₦airaland Forum

charlesemeka85:

TheGoodJoe:

Na wa.

It has nothing to do with Fernandes.

The point is Rashford chasing the ball from an offside position.

TheGoodJoe:

The point is not touched, but chasing the ball. There is irrevocable evidence that Rashford was offside when Casemiro made the pass and he chased after the ball. So he is offside.

TheGoodJoe:

As soon as Mings touched the ball, Rodri is no more offside. You can only be offside when your teammate has the ball. Mings is not a Manchester City player. So in that position, Rodri is not offside.

TheGoodJoe:

No enough evidence to rule. That is the point.

TheGoodJoe:
The point is, as soon as Rashford chased the ball from an offside position, it was offside. Who the ball went to is not the problem. The problem is Rashford chasing the ball from an offside position.

The ball went from Casemeiro to---Rashford chasing the ball from an offside position---to Fernandes.

Offside.

TheGoodJoe:

In that second pic, the ball had not made contact with Rodri's. In the first picture, it is from the back and we can not see precisely if the ball is off the red zone in the sleeve rule.

The VAR officials could not rule because of no clear evidence to rule.

At that point, I did not argue but learnt from it.

TheGoodJoe:


If the ball has gone to Rodri without Mings touching it, the Rodri is offside. As soon as Mings touched the ball, then Rodri is no more offside.

You can only get an offside call when the ball comes directly to you from your teammate. You can not get offside from your opponent.

In that picture, Mings is with the ball and Rodri can not be offside.

TheGoodJoe:

You are going in circles. The point is that the VAR officials made a corrupt and wrong call. I have given you the reasons why they are wrong.

So telling me VAR made the call is devoid of the point.

TheGoodJoe:

No one is talking about that. The offside call was when the pass was made, not when Fernandes hit the ball.

TheGoodJoe:
Whether misplaced or not, whether City players were lazy or not, as soon as Rashford went after the point, he interfered with play.

Note the bolded. What you are talking about is out of context of the point. The point is Rashford, not City defenders or Bruno Fernandes.

TheGoodJoe:

Like seriously. Look at Mings and look at Rodri, how is Rodri interfering with a man in full control of the ball. As soon as Mings got the ball, Rodri is no more offside.

As I said, you do not understand offside rules.

At this point quit arguing and learn. Anything you don't understand, let me know and I will explain.

TheGoodJoe:

So to you, that pass was played to Fernandes. See talk.

TheGoodJoe:

When the pass was played, Rashford was in an offside position. The truth is that you do not even know what an offside call is.

Whether the pass was to Rashford or not, he was in an offside position when the pass was made and he went after the ball, thus he was interfering with play.

So now, read the bolded and tell me which one you disagree with.

TheGoodJoe:

What are you saying?

Rashford was in an offside position when the pass was played to him. It seems you do not even know what an offside call is because your point above is miles away from it.

TheGoodJoe:

Totally off point. The point made is very simple. Rashford interfered with the actions of play from an offside position. Nothing you posted there countered the point.

TheGoodJoe:

As soon as the Aston Villa player controlled the ball, you can not blow offside. If Rodri got the ball before the Aston Villa player, then offside. But the Aston Villa player got possesion of the ball and lost it. At this point, the game continues.

Finito.

TheGoodJoe:
This is another aspect to this that is not being talked about.

We knew immediately that Rashford was obviously offside by virtue of watching on TV but Akanji, Walker, and Ederson didn’t know for sure. Which means everything they did whilst play continued had to be based on the assumption he was onside, because if he was, and the went in for a challenge based on the way Rashford was shielding the ball, they could give away a penalty and/or be sent off.

charlesemeka85:
you really get this man time

Dey ready to argue on this issue from now till the next 4 weeks

TheGoodJoe:

Interference is about preventing would have. You don't need to hold someone's leg to interfere with play. Another off point. The point is simple. Rashford interfered with play when once he chased the ball while in an offside position. Very simple.

TheGoodJoe:

Which makes it a bloody lie. As soon as Rashford chased the ball, he was interfering with play.

TheGoodJoe:
What are you talking physical contact? Did you see physical contact in the point listed? Read them again and show me the one you disagree with. Forget VAR talk, they all knew he was off. It was a corrupt call.

Is he in the way of an opponent - Yes, Akanji and Ederson
Is he interfering with the movement of the player towards the ball - Yes, Akanji and Ederson
Is he impacting the ability of the opponent to play or challenge for the ball - Yes, Akanji and Ederson

If he had not run with the ball literally under his feet for 15-20 yards, either one of Akanji or Eddie would have cleared it.

---

Tell me which one you disagree with. If you can't, you are arguing against the truth.

TheGoodJoe:

You must not touch the ball to interfere with the game. So talking touch is off point.

TheGoodJoe:

That Aston Villa clip, are you not seeing the Villa Defender with the ball? As soon as the defender touched the ball, you can't rule offside for the City player. Na wa. I can't even believe it is that clip.

TheGoodJoe:

Fernandes was not the point of discussion here. Jumping to Bruno Fernandes means you are deviating from the point. Rashford ran a long length with the ball. You can not deny that. Rashford without chasing the ball will make it easier for our defenders and Ederson to getting it.

Look at this comment from a member of bluemoon.

Now mark the points and tell me which you disagree with. If not, he was offside.


Is he in the way of an opponent - Yes, Akanji and Ederson
Is he interfering with the movement of the player towards the ball - Yes, Akanji and Ederson
Is he impacting the ability of the opponent to play or challenge for the ball - Yes, Akanji and Ederson

If he had not run with the ball literally under his feet for 15-20 yards, either one of Akanji or Eddie would have cleared it.

So, it is beyond Bruno Fernandes was not offside. It is a ridiculous call. They can enjoy their shafted win.

TheGoodJoe:


This one is just evasion. Debate the point.

Rashford's own, there is clear evidence of interference. He pursued the ball all through and cause Akanji to change his direction. He interfered with the play. The referee knows it, the VAR officials know it, Bruno Fernandes knows it. You know it.

Rodri's case, there is a sleeve rule and there was not enough evidence for the VAR officials to rule. They even released a statement after the game which no one has contested.