DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
---------------------------------------------------------
RateTheRef
HTML https://ratetheref.createaforum.com
---------------------------------------------------------
*****************************************************
DIR Return to: General Discussion
*****************************************************
#Post#: 84048--------------------------------------------------
Wolves v Man City: Chris Kavanagh
DIR By: Adam
Date: October 20, 2024, 7:58 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Thomas Bramall making a cameo on the line with Richard West
seemingly pulling out in the warm up.
Update: West injured his calf, they've also identified someone
in the stands who can fill in if another injury occurs. Sky
confirming so.
#Post#: 84057--------------------------------------------------
Re: Wolves v Man City: Chris Kavanagh
DIR By: Irishref1985
Date: October 20, 2024, 10:00 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Controversial ending. Not sure it’s the correct call either.
#Post#: 84058--------------------------------------------------
Re: Wolves v Man City: Chris Kavanagh
DIR By: Claretman
Date: October 20, 2024, 10:08 am
---------------------------------------------------------
With the Man City winner the question to be asked is did Silva
impede the goalkeeper when the corner kick was taken.
At the point the corner was taken Silva could not be in an
offside position, so part 4 is irrelevant.
At the time Stones heads the ball, Silva is in an offside
position but not in contact with the keeper and slightly to his
right side, not preventing a clear vision of the line of the
header. I would say at this point he is not interfeering with
the goalkeeper thus if the referee deems the goalkeeper was not
initially fouled ( i dont think he was ) it is the correct
decision to award the goal.
#Post#: 84059--------------------------------------------------
Re: Wolves v Man City: Chris Kavanagh
DIR By: tef
Date: October 20, 2024, 10:09 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Was all very confusing (for me at least watching on TV) as it
wasn’t clear that offside HAD actually been given on the field.
I’m fine with the goal being awarded - some dark arts by Silva
on the goalkeeper but at the critical moment (Stones heading it)
he’s not committing an offence for me.
#Post#: 84060--------------------------------------------------
Re: Wolves v Man City: Chris Kavanagh
DIR By: Ref95
Date: October 20, 2024, 10:10 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Absolutely the correct call at the end in my opinion. Seems to
be a complete lack of understanding by the Sky Sports team as
usually as well.
I believe what has happened is Bramall has given offside on
field, albeit late following a discussion with Kavanagh. VAR has
recommended a review, during which Kavanagh has recognised
Bernardo is clearly not interfering with Sa, and therefore not
committing any offence.
Sky Sports mentioning the nudge by Bernardo on Sa prior to the
header, but obviously this is irrelevant as he cannot be offside
before the header occurs and it’s clearly not a foul.
#Post#: 84061--------------------------------------------------
Re: Wolves v Man City: Chris Kavanagh
DIR By: TA_Ref
Date: October 20, 2024, 10:11 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Think the decision to award City’s second goal is correct. For
me, when stones heads the ball, Silva is crouched down and to
the left of the keeper. As the ball comes in, the contact
between Sa and Silva is normal contact for me so no foul.
As much as I dislike City, I do believe it is the correct
decision.
#Post#: 84062--------------------------------------------------
Re: Wolves v Man City: Chris Kavanagh
DIR By: Midlander
Date: October 20, 2024, 10:13 am
---------------------------------------------------------
As someone who sits firmly on the red side of Manchester……
It’s a great decision to let the goal stand. There is no offence
committed from the corner. The offside is only in play from the
header and it is clear that there is no interference with the GK
from this point. It’s a good goal and rightly awarded.
Whats not so good is the absolute ********* (insert your own
words) out of the pundits who are trying to make a problem out
of this by saying he interferes with the GK while offside by
backing in 🤦🏼‍♂️
#Post#: 84063--------------------------------------------------
Re: Wolves v Man City: Chris Kavanagh
DIR By: Whistleblower
Date: October 20, 2024, 10:21 am
---------------------------------------------------------
When the ball leaves the quadrant it is live and there was
interference with the goal keeper while the ball was moving,
therefore why wasn't a free kick to the defence be awarded for
goal keeper interference ? The offside business is a red
herring. If I was a Wolves supporter I would feel very aggrieved
but then debatable decisions always seem to be given to the top
clubs.
#Post#: 84064--------------------------------------------------
Re: Wolves v Man City: Chris Kavanagh
DIR By: rustyref
Date: October 20, 2024, 10:22 am
---------------------------------------------------------
As per usual the pundits have spectacularly failed to understand
the offside law. Talking about Silva interfering with Sa before
Stones heads it, he can't possibly be guilty of that and any
offside judgement can only be made at the point Stones heads the
ball towards goal. At that time there is no way that Silva was
even close to affecting Sa's view. Correct decision reached in
the end, and because it was (eventually) indicated as offside by
the AR I can understand why Attwell sent Kavanagh for a review.
#Post#: 84065--------------------------------------------------
Re: Wolves v Man City: Chris Kavanagh
DIR By: Ref95
Date: October 20, 2024, 10:29 am
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: Whistleblower link ---
>
> When the ball leaves the quadrant it is live and there was
interference with the goal keeper while the ball was moving,
therefore why wasn't a free kick to the defence be awarded for
goal keeper interference ? The offside business is a red
herring. If I was a Wolves supporter I would feel very aggrieved
but then debatable decisions always seem to be given to the top
clubs.
>
--- End Quote ---
What do you mean by goal keeper interference? Assuming you mean
Bernardo has fouled the goalkeeper, and of course it’s a matter
of opinion, but for me there is no foul. Bernardo does not have
to move out of the way of the goalkeeper, the contact is minimal
and just as much initiated by Sa as Bernardo.
*****************************************************
Page 1 of 3
DIR Next Page