Ratings & Reactions: Man City v Villa

[Raver50032]

I can't really add any more to the debate about VAR for both decisions - the game is over and we can't change the result. But I do hope that Smith and Co continue to give pelters verbally over it and take the financial fines etc as comfortable justification for raising the silliness of it all. 

Overall, as good a performance as I could have hoped for realistically, and on the break, we did look useful. Some sterling defending too - such a long way we have come since this time last year. So fabulous that it was only 2-0 as a result of VAR malfeasance and 'body on the line' defending. 

One thing I haven't seen mentioned in all of the 20 pages is, that for how bad Moss was as the referee, we are very lucky not to have lost both McGinn and Grealish for the Newcastle game. Captain's armband or not, Jack could very easily have received a yellow card for the WWF throw to the floor of Kyle Walker - that ultimately saw the City play leave the pitch for substitution not long after. And if that wasn't cause enough, the coming together between Jack and De Bruyne too also resulting in the City player's substitution. You're a lucky boy Jack. 

So, the rhetorical question I ask of you is - how many would have taken 2-0 before the game (I would) and safeguarded Jack to be available to sword the Toon? 

Move on now Villa - the next two games are very winnable. So win please. 

Edited January 21, 2021 by Raver50032
sausage fingers innit

[alreadyexists]

I just want some consistency to be honest. If it’s offside then fair enough, or onside then fine, but the rules are meant to be applied on a consistent and fair basis but they aren’t.

That’s at worse willful corruption in my opinion, or at best woeful incompetence. Conscious or unconscious the rules are meant to be applied in a binary, right or wrong way, but there’s too much subjectivity in the rules and their application which inevitably leads to either a) corruption or b) incompetence or on the lighter side just plain confusion.

Also, I think that most of the decision made in a game are subjective interpretations of the rules, and if that’s so then fine. But why pretend that the rules are black and white then when they clearly are constantly subjectively applied.

[El Zen]

34 minutes ago, blandy said:

He "receives" it when he takes it from his toes (in the eyes of the officials).

No. That’s just not the case. All precedent from hundreds of similar (more or less identical) situations says officials in general do not see it that way. They are literally always called as offside. To receive the ball is not the same as taking it off someone. Jon Moss is the first referee I have ever seen to intepret the rule this way, and that the governing bodies and various pundits are now defending his decicision is a potential watershed moment (to quote Michael Owen) for the game, as it’s a complete reinterpretation of the offside rule that has the potential to completely change the way football is played. It’s indefensible, and the reinventing of the word receive here is just bonkers, mental, nonsensical.

[StefanAVFC]

2 minutes ago, Michelsen said:

No. That’s just not the case. All precedent from hundreds of similar (more or less identical) situations says officials in general do not see it that way. They are literally always called as offside. To receive the ball is not the same as taking it off someone. Jon Moss is the first referee I have ever seen to intepret the rule this way, and that the governing bodies and various pundits are now defending his decicision is a potential watershed moment (to quote Michael Owen) for the game, as it’s a complete reinterpretation of the offside rule that has the potential to completely change the way football is played. It’s indefensible, and the reinventing of the word receive here is just bonkers, mental, nonsensical.

All to protect an objectively awful referee not fit, in both senses of the word, to do his job.

Mental isn't it?

Edited January 21, 2021 by StefanAVFC

[El Zen]

Next time I coach football, I’ll have them work on tackling, but I’ll say we’re working on receiving the ball, because apparently that means the same thing now. Nuts!

[imavillan]

Not one pundit, ex referee or any other so called expert will be able to ever tell me that that was not offside.

Not even any interpretation of the so called written laws of the game can deem that as not interfering with play.

It's nothing other than absurd and in all my time of watching football i have never heard so much BS being spouted from people defending the decision. Complete and utter bull shit.

 

 

[danceoftheshamen]

It's just another highly suspicious re-interpretation of the rules amidst a swathe of such game altering decisions by FA employees which yet again clearly fit the overall agenda of the FA.  

Ask yourselves this... 

Had the roles been reversed last night and Villa had scored from that would the goal have stood? 

Of course not.

Last time out a Pogba Penalty, ditto against them in both games last season. I'm pretty sure if memory serves correctly that we had a good goal disallowed at Old Trafford and they got their opener at Villa Park from yet another disgraceful decision which VAR conveniently ignored once again when their player stamped on Konsa's shin and dived on the floor and was incredibly given a penalty which changed the game as we had been good up to that point.

