Wolves 1-2 Man City: Verdict Thread

[jd1981]

That now all makes sense

Yep so it’s Atwell doing his usual, if ours is given last season fair enough it’s the complete inconsistency

 

[BeaverWolf]

The contact was well before the header, when he was onside. At the point of the header he was ducked and out of the way of the keeper's line of sight.

So I can see why they've overruled the on-field decision (which was offside BTW. The lino flagged late).

Sa was still unbalanced so it is a foul. Both Sky pundits agreed on this.

 

[Squeak]

Its subjective therefore you stay with the onfield call surely?

Dunno. Can definitely argue it both ways. The assistant who gave it offside is only seeing a side view and has no real clue if the player is in front of the keeper or not. So, he's right to flag. The ref then gives it offside and VAR takes a look. Of course, we have the West Ham experience to look back on but this one is a bit more clear cut in my opinion. Silva isn't anywhere close to Sa when the header is made. Sure, he's backed into him when the corner is taken but he isn't offside then and more importantly, the ref and VAR don't see a foul there. And if you want consistency, Silva was only penalised once for standing on Sa's toes from a corner first half. He was never penalised for backing into him. So, is it a fair goal? I'm on the side that the officials were right and I'd be pissed if we had one ruled out in similar circumstances.

And yes, we can look back on the West Ham game but our player was definitely more in the line of sight IMO.

 

[White Wolf]

In which case I'll have to change tune on VAR not being relevant.

The comparisons to the Kilman goal against West Ham are fair. I don't think either is offside FWIW.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1848017435686732027

Unlike that bellend to spell our name right, and he's defending us!

 

[Jinky]

Sky failed to mention it but the on-field decision was a late flag for offside. Therefore in order to allow the goal they had to go to the monitor.

This is almost worse! Besides, they didn’t give offside did they? Stones was off celebrating in the stands!

Anyway. I forgot to mention Sa. Despite his faults, what he gives you that Johnstone doesn’t, is the saves he made today. If Gaz drops him after that performance then he needs taking out back and shooting. The shirt is Sa’s to lose now.

 

[Carsy]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1848017435686732027

I can see both sides. I’m not appalled by the decision. If it was the other way round I’d be wanting the goal.

Onfield decision was no goal apparently sky sports are saying?

 

[The Bear]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1848017633133613354

 

[Deutsch Wolf]

And yes, we can look back on the West Ham game but our player was definitely more in the line of sight IMO.

 

[The Bear]

Sa was still unbalanced so it is a foul. Both Sky pundits agreed on this.

But he wasn't offside at the point he makes contact with Sa. Only once Stones heads the ball.

 

[jd1981]

I can see both sides. I’m not appalled by the decision. If it was the other way round I’d be wanting the goal.

Onfield decision was no goal apparently sky sports are saying?

So they re-referring the game as they said they wouldn’t complete over interference

 

[GLASGOWOLF]

Different ‘phase of play’

Bullshit

 

[Carsy]

But he wasn't offside at the point he makes contact with Sa. Only once Stones heads the ball.

Can only give it as a foul, which fwiw I don’t think it is

 

[Carsy]

Bullshit

Well, factually it is. Can only give it for an off the ball foul. Which IMV it isn’t

 

[Deutsch Wolf]

Well, factually it is. Can only give it for an off the ball foul. Which IMV it isn’t

I don't think it's a foul

But if it's offside last season, it's offside this season. Unless we're saying you can stand in front of the keeper if you're 5'7'' but not if you're 5'11''.

 

[Carsy]

Appreciate in a game where a lot of decisions are ‘subjective’ you will get some inconsistency, but it does fuel the ‘big team bias’ narrative abit

 

[Carsy]

I don't think it's a foul

But if it's offside last season, it's offside this season. Unless we're saying you can stand in front of the keeper if you're 5'7'' but not if you're 5'11''.

I totally agree. It’s the inconsistency. I don’t think either should’ve been disallowed

 

[Squeak]

Nice try but now show the behind the goal or in front of the goal images. Side on shows nothing about keeper's vision.

 

[jd1981]

Nice try but now show the behind the goal or in front of the goal images. Side on shows nothing about keeper's vision.

They’re both in front of the keeper are we now penalising people because of how tall they’re?

 

[Tony Towner]

I don't think it's a foul

But if it's offside last season, it's offside this season. Unless we're saying you can stand in front of the keeper if you're 5'7'' but not if you're 5'11''.

He's not in front of him when Stones heads it. They aren't the same. Fwiw I thought the Chirewa one was bullshit too. The potential foul is the issue which Kavanagh wasn't shown

 

[AndyWolves]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1848019095825903859