Was our second offside?

[ormester]

Who gives a fuck

Well said how many times haven't we had luck

 

[Davalon]

Strictly speaking Berge was offside and was interfering with play as he went for the ball and very nearly got a touch.

That said if he'd been a yard behind and onside, I believe it would have been the same outcome having watched the replay a few times.

Got away with one but you take them where you can as you'll get them against you too at this level.

 

[diode_blade]

Nobody cares...3 pts and it's 6 clear of boro...I'm off for a wank

Now that's proper bed wetting....

 

[sufcboy95]

It’s offside, if Sander isn’t there the keeper catches the ball.
But who gives a fuck, I’m pretty sure we’ve had bad decisions against us this season

 

[SwissBlade]

Mile off and sander definitely played towards the ball

Keeper just stood though

 

[AWetFlannel]

The keeper has to wait to see if Sander gets a touch before he can dive. Clearly offside.

 

[Drunk blade]

Well was it offside or not?

Here's the appropriate part of the offside law.

View attachment 155909

Going by the Marcus Rashford goal earlier in the season which was VAR checked, he wasn't interfering

 

[Chief14]

Going by the Marcus Rashford goal earlier in the season which was VAR checked, he wasn't interfering

came to say the same

 

[LS16Blade]

Remember standing on the kop when that cnut played for bradford and headed a ball over benstead and it bounced then went over the bar...cue wanker signs to the big boofheaded cnut.

He may have been playing for WBA at the time but, yes, I was standing on the Kop and remember the incident. He got to the ball just before the keeper and flicked a header which bounced about 6 yards from an unguarded net and then somehow trampolined over the crossbar.

Flashing Blade referred thereafter to “Don Goodman’s divot”…

 

[munksyb]

Apparently the refs watch alarmed him at 2am today to alert him that the goal should have been disallowed.
Oh well, you lose some , you win some.
Maybe our luck has changed

 

[S64 Blade]

Until a team scores a perfectly legitimate goal against us, that clearly crosses the line, but isn’t given because the referee’s watch didn’t buzz and no retrospective action is taken, I couldn’t give a fuck.

 

[XH536]

YES!!............Move on...........remember things will go against Blades in future games.

 

[Selly]

The keeper has to wait to see if Sander gets a touch before he can dive. Clearly offside.

Let me start by saying I do think he's offside.

However, I'm not sure the above rationale (which is basically in the rules) really stands up to scrutiny.

If he can't drive until he knows if Berge touched the ball - why didn't he dive when it became clear he didn't?

Fact is that keepers have to make a choice to save the cross or save the shot - without knowing which one is going to happen. Most keepers will choose to try and save the shot, and take the gamble that the cross won't go in.

So I don't buy the "he had to wait" argument - there isn't enough time to change your decision anyway. What the keeper is hoping is that the shot, if it comes, is close enough that he can react and save.

 

[AWetFlannel]

Let me start by saying I do think he's offside.

However, I'm not sure the above rationale (which is basically in the rules) really stands up to scrutiny.

If he can't drive until he knows if Berge touched the ball - why didn't he dive when it became clear he didn't?

Fact is that keepers have to make a choice to save the cross or save the shot - without knowing which one is going to happen. Most keepers will choose to try and save the shot, and take the gamble that the cross won't go in.

So I don't buy the "he had to wait" argument - there isn't enough time to change your decision anyway. What the keeper is hoping is that the shot, if it comes, is close enough that he can react and save.

I'd have to look again, but without Sander and Egan I don't think he has a choice to make. He'd have just saved the cross.

He didn't dive after Sander didn't make contact because he had no time to react. Agree that it's all a bit unclear though in the rules.

 

[corner_flag]

This is where football has gone badly wrong. People seriously arguing it would be right to disallow a world-class goal, because a player who didn't get a touch, who didn't influence the outcome, moved a split second too soon?
You've had your heads boiled by too many wank pundits

 

[Cappy]

 

[Yewsman]

Over the season there are a number of bad decisions which may affect results. The QPR game at home Sande was hauled down in the penalty area and then out injured for several weeks. No pen given So we lose 1-0. That went against us. There are many other examples. Last night decision went for us. That’s football without VAR.

