Ratings & Reactions: Man City v Villa

[Mjvilla]

1 hour ago, TRO said:

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.

 

For me, the rule isn't wrong. That rule is designed for such incidents as the Ashley young first goal at Everton in the 3-2 win under O'Neill. When jagielka misplaced his backpass. The rule is fine. The officiating and use of the rules is bizarre at best and underhand at worst.

[Mjvilla]

Just now, Mjvilla said:

For me, the rule isn't wrong. That rule is designed for such incidents as the Ashley young first goal at Everton in the 3-2 win under O'Neill. When jagielka misplaced his backpass. That's Ashley young receiving it from jagielka. The rule is fine.

The officiating and use of the rules is bizarre at best and underhand at worst.

 

[Okonokos]

7 minutes ago, Mjvilla said:

For me, the rule isn't wrong. That rule is designed for such incidents as the Ashley young first goal at Everton in the 3-2 win under O'Neill. When jagielka misplaced his backpass. The rule is fine. The officiating and use of the rules is bizarre at best and underhand at worst.

The key word is receive. Ashley Young received the ball from Jagielka's poor backpass. Rodri did not receive the ball as a result of Mings' actions; he tackled him. They just chose to interpret it that way because, well Shitty were struggling and needed a goal, didn't they?

Edited January 21, 2021 by Okonokos

[onmeedson]

Is it compulsory to gift it to a city player or are there villa players on the pitch, in the real world we have to work with what we have not what you hoped it would be.

[StefanAVFC]

The word receive indicates passivity. It's the very definition of the word. You can't actively receive something.

[TRO]

20 hours ago, Zhan_Zhuang said:

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!

 

I can't answer whether there is a conspiracy of whether Referee's are biased or not, but something smells.

I know in Boxing they say a busy industrious fighter in America ,catches the eye of the judges, more than a deliberate less busy version......is that a trait that can be levelled at our referee's in terms of certain types of play.

Man Utd have always seemed to get penalties and decisions, but is it because they are always attacking and their play is tidy?.....I think clumsy teams, don't get the benefit of the doubt as much ( not saying we are clumsy, by the way) just making a point.

I am finding it harder to ignore the theory of keeping the " so called" top 6, in the top 6.....I don't want to believe it, but it is becoming more feasible as time goes on......They don't want any "gate crashers"

I would think we have enough incidents and evidence now, to ask the league for some explanations.....I understand clubs will not want to draw attention to themselves for the wrong reasons, but i fear, something must be said. I am not asking for special treatment, but some decisions are just plain taking the ****......many are becoming features of controvesy and headlines on social media only to become tomorrows chip paper.....it has to stop.

Aston Villa have never had a complaining nature, very much stiff upper lip and get on with it.....One of the country's traditionalists in terms of football.....but something must be said, we are being disadvantaged in most games now, its laughable to our opponents.

To defend that law 11 is like Trump defending the red necks insurrection......it needs to be looked at immediately.

I am getting to a stage, where I actually fear referee's now, that simply can't be right.

 

Edited January 22, 2021 by TRO

[Kingman]

I've not felt this much hatred and anger since that useless word removed Kevin Friend **** us at Palace last season 

[danceoftheshamen]

41 minutes ago, TRO said:

I can't answer whether there is a conspiracy of whether Referee's are biased or not, but something smells.

I know in Boxing they say a busy industrious fighter in America ,catches the eye of the judges, more than a deliberate less busy version......is that a trait that can be levelled at our referee's in terms of certain types of play.

Man Utd have always seemed to get penalties and decisions, but is it because they are always attacking and their play is tidy?.....I think clumsy teams, don't get the benefit of the doubt as much ( not saying we are clumsy, by the way) just making a point.

I am finding it harder to ignore the theory of keeping the " so called" top 6, in the top 6.....I don't want to believe it, but it is becoming more feasible as time goes on......They don't want any "gate crashers"

I would think we have enough incidents and evidence now, to ask the league for some explanations.....I understand clubs will not want to draw attention to themselves for the wrong reasons, but i fear, something must be said. I am not asking for special treatment, but some decisions are just plain taking the ****......many are becoming features of controvesy and headlines on social media only to become tomorrows chip paper.....it has to stop.

Aston Villa have never had a complaining nature, very much stiff upper lip and get on with it.....One of the countries traditionalists in terms of football.....but something must be said, we are being disadvantaged in most games now, its laughable to our opponents.

To defend that law 11 is like Trump defending the red necks insurrection......it needs to be looked at immediately.

I am getting to a stage, where I actually fear referee's now, that simply can't be right.

 

Absolutely spot on Tro for me. I despise having to question the integrity of the game i love but the evidence is just so overwhelming now it can no longer be ignored. VAR if one thing has ousted the ridiculous lengths to which these people will sink to attempt to either cover it up or completely ignore it and wait for the next set of games when we all inevitably get absorbed again and it all quiets down.

