VAR controversy GON mad
- Thread starter Scrote
- Start date
TheWolfman
Well-known member
Why did they not show the nudge on the keeper to the ref? Of course he has an impact he backs into the keeper. Crazy
davidmills
Well-known member
If that is disallowed you would have had to disallow about 6 of Arsenals goals that have been given this season
The_Big_Woodowski
Well-known member
got to disagree here, what nobody has mentioned is that silva was not offside until stones headed the ball..
Before the header the keeper choose to wrestle and through silva out the way. Before the header he was moved by out of the keepers view and continued to move away.
As Stones head made contact, yes silva is off side but moving away going to the floor/ducking out way and keeper if fully focused and looking at play in front of him with no obstruction.
Ohhh but is good to see GON going mad either way
Before the header the keeper choose to wrestle and through silva out the way. Before the header he was moved by out of the keepers view and continued to move away.
As Stones head made contact, yes silva is off side but moving away going to the floor/ducking out way and keeper if fully focused and looking at play in front of him with no obstruction.
Ohhh but is good to see GON going mad either way
Cardiffdaffs
Well-known member
Fair goal. Keeper was not inpeded. He leapt like a tired salmon.
Pak_Doo_Ik
Well-known member
Keeper needed to be stronger with the nudge, and of course Silva was onside when the nudge happened. Silva was offside when Stones heads the ball but in no way shape or form was he interfering with play then
Block21
Well-known member
That was before Stones got near the ball. You can't be offside from a corner only after contact and Silvas actions were before Stones got near the ball.
Never ever ever offside
Ravshoutsatbeck
Well-known member
Question -
Is it not a foul?
Silva backs into the keeper off the ball.
You can argue the "keeper should be stronger"
But his one role is to obstruct a player off the ball.
Is it not a foul?
Silva backs into the keeper off the ball.
You can argue the "keeper should be stronger"
But his one role is to obstruct a player off the ball.
Block21
Well-known member
Answer - no.
Scrote
Well-known member
The keeper was definitely impeded.
Silva backed into him and then span away. His actions affected the keeper and prevented him having more time to set himself.
For me it's a foul on the keeper in the build-up to the goal. The offside positioning is less relevant but if he wasn't in that position then he wouldn't have been close enough to impede in the first place. He is in an offside-position when the ball comes back in and has used his positioning to impede the keeper.
Goal should have been disallowed, in my opinion, but it was hilarious that it wasn't - especially after sending the ref to the screen.
Last edited:
Why?
TheWolfman
Well-known member
I didn't mean he was offside then but surely he's interfering in the keepers thought process being offside from the header in such a short time after backing into him.
Scrote
Well-known member
Silva backed into the keeper with the ball not in a playable position. It's a foul. No question.Silva didn't interfere () with the keeper right from when the corner was kicked, eventually ducked down to give the keeper a clear sight. Bad defending, good header.
"Impeding the progress of an opponent means moving into the opponent’s path to obstruct, block, slow down or force a change of direction when the ball is not within playing distance of either player."