 3 favourites for the competition and I'm not sure they're at that level.
Trip is a closer call. I'd say foul but you could argue it wasn't clear and obvious.
I think City are a bit overrated when it comes to CL. BT have been talking all season as if they were one of the top 2 or 3 favourites for the competition and I'm not sure they're at that level.
Well there's an anti-City "fan post"! City deservedly beat the Spanish champions. Of course they were one of the 3 favourites. But it was always likely that a one-leg game could show the problem with missing chances and dodgy defending (and dodgy VAR).
one
RefChat Addict
I tend to agree with you. Don't know about the gesture.
There are two incidents here. Possible offside and tripping .
Offside is checked by VAR, there is no reason for the referee not to accept the VAR's recommendation off the bat.
The second one is the trip which is completely independent of the offside. It must also be checked by VAR. Assuming he noticed it, he then must determined it was a foul and then if it was a clear and obvious error by the referee before a review is done. I think one of those three conditions didn't go through. My guess is he saw it, thought it was a foul but don't think it was clear and obvious.
How is he offside. What offside offence has been committed. He has not attempted to play the ball that is close and he has not interfered with his opponent by impacting his ability to play the ball.
Say what you like about the trip but no offside offence was committed.
onthebrink
Well-Known Member
I'd put City in a similar bracket to PSG for the last three or four years - clearly a very good team and can produce excellent performances but they seem to struggle in many knockout stage CL games they'd be expected to win on paper and QF seems their current standard.
In terms of Makelle, I really like his style of refereeing in general. I thought he was probably not quite as good as the Liverpool V Atletico game that I last saw him but I think he'll go on to be one of the very best in Europe for a sustained period.
- Status