Nigel Posted November 9, 2020 VT Supporter Share Posted November 9, 2020 It doesn't matter whether Leno could have saved that shot, its subjective and cant be taken into consideration. However the most glaring mistake is that Barkley wasnt impeding the keepers view of the actual ball. When the camera was swung around to Lenos view he could clearly see it all the way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tom_avfc Posted November 9, 2020 Share Posted November 9, 2020 2 hours ago, Nigel said: It doesn't matter whether Leno could have saved that shot, its subjective and cant be taken into consideration. However the most glaring mistake is that Barkley wasnt impeding the keepers view of the actual ball. When the camera was swung around to Lenos view he could clearly see it all the way. I don't see how it can ever be given as a goal to be honest. Barkley is in a position where the ball could easily hit him so he has to be having an impact on the keeper's decision. Arguing over millimetres of line of sight isn't really relevant. I get that it's annoying because of how well McGinn hit it and I'm not for one minute arguing that the keeper would have saved it had Barkley not been there. However, Barkley was there in an offside position and within the rules thats all that matters unfortunately. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BG_Villa_Fan Posted November 9, 2020 Share Posted November 9, 2020 The infuriating part isn't that Barkley's position would have affected the keeper's chance of saving it. Fair enough it's offside. In a way similar to Southampton's disallowed goal against us last weekend. But you can definitely see this type of situation not being very strictly enforced when, say Man U score against us and nobody even bothers to check for offside. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nigel Posted November 9, 2020 VT Supporter Share Posted November 9, 2020 1 hour ago, tom_avfc said: I don't see how it can ever be given as a goal to be honest. Barkley is in a position where the ball could easily hit him so he has to be having an impact on the keeper's decision. Arguing over millimetres of line of sight isn't really relevant. I get that it's annoying because of how well McGinn hit it and I'm not for one minute arguing that the keeper would have saved it had Barkley not been there. However, Barkley was there in an offside position and within the rules thats all that matters unfortunately. Yeah maybe the potential deflection thing has to be taken into consideration, good point. They were lucky! 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Talldarkandransome Posted November 9, 2020 Share Posted November 9, 2020 14 hours ago, Zatman said: Barkley was offside BUT he has no role in Leno saving the shot. He is never saving that whatever angle McGinn could have whatsapped Leno to let him know and he still wouldn't have seen it. The fact none of their players or goalie complained is key here. Footballers claim for everything and I didnt see one of them claim for offside or blocking view 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HongKongVillan Posted November 9, 2020 VT Supporter Share Posted November 9, 2020 It took them 5 minutes to decide whether Barkley was in an offside position and obstructing the view. 5 mins, for them to convince themselves it was an obstruction, which smells Bullshits to me. If it was clear enough it should have taken them 2 mins max to decide. Also, was it really true they played only 3mins of injury time in first half? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post Stevo985 Posted November 9, 2020 Author VT Supporter Popular Post Share Posted November 9, 2020 Yeah I'm going to go against the grain too and say Barkley was offside. I know we don't like it, and I know it wouldn't have made a difference because Leno wouldn't have saved it. But it's offside, and if anything we should see more decisions like that and not less 6 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
villaglint Posted November 9, 2020 Share Posted November 9, 2020 41 minutes ago, Stevo985 said: Yeah I'm going to go against the grain too and say Barkley was offside. I know we don't like it, and I know it wouldn't have made a difference because Leno wouldn't have saved it. But it's offside, and if anything we should see more decisions like that and not less Well he was definitely offside I don’t think anyone is disputing that. I guess the argument is around whether him being there has influenced the play or the goal. I’d argue a tiny drip of common sense would say no. I don’t think Leno could even reach the ball from where he was so he could have looked at it as much as he wants but he was never going to stop it. So if Barkley hasn’t influenced the goal should it be ruled out by him being offside. Would be interesting to see the wording of the ruling on this one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
villaglint Posted November 9, 2020 Share Posted November 9, 2020 Out of interest didn’t we have a similar one recently against us where a goal was ruled out because one of their players was in front of the keeper. Who was that against ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tom_avfc Posted November 9, 2020 Share Posted November 9, 2020 1 minute ago, villaglint said: Out of interest didn’t we have a similar one recently against us where a goal was ruled out because one of their players was in front of the keeper. Who was that against ? I think we had one against Man City last season that wasn't given. I remember thinking it was ridiculous that the goal wasn't overruled by VAR. To me its not a difficult decision to make. It baffles me more that it took the ref and VAR 5 minutes to give an offside that could have been called fairly easily from one replay to be honest. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zatman Posted November 9, 2020 Share Posted November 9, 2020 24 minutes ago, villaglint said: Out of interest didn’t we have a similar one recently against us where a goal was ruled out because one of their players was in front of the keeper. Who was that against ? Fulham Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PaulC Posted November 9, 2020 Share Posted November 9, 2020 The main thing is it didn't effect the result of the game. Arsenal had one chalked off against Leicester and Ateta was complaining about that. So swings and roundabouts I guess. we made our own luck Arsenal didn't. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StefanAVFC Posted November 9, 2020 Share Posted November 9, 2020 18 minutes ago, Zatman said: Fulham Different, it was a foul on Konsa. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
One For The Road Posted November 9, 2020 Share Posted November 9, 2020 1 hour ago, HongKongVillan said: It took them 5 minutes to decide whether Barkley was in an offside position and obstructing the view. 5 mins, for them to convince themselves it was an obstruction, which smells Bullshits to me. If it was clear enough it should have taken them 2 mins max to decide. Also, was it really true they played only 3mins of injury time in first half? It took 5 minutes because the VAR screen was broken and they had to find another one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sne Posted November 9, 2020 Share Posted November 9, 2020 35 minutes ago, One For The Road said: It took 5 minutes because the VAR screen was broken and they had to find another one. I don't believe them. That sounds like something they made up to explain why it took them far too long. Doesn't explain why they only added 3 minutes for a 5 min break. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stevo985 Posted November 9, 2020 Author VT Supporter Share Posted November 9, 2020 1 hour ago, villaglint said: Well he was definitely offside I don’t think anyone is disputing that. I guess the argument is around whether him being there has influenced the play or the goal. I’d argue a tiny drip of common sense would say no. I don’t think Leno could even reach the ball from where he was so he could have looked at it as much as he wants but he was never going to stop it. So if Barkley hasn’t influenced the goal should it be ruled out by him being offside. Would be interesting to see the wording of the ruling on this one. But the rule isn't whether the keeper would have got there anyway. The rule is is he interfering with play. And I think standing right in front of the keeper counts as interfering with play whatever way you look at it. To open the rule up to whether the keeper would get there anyway makes it even more subjective than it already is. An example would be if Cristiano Ronaldo was a foot offside chasing a through ball against Neil Taylor then it makes no difference either because Ronaldo would have got there anyway. It's still offside though. Like I said, we should see more of these kinds of goals being ruled out, not less. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stevo985 Posted November 9, 2020 Author VT Supporter Share Posted November 9, 2020 7 minutes ago, sne said: I don't believe them. That sounds like something they made up to explain why it took them far too long. The ref was literally stood there next to a blank screen while they tried to get it to work Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Genie Posted November 9, 2020 Share Posted November 9, 2020 Barkley was offside, and stood in front of the keeper. Being offside is only ignored if not interfering with the play. Standing between Mcginn and the keeper is as interfering as it gets. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sne Posted November 9, 2020 Share Posted November 9, 2020 20 minutes ago, Stevo985 said: The ref was literally stood there next to a blank screen while they tried to get it to work Ah OK the pitch side monitor? Though they meant the one Stockley Park. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fightoffyour Posted November 9, 2020 VT Supporter Share Posted November 9, 2020 Is the wording of the rule literally "interfering with play" though? Because then I could argue that "interfering with play" can be interpreted as whether the offside player makes any difference to the outcome only, which in this case was a goal and the answer is no. The line drawing for Barkley being offside was comical though as he clearly was, at least in the current rules, so this took 1 minute before they even told the ref to look at the monitor. Which was then broken. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts