DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
---------------------------------------------------------
RateTheRef
HTML https://ratetheref.createaforum.com
---------------------------------------------------------
*****************************************************
DIR Return to: General Discussion
*****************************************************
#Post#: 58221--------------------------------------------------
Stuart Attwell (Man United vs Manchester City)
DIR By: jacksamuel21
Date: January 14, 2023, 8:12 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Good correct decision to award the goal. Poor player behaviour
again. Rashford affected nobody. Correct from Stuart Attwell to
confer with Darren Cann and award the goal.
#Post#: 58222--------------------------------------------------
Re: Stuart Attwell (Man United vs Manchester City)
DIR By: Comeonref
Date: January 14, 2023, 8:26 am
---------------------------------------------------------
I disagree Jack Samuel. Initially there was only one player who
went for the ball and that was Rashford. He is very close and
about to draw his foot back to shoot when he gets a call from
Fernandez. If that’s not interfering with play or an opponent
then I don’t know what is. I don’t support either side. If
that’s not offside heaven help us.
#Post#: 58223--------------------------------------------------
Re: Stuart Attwell (Man United vs Manchester City)
DIR By: Craven
Date: January 14, 2023, 8:46 am
---------------------------------------------------------
That particular decision is going to split opinion I’d guess.
For me, it shouldn’t stand. Rashford chases the through ball,
and as soon as he does that he’s interfering with play. If he’d
stood still as soon as it was played, then fair enough. But to
chase it and occupy the defenders he’s very much involved IMHO.
Attwell did ok overall, but for some bizarre reason chose not to
book Fernandes for what was the most clear and obvious yellow
card tackle when he dived in to stop City breaking down the
left. Very odd decision.
#Post#: 58224--------------------------------------------------
Re: Stuart Attwell (Man United vs Manchester City)
DIR By: Failed Ref
Date: January 14, 2023, 8:57 am
---------------------------------------------------------
I cannot comment on Stuart Attwell's performance having only
seen part of the game but United's first goal fails the look and
feel test. However, there is a historic issue with when is a
player interfering with play? So we change the rules to make it
black and white, did he touch the ball or make a play for it?
No, therefore not offside. But it looks wrong tbh. He is making
a play simply by being there which is why it feels wrong. We
wanted clarity and we end up here. Agree that decision is
correct in law.
#Post#: 58227--------------------------------------------------
Re: Stuart Attwell (Man United vs Manchester City)
DIR By: tef
Date: January 14, 2023, 9:19 am
---------------------------------------------------------
One of those where the majority of those who follow football
expect offside but there is scope in the current Law for it to
be allowed.
If you took Rashford out of the equation, then Fernandes
probably still gets there first. As such, the defender on the
nearer side ( to the tv camera) is not relevant to the
situation, meaning the only question mark for me is whether
Rashford’s presence is interfering with Akanji’s movement
towards the ball and his ability to play it. This is far from
clear cut - there is an argument to be made that Rashford’s
presence prevents a clear run towards the ball but I don’t see
it as a dead cert that he’d have got there before Fernandes. I
think that’s the only argument in law that can be made.
Certainly a bold call from Attwell but he would’ve had a
clearer/wider angle than Cann to determine the level of
interference, so totally understandable why Cann flagged.
Would’ve been interesting to have seen the VAR review that
would’ve taken place if they’d stuck with the onfield offside
call as it clearly has some subjective elements to it.
#Post#: 58232--------------------------------------------------
Re: Stuart Attwell (Man United vs Manchester City)
DIR By: Readingfan
Date: January 14, 2023, 10:00 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Was it an on-field decision in the end to award the goal or did
it come from VAR?
#Post#: 58233--------------------------------------------------
Re: Stuart Attwell (Man United vs Manchester City)
DIR By: tef
Date: January 14, 2023, 10:09 am
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: Readingfan link ---
>
> Was it an on-field decision in the end to award the goal or
did it come from VAR?
>
--- End Quote ---
On field - Attwell consulted with Cann and awarded the goal
#Post#: 58234--------------------------------------------------
Re: Stuart Attwell (Man United vs Manchester City)
DIR By: Failed Ref
Date: January 14, 2023, 10:12 am
---------------------------------------------------------
And VAR agreed. Lots of reports VAR gave it, but it was an on
field decision.
#Post#: 58235--------------------------------------------------
Re: Stuart Attwell (Man United vs Manchester City)
DIR By: Ref Fan
Date: January 14, 2023, 10:18 am
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: Readingfan link ---
>
> Was it an on-field decision in the end to award the goal or
did it come from VAR?
>
--- End Quote ---
Once it was established Rashford didn't touch the ball, isn't it
then a subjective decision as to whether he was interfering with
an opponent? I believe VAR only deals with offsides that are
deemed factual. There could have been chat between referee and
VAR, and there have been incidents previously when VAR has
advised an OFR
to assess whether or not there is interference. It appeared to
me that Attwell took the view that Rashford was not interfering
and that therefore Oliver wouldn't get further involved.
#Post#: 58240--------------------------------------------------
Re: Stuart Attwell (Man United vs Manchester City)
DIR By: Midlander
Date: January 14, 2023, 11:37 am
---------------------------------------------------------
It’s a goal, pure and simple. Neither city player is close
enough to make a challenge so Rashford has no influence on them.
Protocol dictates you award the goal and allow VAR to review it
and call to the monitor if needed. As for the comment about 19
other clubs I think someone may be a bit blinkered. Some of the
VAR decisions that go to other teams are far more controversial
than some one not touching the ball.
*****************************************************
Page 1 of 6
DIR Next Page