DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
---------------------------------------------------------
RateTheRef
HTML https://ratetheref.createaforum.com
---------------------------------------------------------
*****************************************************
DIR Return to: General Discussion
*****************************************************
#Post#: 6811--------------------------------------------------
Graham Scott - Utd v West Ham
DIR By: Hendo
Date: April 13, 2019, 2:36 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
By all accounts a mare from a Scott tonight resulting in Utd
getting another jammy 3 points. 1st penalty should not have been
given and WHU had a perfectly good goal disallowed for offside.
MOTD could make for interesting viewing later
#Post#: 6812--------------------------------------------------
Re: Graham Scott - Utd v West Ham
DIR By: Readingfan
Date: April 13, 2019, 2:39 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
I think 'a mare' is overly strong.
As Pellegrini and Antonio said, the relevant decisions were very
tight - Antonio seemed to think he had refereed it well overall.
The goal disallowed for offside was incorrect but a pretty tight
call - I would say closer than the one initially disallowed on
Wednesday night. VAR would have cleared it up quickly.
The tackle for the first penalty looked quite clumsy in real
time. Like Slaven Bilic on BT, I thought it was a penalty on
first viewing. The replays suggest that it probably wasn't.
The decision for the second United penalty was correct.
#Post#: 6814--------------------------------------------------
Re: Graham Scott - Utd v West Ham
DIR By: ajb95
Date: April 13, 2019, 4:07 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Offside goal is clearly onside so a poor mistake from the
linesman. Both penalties correct imo - 1st one snodgrass has
come straight through the back of mata, no questions about the
second penalty.
West Ham created a lot of good chances - the reason they lost
was they couldn’t finish them!
#Post#: 6819--------------------------------------------------
Re: Graham Scott - Utd v West Ham
DIR By: dave26
Date: April 14, 2019, 4:19 am
---------------------------------------------------------
I thought Graham Scott was very good let the game flow used
common sense to deal with the ruckus the penalties were correct
but the AR incorrectly disallowed a West Ham goal
#Post#: 6860--------------------------------------------------
Re: Graham Scott - Utd v West Ham
DIR By: WiresAndRams
Date: April 15, 2019, 9:16 am
---------------------------------------------------------
I thought Graham Scott applied a very good level of refereeing
in this game. I would have given the first penalty, and still
despite the different views think it was a penalty. Second is
nailed on.
I don't think you can blame the referee for a very borderline
offside decision.
The whole offside rule is barmy - it was much better when there
had to be clear daylight in between the attacker and defender
before it was called. I think people have forgotten why the rule
was ever created...to stop goalhanging. To now be looking at
whether a foot, or someone's ear/nose etc is in line with the
other player or slightly beyond is ridiculous and VAR is going
to slow the game down way too much. I watch a lot of Rugby
League nowadays and we get halves of games extended by 10+
minutes sometimes whilst they analyse it over and over. Surely
it needs to be one look at each camera angle to see if a clear
and obvious error has been made, if that is not the case then
stick with the decision.
#Post#: 6864--------------------------------------------------
Re: Graham Scott - Utd v West Ham
DIR By: Readingfan
Date: April 15, 2019, 9:37 am
---------------------------------------------------------
As I said previously, I like Rory Smith's suggestion that if any
part of the attacking player is level with the second last
defender then they are onside. It means strikers can't goal hang
but are not penalised for their toe being slightly ahead which
doesn't really give them any material advantage.
#Post#: 6865--------------------------------------------------
Re: Graham Scott - Utd v West Ham
DIR By: Ref Watcher
Date: April 15, 2019, 9:56 am
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: Readingfan link ---
>
> As I said previously, I like Rory Smith's suggestion that if
any part of the attacking player is level with the second last
defender then they are onside. It means strikers can't goal hang
but are not penalised for their toe being slightly ahead which
doesn't really give them any material advantage.
>
--- End Quote ---
It may have its attractions as far as creating more goals is
concerned but it doesn't make it any easier to adjudicate.
There would still be a exactly the same fine line between
offside and onside. VAR would take just as long to determine
the outcome. The amount of controversy generated would be
exactly the same as now.
#Post#: 6867--------------------------------------------------
Re: Graham Scott - Utd v West Ham
DIR By: Readingfan
Date: April 15, 2019, 10:05 am
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: Ref Watcher link ---
>
> [quote author=Readingfan link=topic=713.msg6864#msg6864
date=1555339079]
> As I said previously, I like Rory Smith's suggestion that if
any part of the attacking player is level with the second last
defender then they are onside. It means strikers can't goal hang
but are not penalised for their toe being slightly ahead which
doesn't really give them any material advantage.
>
--- End Quote ---
It may have its attractions as far as creating more goals is
concerned but it doesn't make it any easier to adjudicate.
There would still be a exactly the same fine line between
offside and onside. VAR would take just as long to determine
the outcome. The amount of controversy generated would be
exactly the same as now.
[/quote]
Granted, but I think it is more in the spirit of the law and it
would probably lead to fewer checks because attacking players
tend to sometimes stray slightly off and it feels 'wrong' to
disallow a goal in such a marginal case.
You obviously need to have some precise way of measuring
offside.
#Post#: 6881--------------------------------------------------
Re: Graham Scott - Utd v West Ham
DIR By: Matt
Date: April 15, 2019, 12:07 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Why not just have a very simple offside rule.
If you're offside you're offside. I don't get how an attacking
player 40 yards from the ball who's offside then becomes active
isn't offside, but a defender 40 yards from the ball who isn't
partaking in play is keeping everyone onside.
The rule is far from the spirit of the game.
#Post#: 6886--------------------------------------------------
Re: Graham Scott - Utd v West Ham
DIR By: nemesis
Date: April 15, 2019, 12:56 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: Matt link ---
>
> Why not just have a very simple offside rule.
>
> If you're offside you're offside. I don't get how an attacking
player 40 yards from the ball who's offside then becomes active
isn't offside, but a defender 40 yards from the ball who isn't
partaking in play is keeping everyone onside.
>
> The rule is far from the spirit of the game.
>
--- End Quote ---
In one case at Portman Road, lying on the ground towards the
corner flag injured !
*****************************************************
Page 1 of 2
DIR Next Page