What an idiotLyon had a nice run. I cannot imagine them getting another (tho as a type they almost drew a PK).
Do u have Univision?Why is this not televised? Am I missing something?
can you run out of the play by stepping over the ball? I guess I remember Negredo ignoring a pass to let it run onceNot offsides because he ran out of the play. foul certainly could have been given.
He is a complete and utter fraud as a goalkeeper.Ederson is awful.
I think Odsonne Edouard is better. Which is scary for this transfer window .He was class for Celtic .
Don't tell anyone.I think Odsonne Edouard is better. Which is scary for this transfer window .
I guess the ruling is he didn't really interfere with the play since he ran away from the ball and no one followed him. Lyon still got lucky as the shot was drilled right at the keeper, but got under him.can you run out of the play by stepping over the ball? I guess I remember Negredo ignoring a pass to let it run once
He didn’t so much run away from the ball as slow down and let it go through his legs.I guess the ruling is he didn't really interfere with the play since he ran away from the ball and no one followed him. Lyon still got lucky as the shot was drilled right at the keeper, but got under him.
Having it played through your legs only to let it go to a teammate is a pretty obvious instance of #5, I really don't think there's a question. This is a textbook case of it, it's the exact situation for why that rule is there, and the ref just said "nah".Offside offence
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
The whole "unnaturally bigger" thing (A-3 / B-2) has gotten entirely ignored with respect to hitting an arm that is literally right by the torso, or used to defend the front of the body (or in Pogba's case, the face). Here's an easy test: if the arm had been amputated, would the ball have hit the body? If yes, then the body was not unnaturally bigger, so not a handball.(A) The following ‘handball’ situations, even if accidental, will be a free kick:
(B) The following will not usually be a free kick, unless they are one of the above situations:
- the ball goes into the goal after touching an attacking player’s hand/arm
- a player gains control/possession of the ball after it has touches their hand/arm and then scores, or creates a goal-scoring opportunity
- the ball touches a player’s hand/arm which has made their body unnaturally bigger
- the ball touches a player’s hand/arm when it is above their shoulder (unless the player has deliberately played the ball which then touches their hand/arm)
- the ball touches a player’s hand/arm directly from their own head/body/foot or the head/body/foot of another player who is close/near
- the ball touches a player’s hand/arm which is close to their body and has not made their body unnaturally bigger
- if a player is falling and the ball touches their hand/arm when it is between their body and the ground to support the body (but not extended to make the body bigger)
It was worse than a Wondo. Both were at point blank range, but least Wondo had the excuse that he need to hit a half-volley *right* after the ball bounced.Sterling pulling a Wondo
I haven't reffed in a few years, but there's no way that should be ruled onside.I agree with everything you said, Insta- it was offside, period. There’s no other room for interpretation.
It happened 50 yards from goal.The goalkeeper’s mindset isn’t going to change in the slightest.I haven't reffed in a few years, but there's no way that should be ruled onside.
The spirit of the rule is fine but the way it was enforced are total incompetence or dishonest. Im not sure how any AR can say he had no impact on the mindset of the goalie. Yes he didn't put a foot on the ball but by positioning it makes everyone behave differently when you are over the ball like that.
pretty sure posting this dan get your banned around here.It was worse than a Wondo. Both were at point blank range, but least Wondo had the excuse that he need to hit a half-volley *right* after the ball bounced.
View: https://youtu.be/FZrPJyqw3mk?t=25
I mean if you think the guy is clearly offside maybe you let off maybe you dont rush out like a madman. When it's that blatant it's gotta be called.It happened 50 yards from goal.The goalkeeper’s mindset isn’t going to change in the slightest.
It continues to be FIFA’s version of the NFL’s catch rule. They’re so desperate to get words on paper that encompass every situation that it becomes impossible to legislate correctly on the pitch.The internet seems to be divided whether that was active play.
Seems maybe the rule is not clear. Watching live my understanding of the rule was that it was not offside offense because he took no defender with him and did not play the ball. Half the internet agrees. Half does not. Whomever is right that is a problem.
The language of the rule isn't particularly clear but I think its obvious that this such have been deemed active play by the spirit of the rules. This wasn't a case where the guy was offside and he just walks back toward his own goal to get onside and lets the rest of the play continue. Or a case where its not really clear who the ball is played to but the offside guy doesn't go for it. The ball was played directly toward him and he continued to jog forward to meet the path of the ball and made it look like he was going to receive the ball, then he dummied it at the last minute through his legs. Meanwhile, the defenders had every reason to believe that he was going to be called offside. Before tripping, LaPorte changes his recovery run precisely to play him offsides.The internet seems to be divided whether that was active play.
Seems maybe the rule is not clear. Watching live my understanding of the rule was that it was not offside offense because he took no defender with him and did not play the ball. Half the internet agrees. Half does not. Whomever is right that is a problem.
Fair enoughMoreover, he gained an advantage from being offside and having the ball played to him, even if he didn't control it - the covering defenders rushed to him, rather than to his onside teammate, forcing a running path that cost them a couple steps in trying to get back and cover the attack. It's got very little to do with Ederson.
Very true the outcome may be coloring my memory of him being so bad lol.I’m sorry, but it just doesn’t factor. Goalkeepers will still make saves after a whistle has blown (and did even before the VAR rules made it crucial). Nothing in Ederson’s response suggests he was waiting for the play to be pulled back.
Look at the clip: https://www.clippituser.tv/c/egvywx
There’s an eternity there. If it did affect him, he had plenty of time to reset and do his job properly. Unfortunately for him, a breakaway starting so far away can be difficult to gage. Positioning has never been a strength and he made several wrong decisions culminating in a reaction failure (normally his best goalkeeping skill).