How can VAR ignore / not see that with slow motion replays? Only sensible answer is they decided to not see it. I frankly do not believe that with all of the technology they have at their disposal that they missed that, it just doesn't stack up.

To my mind it's not incompetence it's merely manipulation of results. I would hazard a guess that many of the defeats against these clubs over the years have involved dodgy decisions or penalties. Harsh sendings off or Refs being lenient with cards for them but not us stuff like that. It's not just with us either it happens on mass in most of their games against the "lesser" sides although we, along with most other Midlands teams apart from Leicester (just ask Wolves fans), do seem to be particularly impacted by it all. 

Over the last season & a half Man Utd as we know have had 33 penalties & 7 against (Whilst playing  pretty poorly don't forget)

We, one of the better attacking teams certainly this season, have had 7 penalties over that time.

It's simply yet more of the result manipulation which we are now seeing nearly every week. Clearly the FA see this covid situation as the ideal opportunity to get a "stranded at home Global audience" paying to watch the Premier League games.  What better way than to have a huge shoot out between the main few internationally supported clubs Man Utd, Man City, Liverpool and the underdog Leicester (Even more penalties than Man Utd this season).

Something is clearly very suspect at FA towers.

Edited January 21, 2021 by danceoftheshamen

[fightoffyour]

50 minutes ago, blandy said:

I'd suggest they wrote the clarification to the laws a couple of years or so back, to cover where a through ball is glanced by a defender (deliberately trying to clear it) and it still ends up at the feet of an attacker

What? That would still obviously be offside otherwise you could just leave someone goal hanging and hope for the ball to ping off a defender.

That would still not be receiving the ball from an opponent who deliberately played it, that would be receiving the ball from a teammate via a pass that is inadvertently glanced in the direction of the offside player.

[TRO]

There are 3 issues for me.

1. The ruling is wrong, and it opens up so much abuse to it if it stays as it is...my suspicion is it will be quickly changed.....but it shows half the football world don't know the rules, because they are changed every 5 minutes and are too ambiguous......its open to interpretation, bias.

2. Tyrone, despite having a good game, was clumsy in his execution of bringing the ball under control.....He failed to " cup" his chest, and subsequently the ball just bounced off it to his right hand side, he would have got away with it, if there wasn't someone behind in a "offside" position.

3. Man city having secured the ball, in the manner that they did, still had a fair bit to do, to get a goal, there was opportunity to be more aggressive with a tackle....we should have took a yellow for the team.

 

[TRO]

9 minutes ago, imavillan said:

Not one pundit, ex referee or any other so called expert will be able to ever tell me that that was not offside.

Not even any interpretation of the so called written laws of the game can deem that as not interfering with play.

It's nothing other than absurd and in all my time of watching football i have never heard so much BS being spouted from people defending the decision. Complete and utter bull shit.

 

 

I will be most surprised if this law is not changed asap.....its pathetic that such a huge organisation can countenance this as the law it's embarrassing.

if clubs want to take advantage of it ,the game would become farcical.

it needs changing Asap.

[onmeedson]

Every coach in the country will being saying the same thing today, just head the ball clear, and the recieve aspect must be the ball of the chest that allowed the ref to come to that desicion. We played well, but we must always remember we are not only playing the team on the park.

[StefanAVFC]

3 minutes ago, onmeedson said:

Every coach in the country will being saying the same thing today, just head the ball clear,

No they're literally not.

In the laws of the game, Mings is completely clear here to take a touch and bring it down. The only City player near him can't interfere with him. Heading it back just gifts the back to City, which is madness considering the time in the game, and the amount of pressure we were under.

I agree with clearing your lines, but clearing your lines is usually safety first, when there's danger.

The only danger in this situation was an offside player and a fat, old ref.

[TRO]

1 hour ago, Raver50032 said:

I can't really add any more to the debate about VAR for both decisions - the game is over and we can't change the result. But I do hope that Smith and Co continue to give pelters verbally over it and take the financial fines etc as comfortable justification for raising the silliness of it all. 

Overall, as good a performance as I could have hoped for realistically, and on the break, we did look useful. Some sterling defending too - such a long way we have come since this time last year. So fabulous that it was only 2-0 as a result of VAR malfeasance and 'body on the line' defending. 

One thing I haven't seen mentioned in all of the 20 pages is, that for how bad Moss was as the referee, we are very lucky not to have lost both McGinn and Grealish for the Newcastle game. Captain's armband or not, Jack could very easily have received a yellow card for the WWF throw to the floor of Kyle Walker - that ultimately saw the City play leave the pitch for substitution not long after. And if that wasn't cause enough, the coming together between Jack and De Bruyne too also resulting in the City player's substitution. You're a lucky boy Jack. 

So, the rhetorical question I ask of you is - how many would have taken 2-0 before the game (I would) and safeguarded Jack to be available to sword the Toon? 

Move on now Villa - the next two games are very winnable. So win please. 

I don't accept we have to lose any game.....its not in my DNA supporting villa, to succumb to that and futhermore, i have always, always been interested in us improving, no matter how well we are playing.....improving is what keeps ( you there) playing well....its the future and what we strive for....Winning is the holy grail, its what keeps everyone interested, owners, players, coaches and fans....if we don't win, we have to question, challenge and search for solutions...they are all there, its finding them.

May i take you back to the Bayern Munich game, some thought we was going to make up the numbers against arguably the best team in Europe at the time, we in contrast had very few internationals in our team, but what we did have was workrate, energy, will, determination, character and belief.....I am not advocating talent is unnecessary, far from it, but applying those attributes of ours unhinged Bayern and created doubt, their edge was blunted.....it affects teams.

I have no idea of Covid and the time out , of how it affected us.....but despite, conceding space and losing some duels.....we could have won that with a bit more composure, we had chances and had they been finished better, it could have happened......defensibly, its hard to criticise and until stupid rules intervened we was on our way to 0-0

But what would we have been saying then, if we had of won?

Edited January 21, 2021 by TRO

[BOF]

Matt Targett has become Paolo Maldini in his last 2 appearances at left back. He has been staggeringly good.  Long may it continue.

[Okonokos]

3 minutes ago, BOF said:

Matt Targett has become Paolo Maldini in his last 2 appearances at left back. He has been staggeringly good.  Long may it continue.

Our second best player this season so far, IMO.

[TRO]

Man city are a fine team, who have found their form.......but what i also noticed last night, they won most of the 50/50 balls the duels where they come out with the ball.....not to mention, Mings attempt with Rodri.

They also won too many headers for my liking, they are not exactly giants.....we have to do better.

We have to be stronger in this area, physically and technically.

[HKP90]

16 minutes ago, BOF said:

Matt Targett has become Paolo Maldini in his last 2 appearances at left back. He has been staggeringly good.  Long may it continue.

Not just the last two. He’s been immense for a while.

[villalad21]

5 minutes ago, TRO said:

but what i also noticed last night, they won most of the 50/50 balls the duels where they come out with the ball

Exactly.

But you have to take into account we've not played a game for 3 weeks and they are on a 9 game unbeaten run. They are flying and confidence is skyhigh.

When you are in that flow you're gonna feel unstoppable and win most 50/50 duels.

The rules are dumb and need changing. Mings can't keep being so sloppy on the ball and we need to keep the ball better and stop trying silly difficult passes and keep it more simple at times.

Need a performance against Newcastle now.

[TRO]

9 minutes ago, villalad21 said:

Exactly.

But you have to take into account we've not played a game for 3 weeks and they are on a 9 game unbeaten run. They are flying and confidence is skyhigh.

When you are in that flow you're gonna feel unstoppable and win most 50/50 duels.

The rules are dumb and need changing. Mings can't keep being so sloppy on the ball and we need to keep the ball better and stop trying silly difficult passes and keep it more simple at times.

Need a performance against Newcastle now.

I accept all that.

just highlighting things we have to get better at.....the reasons are clear, its just things to aim for.

[Zhan_Zhuang]

Still angry about this the day after...

Thing is before the match I figured we'd lose anyway but the longer it went I thought we might get a draw or even snatch it. It took a shambolic refereeing decision to stop us.

Villa have unfortunately been on the wrong end of several really bad decisions now. Up until the City 'offside' I thought the Palace decision was the worst but this one is far greater.

So why is it us, why Villa? Conspiracy? You could almost bet your savings if it was Watkins who scored a identical goal for Villa last night it would have been ruled out by VAR. It's corrupt!