 

[Stretch]

VAR rules it out every day of the week, unless it's ManU or Liverpool scoring it.

But fuck VAR eh.

 

[MobileBlade]

Well at least we got VAR in use on Sunday.....

 

[Stretch]

Fair play to him tbh. We'd probably be furious of it was allowed against us.
The officials are so bad now in this country that most teams get badly shafted by decisions in almost every games. Consequently, when one goes our way we just have to shrug our shoulders and say "oh well, we had one like that last week, so we'll take it". And that is how they make us put up with this shit.
Situations like this to strengthen the case for video assistance, but VAR is it's own shitshow which has just made the dividing line between players/fans/managers and officials even worse.
Fucking amateurs, the lot of them.

 

[cahill]

Irrelevant. Sometimes you’re lucky sometimes you aren’t

 

[Rochdaleblade]

Probably was offside with VAR in play.

Although with VAR in play they are down to ten men with that foul on Jebbo.

This. Referee made plenty of bad decisions last night. He gave our lads yellow cards for pulling players back 80 yards from goal, but Illy was taken out half a dozen times after wriggling free with no card and their no5 was clinging on to Jebbo like a jilted ex. The foul was aggressive, nowhere near the ball and knee height. Clear red.

 

[BladeInIreland]

Mowbray says the goalkeeper reacts, only watched it once but I didn't think he reacted at all.

 

[Champagneblade]

Irrelevant. Sometimes you’re lucky sometimes you aren’t

This time it came on our side.

It's not as if the adjudication of this sort of thing hasn't been applied consistently, even if wrongly.

Exhibit A, almost identical goal for Stoke by Nick Powell where the striker runs across, but this time right in front of the keeper and behind the defender in an offside position.

We won 3-1. But that doesn't mean there was any less warranting of an apology.

Sometimes you get them, sometimes you don't. We've had an almost identical thing go against us, so forgive us if we pluck away for a while on the world's smallest violin!

 

[blade too long]

Have you seen the replay? It's as clear as day, that Berge sticks his leg out to try and play the ball.
Anyone arguing it should have been allowed are just being awkward or being delusional.

are they , tell me are 100 per cent of VAR decisions consistant

weve had goals disallowed for players being only in the peripheral vision of the keeper then a day after the argument was made that a man utd player directly in front of the keeper wasnt interfering

and to say VAR would have given it is irrelevant , as its not in use in this division
the goalie decided to stay planted on his line so line of sight is ruled out

if it had been more central and smacked in players slightly ahead of defenders the goals given
ward prowse has hit a lot of strikes directly in with players ahead of defenders

its a matter of opinion and last nights opinion from the officials was it went in untouched so it was a shot at goal

it would be a lot clearer if there was not 20 changes to the rules every season

 

[ChipButtyBlade]

Sure the oppo scored a goal just like that at The Kop end this season or last,annoying when they go in against you,soz Sunderland if you are annoyed.

 

[blade too long]

we ve had lots of referee apologies

the costliest was at west ham in the prem 2006 7 when we scored a legit equaliser at west ham in the last minute which was disallowed as the goalie was tripped , but it was accidentally done by a west ham player and he apologised , but had that stood wed have stayed up


once that final whistles gone the games over and the result stands
Ive no doubt had it been disallowed we would have kept pressing till we got a winner anyway , even Mowbray begrudgingly said we were the better side

 

[Houston_Blade]

Well at least we got VAR in use on Sunday.....

I really don't understand why we didn't just say "sorry we took the VAR wires out when we got relegated and we've sold the copper to pay some of the embargo off". We wouldn't have VAR if we were playing away, so why go along with it?!

We will have to change our game because we have become a team of shithouses off the ball, Blackburn will have 3 penalties if Anel and JLT start manhandling players in the box like they have been doing.

 

[Greasy Chap Butty]

c) not bothered.

Went in direct so fuck em.

 

[Bladepicker]

I think it was offside but Wigan and Blackpool both scored offside goals against us this season so fuck them.