Champions League 2018/19 (55 Viewers)

[Elvin]

Disgusting qualification for Real. Wonder if anyone cares.

Seems only Juve is required to wow all the time.

Result is ALL that matters.

 

Buy on AliExpress.com

[campionesidd]

The handball rule depends on a player's intention. The offside rule is only about geometry.

Obstuction isn't a clear cut rule. It's up to the ref's discretion.

 

[Ali]

In CL Real just out for the most disgusting win just like us on Serie A.

 

[s4tch]

The handball rule depends on a player's intention. The offside rule is only about geometry.

https://www.fifa.com/mm/document/afdeveloping/refereeing/5. law 11_554.pdf

check "interfering with an opponent" part. "in the opinion of the referee" isn't exactly about geometry, it's all subjective.

 

[il brutto]

You're oversimplifying, because passive offside is 100% interpretative.

You can stand offside all you want if you don't make an attempt on the ball, or impede the keeper's ability to make a save. In this case, I don't believe the player impeded the keeper to the point that it warranted the offside call. You're welcome to think it did, but let's not act like it's unbelievable that someone doesn't agree with you.

Anyways, water under the bridge now. It was disallowed.

There are plenty of calls you can debate over this just isn't one if we go by the rules. It's certainly unlucky as Tadic was just at the wrong place at the wrong time.

 

[Post Ironic]

The handball rule depends on a player's intention. The offside rule is only about geometry.

Only in the case the player actually makes a play on the ball.

Passive offside rule for a playing standing there, only comes into play through interpretation of whether the player interfered with the keeper's ability to make a save.

As I said, in the end it's fine for the ref to call it this way, but I disagree with it. It's a 50/50 call imo, like Benatia last year.

 

[Hængebøffer]

Nice. Yes I'm pretty aware on what I'm saying. They used VAR because they got it wrong. VAR isn't there to be used for turning right calls in to wrong ones.

Suck my dinglebeeries. That’s not what you said. You said offside is not up till interpretation. That’s absolutely bs.

 

[j0ker]

https://www.fifa.com/mm/document/afdeveloping/refereeing/5. law 11_554.pdf

check "interfering with an opponent" part. "in the opinion of the referee" isn't exactly about geometry, it's all subjective.

The funny part is that you have to explain this rule to people.

And I bet there are still people who don't know that you need two opposing players in front you to not be considered offside.

 

[DAiDEViL]

Pulisic

Chelsea

 

[Jethro]

Pulisic

Chelsea

they have paid €65M for this bum

 

[Hængebøffer]

Only in the case the player actually makes a play on the ball.

Passive offside rule for a playing standing there, only comes into play through interpretation of whether the player interfered with the keeper's ability to make a save.

As I said, in the end it's fine for the ref to call it this way, but I disagree with it. It's a 50/50 call imo, like Benatia last year.

No no. The offside rule is only q question about black and white. People, who doesn’t know that, are pleebs.

 

[DAiDEViL]

they have paid €65M for this bum

The new Landon Donovan

 

[campionesidd]

There are plenty of calls you can debate over this just isn't one if we go by the rules. It's certainly unlucky as Tadic was just at the wrong place at the wrong time.

You can bet your ass if Real had scored the goal, they wouldn't even have checked it on VAR. 100% guarantee.

 

[AFL_ITALIA]

Pulisic

Chelsea

What did he do? I missed it.

 

[Post Ironic]

There are plenty of calls you can debate over this just isn't one if we go by the rules. It's certainly unlucky as Tadic was in the wrong position in the wrong time.

100% debatable. Again, this isn't a rule that says offside or not. Passive offside is interpretative and requires interfering with the opponent. Are you purposefully ignoring that no one is arguing that he wasn't offside? You said offside is not up for interpretation, when in this type of offside it 100% is. The ref and VAR determined through INTERPRETATION that he interfered with Courtois while in an offside position.

As I said though, it was disallowed, water under the bridge now. Having seen multiple times now, I think it was a 50/50 call on the interference, so fine that ref decided that (and it's fine that you agree), would have been fine the other way too. Same deal with the Benatia penalty we conceded last year too. Once immediate aftermath passions calmed, it was a 50/50 call imo.

 

[piotrr]

YISSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSsss

 

[Jethro]

The new Landon Donovan

10 goals in last 3 years

 

[Cerval]

YES so deserved

 

[il brutto]

Suck my dinglebeeries. That’s not what you said. You said offside is not up till interpretation. That’s absolutely bs.

“Interfering with an opponent” means:

• Preventing an opponent from playing or being able to play the ball. For example, by clearly obstructing the goalkeeper’s line of vision or movement.
• Making a gesture or movement which, in the opinion of the referee, deceives or distracts an opponent.

It is. The rules are pretty clear.

 

[Klovn]

I hope the guy on RM payroll checks VAR again

- - - Updated - - -

It is. The rules are pretty clear.

Thank you for proving our point