villalad21 Posted January 21, 2021 Share Posted January 21, 2021 At least he admitted he made a mistake Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DCJonah Posted January 21, 2021 Share Posted January 21, 2021 Utter rubbish. We've been screwed over and people still want to just get on this guy as quick as they can, after all he's done. What's wrong with our fans at times. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AVTuco Posted January 21, 2021 VT Supporter Share Posted January 21, 2021 9 hours ago, StefanAVFC said: Does the defender here make a mistake not just hoofing it? I was going to come here to post this Stefan. Here, the ref does the right thing, but so do the players. Players all know it would be wrong to continue, their body language says it all. I really don't want to get angry again, but... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DCJonah Posted January 21, 2021 Share Posted January 21, 2021 8 hours ago, bobzy said: We're a side that plays out from the back - it's quite clearly a thing we do which is why we have comfortable, technically proficient passers all across the back line. We're under the cosh by a very strong side. The thing that leads to this whole incident is a poor kick from Martinez. Mings is bringing the ball down in defence to retain possession with a player miles offside behind him. There's literally no danger. Hoofing it under no pressure and giving the ball straight back to Man City is exactly what we wouldn't have wanted to happen there. (I say 'exactly' what we wouldn't have wanted...) Exactly. Also where is the advantage to us if we have to hoof it away because a player is standing in an offside position behind the defender? I guarantee they will change the interpretation of that rule because teams will start to intentionally do it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DCJonah Posted January 21, 2021 Share Posted January 21, 2021 28 minutes ago, villalad21 said: At least he admitted he made a mistake When will you do the same? 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post villa4europe Posted January 21, 2021 Popular Post Share Posted January 21, 2021 The thing is "with hindsight I should have cleared it" means that his decision is influenced by a guy who is offside... If mings just boots that clear because of rodri then man City gain an advantage from their offside player None of it makes sense, it's a ridiculous scenario 5 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DCJonah Posted January 21, 2021 Share Posted January 21, 2021 11 minutes ago, villa4europe said: The thing is "with hindsight I should have cleared it" means that his decision is influenced by a guy who is offside... If mings just boots that clear because of rodri then man City gain an advantage from their offside player None of it makes sense, it's a ridiculous scenario 100% this. They shouldn't have the advantage in that situation 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
villalad21 Posted January 21, 2021 Share Posted January 21, 2021 (edited) 14 minutes ago, villa4europe said: The thing is "with hindsight I should have cleared it" means that his decision is influenced by a guy who is offside... If mings just boots that clear because of rodri then man City gain an advantage from their offside player None of it makes sense, it's a ridiculous scenario But it's the rules. By chesting it down instead of letting it go a new situation is created. VAR did everything right as a matter of fact. It's just that the rules are really dumb Mings is dilly dallying on the ball and being casual that is the error and that is why we concede the goal. Edited January 21, 2021 by villalad21 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zatman Posted January 21, 2021 Share Posted January 21, 2021 5 hours ago, QldVilla said: Two things can happen, either they will change the interpretation of the rule immediately or some one will do it to Manure and then they’ll change the rule. Nothing to see here... It would never be given if was United, flag would have went up or VAR would disallow it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rolta Posted January 21, 2021 Share Posted January 21, 2021 It's one of the worst refereeing decisions I have ever seen. It's a complete joke. We played well. Mings played well. Hopefully we get less of a dick ref next time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post tom_avfc Posted January 21, 2021 Popular Post Share Posted January 21, 2021 14 minutes ago, villalad21 said: But it's the rules. By chesting it down instead of letting it go a new situation is created. VAR did everything right as a matter of fact. It's just that the rules are really dumb Mings is dilly dallying on the ball and being casual that is the error and that is why we concede the goal. The rules say nothing about a “new situation” being created. The rule that they are using to justify this decision refers to a player in an offside position “receiving” the ball from an opponent. The definition of receiving the ball appears to include tackling the opponent in their eyes. This is not a definition of receive that I have ever come across before. The number of people that will lap up any old rubbish that PGMOL put out to try and justify crap decisions is as worrying as the decisions being made themselves. 6 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Willard Posted January 21, 2021 Share Posted January 21, 2021 47 minutes ago, DCJonah said: Utter rubbish. We've been screwed over and people still want to just get on this guy as quick as they can, after all he's done. What's wrong with our fans at times. Also the bloke in that video is Ronaldo. The bloke is football and you think he didn't know he could tackle him and attack? Bloke is the most driven guy in football and he even knows he can't do that. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sulberto21 Posted January 21, 2021 Share Posted January 21, 2021 No! The rule clearly says receiving. He didn't receive he tackles Mings therefore he takes. If he intercepted a back pass or a sideways pass then he receives. There's a difference. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