It's akin to Groundhog day actually. Same thing over & over again but now the age old brush which has been used to sweep it under the carpet has been removed due to VAR.  The fog is slowly clearing now and it's looking more & more ridiculous as the weeks pass.  First it was a new human arm design for handball where apparently now the shoulder is actually part of the arm and not the shoulder. Then it is all sorts of lame excuses as to why VAR saw that but not the other identical situation. Now this week takes the biscuit with a completely new rule of how you can be 10 yards offside and still be involved in creating a goal and yet not be interfereing with play... Yeah good one that!.

Even with all this you could put it down to idiots or incompetence apart from one little issue..... It always goes for certain teams & against others! Now that is completely unexplainable and that is called corruption sadly.

 

As for the Man Utd bit i've highlighted in your original post, for me that is nonsensicle as surely if anything was obvious last season it was that Liverpool were far more of an attacking threat than any other team & Utd were actually not playing their normal flowing attacking football at all and yet Liverpool get Half the amount of penalties from an equivalent number of games as them...and i can remember quite a few odd ones Liverpool got in with all that too so what that says i'm not sure exaclty.

Edited January 21, 2021 by danceoftheshamen

[TRO]

4 minutes ago, danceoftheshamen said:

Absolutely spot on Tro for me. I despise having to question the integrity of the game i love but the evidence is just so overwhelming now it can no longer be ignored. VAR if one thing has ousted the ridiculous lengths to which these people will sink to attempt to either cover it up or completely ignore it and wait for the next set of games when we all inevitably get absorbed again and it all quiets down.

It's akin to Groundhog day actually. Same thing over & over again but now the age old brush which has been used to sweep it under the carpet has been removed due to VAR.  The fog is slowly clearing now and it's looking more & more ridiculous as the weeks pass.  First it was a new human arm design for handball where apparently now the shoulder is actually part of the arm and not the shoulder. Then it is all sorts of lame excuses as to why VAR saw that but not the other identical situation. Now this week takes the biscuit with a completely new rule of how you can be 10 yards offside and still be involved in creating a goal and yet not be interfereing with play... Yeah good one that!.

Even with all this you could put it down to idiots or incompetence apart from one little issue..... It always goes for certain teams & against others! Now that is completely unexplainable and that is called corruption sadly.

The problem is, they have to back the referee, else the game is in chaos, even if behind closed doors they don't.

If they were genuine in their thinking they should come out and say Law 11 is going to be revisited.....it will be put right for someone else to benefit, thats for sure.

[newhavenhibby]

Tough luck last night on both goals , especially the first. The penalty is due to the daft changes in the interpretation of the handball rule and I would imagine players are now practising flicking the ball onto defenders hands from point blank range. 

The offside interference was again a poor decision in my book........and believe me you see plenty of poor decisions up here. If Mings had turned and misplaced a pass which the City player received then fair enough but coming back and interfering and tackling the player in possession from goalside of him is harsh. 

What really astounded me is that VAR ( we don't have that luxury here ) didn't discuss it ? People from ex players, pundits, referees etc have been discussing the pros and cons of it all day but the VAR officials didn't give it a second look? Would have been different if it had happened at the other end or Man or Liverpool had been involved. You see them discussing whether someone has their big toe offside but not the incident last night......strange.

A similar incident happened in the Juve game last night and the ref and linesman immediately gave offside........so not as clear cut as the official line given today by the refs association desperate to protect the officials from last night.

Hopefully the players will be aggrieved and take it out in the next game, especially as it is a return of one of your favourite managers.

 

[El Zen]

One potential issue with admitting Jon Moss screwed up, is that would be admitting the ref had applied the rules of football wrongly. To make a mistake, missing a call through not seeing it, is fair enough. But for the ref to actually use the rules wrongly (no chance he didn’t see Rodri came from an offside position), that opens you up for an official protest and rematch doesn’t it? 

[danceoftheshamen]

12 minutes ago, Michelsen said:

One potential issue with admitting Jon Moss screwed up, is that would be admitting the ref had applied the rules of football wrongly. To make a mistake, missing a call through not seeing it, is fair enough. But for the ref to actually use the rules wrongly (no chance he didn’t see Rodri came from an offside position), that opens you up for an official protest and rematch doesn’t it? 

Thing is though even then why did VAR not intervene? John Moss made a very odd decision & he also cost us away at Arsenal last season by ignoring a blatant hand ball by them which again mysteriously VAR ignored and yet again when he was the ref who gave Utd that ridiculous penalty at Villa Park when their player stamped on Konsas shin and dived ... guess what? Yep VAR also ignored that one too which was so clear on replays..embarrassing. 

Seems to be a pattern here no? It may even be suggested if a little sceptical that on the odd occasion to help get the desired result they bring out the old boy and a compliant VAR team to back him up?

Edited January 21, 2021 by danceoftheshamen

[alreadyexists]

2 hours ago, newhavenhibby said:

Tough luck last night on both goals , especially the first. The penalty is due to the daft changes in the interpretation of the handball rule and I would imagine players are now practising flicking the ball onto defenders hands from point blank range. 

The offside interference was again a poor decision in my book........and believe me you see plenty of poor decisions up here. If Mings had turned and misplaced a pass which the City player received then fair enough but coming back and interfering and tackling the player in possession from goalside of him is harsh. 

What really astounded me is that VAR ( we don't have that luxury here ) didn't discuss it ? People from ex players, pundits, referees etc have been discussing the pros and cons of it all day but the VAR officials didn't give it a second look? Would have been different if it had happened at the other end or Man or Liverpool had been involved. You see them discussing whether someone has their big toe offside but not the incident last night......strange.

A similar incident happened in the Juve game last night and the ref and linesman immediately gave offside........so not as clear cut as the official line given today by the refs association desperate to protect the officials from last night.

Hopefully the players will be aggrieved and take it out in the next game, especially as it is a return of one of your favourite managers.

 

Love those Hibs. They’re now my team north of the border!

[Vive_La_Villa]

They need to go back to basics and stop these stupid rules with grey areas. It’s like the stupid handball rule they had at start of the season that cost teams points. I remember Spurs losing 2 points against Newcastle. 
 

They’ve fixed that and they’ll fix this. But if they stopped **** about with the rules in the first place they wouldn’t have to fix them!

[vreitti]

On 20/01/2021 at 22:07, briny_ear said:

I fear @vreitti won’t like this - Targett had another excellent game.

I'm certainly big enough to admit I was wrong. I suspect past performances (mainly last season), really clouded my mind, and I just couldn't see the improvement. I absolutely concur though, he was brilliant. Just gutted with the result. We deserved so much more with that collective effort. 

[TRO]

1 hour ago, vreitti said:

I'm certainly big enough to admit I was wrong. I suspect past performances (mainly last season), really clouded my mind, and I just couldn't see the improvement. I absolutely concur though, he was brilliant. Just gutted with the result. We deserved so much more with that collective effort. 

I wasn't a targett fan either.....but he is playing much,much better.

shows we look at the form, not the player.

[BleedClaretAndBlue]

12 hours ago, StefanAVFC said:

The word receive indicates passivity. It's the very definition of the word. You can't actively receive something.

Exactly.
 

In my head, any situation like the one we saw is comparable to when the referee plays an advantage in the middle of the park when a player is fouled but the ball carries onto to a teammate anyway, but then he loses it too and you know it will always be braught back for the initial foul. Its an insurance that the original offence is noted in the head of the referee but you have retained posession so play will resume to see if anything progresses whereby you dont need to bring it back. 99 times out of 100 you will always get the free kick if the next pass or move breaks down. Thats what we all thought would happen. Its disgusting to be done like that and then the world acting like its fine and its always been the rules. 

[ThornburyVilla]

18 hours ago, StefanAVFC said:

At which point does Rodri 'receive' the ball from Mings though?

That's making the word receive mean something it doesn't.

Again, just the like the pundits and the media, you're quoting something without actually questioning what it says.

This law quite clearly means situations where the defender passes, heads, whatever's the ball to a player stood offside. Not when the offside player comes back and tackles him. In what way does the word 'receive' cover Rodri's actions here?

I'm sorry to be blunt, but I've seen this exact wording at least a hundred times since yesterday and it's a load of bollocks. It's absolutely the PGMOL pulling the wool over everyone's eyes and people swallowing it without displaying a sliver of critical thought.

This is the problem, same with politics. Someone in ‘authority’ quotes something to justify an action, which is clearly incorrect, and no one gets a chance to call them out on it! 
 

This post should be nailed to the PGMOL door and they should not do anything else until they answer it! 
 

As someone else said, it is guaranteed to happen again this weekend, and guaranteed to be called offside. I pray Watkins is told to stand offside and do the same, to prove the point. 

[BleedClaretAndBlue]

Apply that law to the Grealish goal at Turf Moor last season that got chalked off. The new phase happens when Burnley clear the ball but they still bring that all the way back to find Wesleys heel off by a millimetre. Laughable they just make it up as they go along

[robby b]

To sum up: Rodri took the ball from Mings, he didn't "receive" the ball from Mings.

Well done Sky and the BBC for not mentioning this at all in any of their post-match analysis. Grrrrrrr.   The verb receive is different from the verb take !

Edited January 22, 2021 by robby b