The disallowed 'goal'

[haich1889]

Brilliant post mate. I never celebrated a goal like that before. I went crazy with my 2 daughters (never been to a match together before), turned to my mates lad who had tears in his eyes and had time to look 6 seats along where my nephew was showing massive relief because it was 2 -0. A man 5 rows down was in the aisle on his knees looking up & shouting 'thank you.'
I don't think anybody would have been too bothered if it was dis-allowed straight away BUT 3/4 mins was cruel beyond anything I have ever witnessed. There was no appeal from Sunderland players, the scoreboard changed, goal announced over the PA system, players finished celebrating & Sunderland were readying themselves to kick off.
My son-in-law a Man U fan texted saying he didn't think it was offside, my dad also watching on tv said it wasn't offside. How, as you say, was this 'CLEAR & OBVIOUS'???
I believe, however, was to allow a narcissistic referee the opportunity to make history. He took 15 seconds, looking at a portable sized screen to see what the experts couldn't in 2 -3 minutes & boy did he love making that announcement!??? There way he strode on the pitch & waited for his audience to quite down, pure theatre!!!

 

[haich1889]

This was more about the ref having his me me me look at me make history moment & listen to my voice over the system & millions of households.
This is my moment & f##k everyone else. Who on earth came up with this idea is beyond me. The chance to make history & be heard by millions round the World or simply confirm a goal. No brainer for those who love to be hated anyway.

 

[haich1889]

Not going on a campaign against the officials it was a marginal call but it was so important and deserves a thread of it's own.

Do people thing it was right it was disallowed?

 

[haich1889]

It was a straightforward decision.

Their defenders came out of the six yard box fast. Our front two didn't. And Campbell was in the eyeline of the keeper.

 

[haich1889]

Really??

 

[haich1889]

If we must have VAR, let's just have it for undisputed factual errors - ball over the line, player scoring was offside, trip was inside the box etc.

Where there's any element of subjective judgement, refs decision should be final.

I have heard this since it's conception. Nothing changes. If anything Saturday showed it's worse.

 

[haich1889]

Again, I think that's a slight misreading, or possibly bad wording - I don't think it means that in some circumstances you can obstruct the opponent's line of vision but not affect their ability to play the ball. I think it's saying that the obstructing of the line of vision is the thing that intrinsically prevents the opponent being able to play the ball (always).

Either way, in practice if a player is standing virtually on the keeper's toes, temporarily blocking his view as a shot is coming in, you've got a hard task arguing he wasn't involved in play.

He wasn't though & you used the word think a lot. I have never heard think, might, could, possibly, arguably, if, might have ... etc etc used as much in 1 week, ever.

 

[haich1889]

That's not true. You can be in the line of vision at a given time and not affect the players ability to play the ball. If the keeper has absolutely no chance of getting to the shot the it's a goal.

Extreme example but if the keeper is well out of position after a deflected ball falls to a striker, he then blasts it into a near empty net but a player is offside between him and the keeper, the goal still stands.

The ref decided that Vini making that move clearly prevented the keeper from making a play at the ball. Again it's subjective but I'd say it's a goal.

How did he clarify all that in about 15seconds on a laptop???

 

[haich1889]

It’s a goal, and it’s game over.

Split second decisions on peripheral vision is a nonsense.

Anyone agreeing with the decision is enabling the decimation of our game.

For the past 150 years it’s a goal, not now.

When a ref is given a choice between being remembered in Hustory for the 1st ref to make this announcement to 85 000 + the world or not: there was no way he gave anything different. One man & an ego the size of Sunderland wasn't going to turn that down.

 

[PotterLog]

He wasn't though & you used the word think a lot. I have never heard think, might, could, possibly, arguably, if, might have ... etc etc used as much in 1 week, ever.

He wasn't standing virtually on the keeper's toes blocking his view?

 

[haich1889]

So Campbell was the culprit. Swear the announcement was Souuza?

 

[Frank the tank]

He wasn't standing virtually on the keeper's toes blocking his view?

View attachment 212299

But that's ages after the shot

 

[haich1889]

When all is said & done, I haven't heard or read anyone say 'IT DEFINITELY WAS'. Unless someone does then it is by definition the absolute opposite of 'CLEAR & OBVIOUS'

 

[A Storm of Blades]

But that's ages after the shot

And every blades player is onside

 

[haich1889]

When all is said & done, I haven't heard or read anyone say 'IT DEFINITELY WAS'. Unless someone does then it is by definition the absolute opposite of 'CLEAR & OBVIOUS'

Defenders are also coached to close down attackers which is why they moved quicker. In a million years Souza, Campbell & Uncle Tom Cobly would never have thought 'oooh I better look sharp cos the keeper can't see Harrison Burrows' ffs this will happen 100 times next season & the goal will stand.

 

[PotterLog]

But that's ages after the shot

Again, that's irrelevant. He was offside and then became involved in active play by getting in the goalie's line of vision

 

[Trigger Blade]

He wasn't standing virtually on the keeper's toes blocking his view?

View attachment 212299

When Burrows hit the shot, Souza was much further left. At the time of this photo, Moore has had slight contact on the ball, playing Souza and every other United attacker onside, so his position is no longer relevant.

 

[PotterLog]

So Campbell was the culprit. Swear the announcement was Souuza?

The one with the arrow is Souza isn't it? Campbell is to the right

 

[HodgysBrokenThumb]

He wasn't standing virtually on the keeper's toes blocking his view?

He was, in an onside position as Moore heads the ball. Because the mindset of the VAR officials is ‘how can we find a way of disallowing this goal?’, they don’t look for things that the ref missed that could mean it should be allowed.

 

[haich1889]

He was, in an onside position as Moore heads the ball. Because the mindset of the VAR officials is ‘how can we find a way of disallowing this goal?’, they don’t look for things that the ref missed that could mean it should be allowed.

Too my point, it gets more complicated with time not clearer
Ref is a genius deciphering all the connotations in 15 seconds. I apologise, he is a genius & I just thought he was a tw@t with an ego??

 

[PotterLog]

When Burrows hit the shot, Souza was much further left. At the time of this photo, Moore has had slight contact on the ball, playing Souza and every other United attacker onside, so his position is no longer relevant.

He was, in an onside position as Moore heads the ball. Because the mindset of the VAR officials is ‘how can we find a way of disallowing this goal?’, they don’t look for things that the ref missed that could mean it should be allowed.

Moore wasn't adjudged to have touched it. I can't see any change of direction of the ball on the replay.

I'm not sure it would make a difference anyway, Souza is still becoming involved in active play from the initial ball forward

 

[ChrisBlade]

Too my point, it gets more complicated with time not clearer
Ref is a genius deciphering all the connotations in 15 seconds. I apologise, he is a genius & I just thought he was a tw@t with an ego??

Hypothetical idea: Inter score that goal tonight in the Champions League Final.

Question 1: Will it be chalked off?

Question 2: How long would we expect the review to last?

My personal guesses are no. Game kicks off within 80 seconds of the ball having hit the net.

Hypothetical alternative: Lino raises flag on the pitch.

Then it would be goal not given upon review either, match kicks off within 45 seconds of ball hitting the net as there is no celebration.

And that is HOW clear and obvious it was. Namely, not clear and obvious at all, but a quicksand rule and decision that you can give or not give as you please.

One week, the Stockley Park dice says 2, 4 and 6 means goal. Next week, 1, 2 and 3 are goal.

And we are the ones who roll a 2 both weeks.

 

[ChrisBlade]

And Potter Log: I trust you to be really chill and decisive the next time one of the best shots your team ever takes at Wembley gets called on something 50 to 50 next time.

This was NOT a clear cut error or decision. At best, the VAR decision is arguably correct, but no way is it clearly and obviously correct. Refs can’t agree. Pundits are split. Fans are.

I won’t get the goal back I know. But I have trouble with fans who can be emotionally so far removed from what football is SUPPOSED to be that they stick up for this flawed concept of VAR and justify whichever controversy it throws up this week.

Somebody justifies it every week. As if VAR as a concept is worth saving.

Genuine question: What has VAR objectively improved?

The stadium experience? A sense of greater justice among teams and fans? Fewer discussions on margin calls? TV entertainment?

Or is it not just a case of muddying all of the above in return for a very vague statistical number of so-called accuracy?

 

[PotterLog]

And Potter Log: I trust you to be really chill and decisive the next time one of the best shots your team ever takes at Wembley gets called on something 50 to 50 next time.

This was NOT a clear cut error or decision. At best, the VAR decision is arguably correct, but no way is it clearly and obviously correct. Refs can’t agree. Pundits are split. Fans are.

I won’t get the goal back I know. But I have trouble with fans who can be emotionally so far removed from what football is SUPPOSED to be that they stick up for this flawed concept of VAR and justify whichever controversy it throws up this week.

Somebody justifies it every week. As if VAR as a concept is worth saving.

Oh trust me, my heart goes out to you. Somebody above described the wrench of having that moment of pure delirium taken away so cruelly, it must have been agony. I totally understand that side of it.

I'm just interested in the laws of the game and I'm talking about it purely technically. A luxury I'm aware you don't have in this instance.

 

[HodgysBrokenThumb]

Moore wasn't adjudged to have touched it. I can't see any change of direction of the ball on the replay.

I'm not sure it would make a difference anyway, Souza is still becoming involved in active play from the initial ball forward

It does make a difference. But the main thing it shows is that VAR does not always produce clear and incontestable decisions, whilst at the same time it is ruining the experience of the fans in the ground. It’s use should be severely curtailed during the game. If they want then to spend hours afterwards looking for bad behaviour to punish (diving, etc), fine. But stop ruining the game for committed fans. And put the onus on the captains to lodge a protest (one per game, only retained if it is upheld). Otherwise, we are going to have more and more emotion taken out of the game.

 

[Trigger Blade]

It does make a difference. But the main thing it shows is that VAR does not always produce clear and incontestable decisions, whilst at the same time it is ruining the experience of the fans in the ground. It’s use should be severely curtailed during the game. If they want then to spend hours afterwards looking for bad behaviour to punish (diving, etc), fine. But stop ruining the game for committed fans. And put the onus on the captains to lodge a protest (one per game, only retained if it is upheld). Otherwise, we are going to have more and more emotion taken out of the game.

Interesting point about the captain’s right to protest once a game. I reckon Sunderland wouldn’t have used it in this case, not one of their players protested, including the unsighted keeper.

 

[ChrisBlade]

@Potter Log: Fair enough. It is a luxury I never have. VAR has never given me anything. Even if teams I hate suffer, I just think „why not fiddle them in the tried and trusted old-style way?“

We were in the Prem in its first season. The Lundstram goal at Spurs introduced and pretty much finished the concept for me.

VAR killed that goal after what felt like 10 minutes. It also killed Baldock‘s equalizer ten minutes later. Neither Baldock nor our fans celebrated much. He was visibly angry still about the earlier call and despite scoring (obviously Angry George was angry rather charmingly a lot…).

It kills so much joy in a constant stream of shite. I call it the belated revenge of the unsporty kids who hated football in school but who still somehow held a grudge against all the sexy boys who played the beautiful game.

After thirty years of pent up hate, they found a way in where their kind have the last laugh. Let’s wreck their fun with rulers, lines, picture frame repeat rates and word salad rules that can justify free-styling interpretation but we call it clear and obvious or factual black and white. They will take years to twig that everything in life is black and white if black is interchangeably white. And they weren’t too bright, anyway, those togger lads…

Since Spurs, I have never celebrated a Prem goal without a hint of fear. Even thirty yarders aren’t safe. Hell, even an Olimpico might be ruled off for some remote block on the penalty spot…

On Saturday I celebrate the 2-0 with my Championship mindset. I am really disappointed with myself. Really disappointed.

99% of this post is happily tongue in cheek. 100% of my non-football life is happily tongue in cheek.

But my disappointment with myself for (1) not mentally preparing for VAR and (2) not treating the goal with the horrible Prem mindset is genuine and no joke. I care too much, and should have prepared better. I invited excess hurt that as a modern fan you cannot avoid if you allow yourself your childlike Championship mindset.

Celebrating like that now feels like leaving my I-phone in a Venetian pizzeria when going to the loo. Better take no chances. I know I shouldn’t victim blame myself, but I could have known better. Maybe following United is the proverbial provocative skirt that is a few inches too short?

And to ever feel like that is WRONG. Plain wrong. In all other walks of life this feeling is weeded out as gaslighting or grooming or manipulation. But we accept VAR which is the footballing equivalent of gaslighting (or worse).

Before Saturday, I thought my chill ways would allow me to rationalize VAR the English way with humour if ever United are subjected to it again. Now I know better. I hate it as a system now. Forever. It’s once too often.

And I know for a fact that I am correct. It won’t stop. It will keep destroying magic moments. Ours and those of others. Including one-off life-changing ones.

And it will never ever create a single moment where the world will say “magic VAR. Beautiful!! How did football ever thrive before you.”

If you gave me a deal now: two successive relegations, five years League 2 and back in the Prem by 2035 - provided that there is no VAR outside of goal lines by then - I’d sign it. For myself, my team, the game I love.

I’d take that hit knowing that I take one for humanity. Even if humanity includes Liverpool FC, Leeds, Piggy Bastards and a great number of other shit clubs who the deal gives 10 undeserved comparatively more successful years to.

 

[HodgysBrokenThumb]

Oh trust me, my heart goes out to you. Somebody above described the wrench of having that moment of pure delirium taken away so cruelly, it must have been agony. I totally understand that side of it.

I'm just interested in the laws of the game and I'm talking about it purely technically. A luxury I'm aware you don't have in this instance.

If the roles had been reversed,we wouldn’t have been very interested in VAR. But those of us who don’t like it, especially in its present form, need to keep making our views clear. Many of us have come to terms with last week in the belief that our matches next season will be more enjoyable than they otherwise would have been. Not only should we win plenty of matches (dangerous statement), but we won’t have to put up with VAR. As next season progresses, I would be interested to know whether you feel it improves the game for the fans in the ground. One particularly bad memory from the PL was (v Bournemouth perhaps), losing 3-0, added time, we scored in similar circumstances to last Saturday, VAR intervened, and we waited an age in the cold and wet for a decision that we had no idea of what was involved. Just give the goal or disallow it, but let’s go home, was my thought. I think it was disallowed, but it really wasn’t worth the effort either way. Ref blew the whistle as soon as the game re-started.

 

[CarlMcBlade]

I suppose we can add it to the Gerrard “intent” penalty, the West Ham relegation debacle and the Villa ghost goal…How big can that chip on my shoulder really get?

 

[ChrisBlade]

I suppose we can add it to the Gerrard “intent” penalty, the West Ham debacle and the Villa ghost goal…How big can that chip on my shoulder really get?

Don’t forget the old “Shelvey flag up play to the whistle, then change the rule on Monday” routine.