villalad21 Posted January 21, 2021 Share Posted January 21, 2021 (edited) 14 minutes ago, Rolta said: It's one of the worst refereeing decisions I have ever seen. It's a complete joke. We played well. Mings played well. Hopefully we get less of a dick ref next time. If Mings clears it instead of chesting it down Rodri's position doesn't affect the play. If Mings doesn't f*** up the chest control , Rodri's position doesn't affect the play. Rodri's position affects the play because Mings chests it down - deliberately plays and f***s it up. Ergo he's not offside. It's a bit of a loophole in the rule by itself and something needed to be looked at, but this is quite simply a result of Mings f***ing it up. It was very avoidable but Mings was just being Mings. The rule is a joke. I am not disputing that but Mings need to stop being so casual on the ball. It leads to mistakes time and time again. It's costing us goals. It's costing us points. Edited January 21, 2021 by villalad21 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
villa4europe Posted January 21, 2021 Share Posted January 21, 2021 3 minutes ago, villalad21 said: If Mings clears it instead of chesting it down Rodri's position doesn't affect the play. If mings cleared it then it would be because of rodri Ergo he's offside Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rolta Posted January 21, 2021 Share Posted January 21, 2021 2 minutes ago, villalad21 said: If Mings clears it instead of chesting it down Rodri's position doesn't affect the play. If Mings doesn't f*** up the chest control , Rodri's position doesn't affect the play. Rodri's position affects the play because Mings chests it down - deliberately plays and f***s it up. Ergo he's not offside. It's a bit of a loophole in the rule by itself and something needed to be looked at, but this is quite simply a result of Mings f***ing it up. It was very avoidable but Mings was just being Mings. Your bias is so blatant. You've been criticising Mings for a while now, and this is a little gleeful opportunity to post something like you just did there. Look at the other posts. The letter of the law does not cover someone tackling from behind. It's ludicrous. I won't respond to your follow up post where you double down and continue your self justifying agenda. It's not worth my time. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DCJonah Posted January 21, 2021 Share Posted January 21, 2021 9 minutes ago, Rolta said: Your bias is so blatant. You've been criticising Mings for a while now, and this is a little gleeful opportunity to post something like you just did there. Look at the other posts. The letter of the law does not cover someone tackling from behind. It's ludicrous. I won't respond to your follow up post where you double down and continue your self justifying agenda. It's not worth my time. It really isn't Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DCJonah Posted January 21, 2021 Share Posted January 21, 2021 16 minutes ago, tom_avfc said: The rules say nothing about a “new situation” being created. The rule that they are using to justify this decision refers to a player in an offside position “receiving” the ball from an opponent. The definition of receiving the ball appears to include tackling the opponent in their eyes. This is not a definition of receive that I have ever come across before. The number of people that will lap up any old rubbish that PGMOL put out to try and justify crap decisions is as worrying as the decisions being made themselves. I bet they change this interpretation at some point. Teams will do this knowing you can now make a run in behind knowing that if you're offside defenders will not be able to bring the ball down. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sulberto21 Posted January 21, 2021 Share Posted January 21, 2021 (edited) 2 minutes ago, DCJonah said: I bet they change this interpretation at some point. Teams will do this knowing you can now make a run in behind knowing that if you're offside defenders will not be able to bring the ball down. I now want our forward players to stand offside and walking back as soon as the ball is played forwards I want them to tackle and gain the advantage. Edited January 21, 2021 by Sulberto21 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
handsworthvilla Posted January 21, 2021 Share Posted January 21, 2021 Anyone suggesting he should have hoofed it is talking nonsense. I guarantee nobody (including all the pundits and commentators) had heard of that rule before last night … so how on earth would you expect Mings to be aware of it, and to take a split second decision to hoof the ball based on this obscure rule that nobody has ever heard of or seen enforced previously? If we assume that Mings wasn't aware of the rule (like none of us were) then why on earth would you hoof a ball upfield because there is an offside man behind you? That is ridiculous 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts