• Pidjesus@alien.topB
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    “Gabriel had already made a movement to play the ball before any contact” what the fuck kind of reasoning is that? How does that make it not a foul?

    ???

    • the-won@alien.topB
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      I don’t agree with it fully but they’re saying Joelintons actions had no/ little impact on Gabriel as he had already went to make that header.

    • HalfMan-HalfMoth@alien.topB
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      I can understand them saying it wasn’t a clear and obvious error even if I disagree, surprised they didn’t disagree with the original on field decision though

    • Kenny_dies@alien.topB
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      If anything, isn’t it worse if a player gets fouled after they have played the ball?

    • InTheMiddleGiroud@alien.topB
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      It’s a phrasing they’ve never used before, to invent a way of not admitting wrongdoing.

      He also played it with his arm.

      Can someone explain to me how Saliba being hit on the arm in a natural jumping position from half a yard away on a scuffed Mudryk-header going a mile off target is a penalty, but Joelinton assisting the goal with his arm in a fouling motion from a 20 yard pass is a-okay.

      Even beyond the handball , the foul is obvious and the offside is clear, there is no logic. Blatant cover-up.

      • clap-hands@alien.topB
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        i haven’t seen any angle showing whether it was offside, could you link a video/screencap?

        • InTheMiddleGiroud@alien.topB
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          https://imgur.com/Z2WSvjj

          And this is a pretty conservative set of lines from the guy who drew it. The line on Gordon is at his knee, rather than at his outstretched foot which isn’t visible from this angle, while the line for the ball is so far right, that if the ball was any further right it’d be visible - even though it obviously hit the left side of Joelinton.

          If they’d drawn the lines at Gordon’s foot from a different angle, the line would go somewhere in the visible space right of Joelinton and behind Gabriel, which would mean that even if you can’t pinpoint the ball, you can see that it’s at least half a yard offside.

          It’s much clearer than the the time they couldn’t find Cucurella’s foot because he was blocked by his own keeper, so they just gave up after 4 minutes and guessed that Martinelli was probably offside to overturn the goal.

          • coffeecakeisland@alien.topB
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            You can’t even see the ball mate. How do you think that is ‘clear and obvious’ It isn’t, and so VAR can’t rule on it.

    • ProstetnicVogonJelz@alien.topB
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Fucking insane. Like, say I had already started my movement to shoot the ball 1 on 1 against the goalie from 15 yards, but then my standing leg got violently slide tackled from behind, nowhere near the ball. No foul apparently 😆