Equaliser Offside

martin_p · Post by **martin_p** » Tue Jan 29, 2019 11:03 pm

When Sanchez heads the ball Lindelof is offside.

Steve1956 · Post by **Steve1956** » Tue Jan 29, 2019 11:04 pm

Think they all looked across to the lineman as well...bottler.

randomclaret2 · Post by **randomclaret2** » Tue Jan 29, 2019 11:05 pm

Par for the course

Rick_Muller · Post by **Rick_Muller** » Tue Jan 29, 2019 11:05 pm

My initial thought too

conyoviejo · Post by **conyoviejo** » Tue Jan 29, 2019 11:06 pm

Just watched the replay and he was offside

cricketfieldclarets · Post by **cricketfieldclarets** » Tue Jan 29, 2019 11:11 pm

Oh well these things even out. Especially with the 3 points we gained at Watford with Woods goal that was offside.

dsr · Post by **dsr** » Tue Jan 29, 2019 11:14 pm

Looked level to me. Bear in mind they were playing traditional rules, not VAR rules. You can't be inch offside in traditional rules, that counts as level.

martin_p · Post by **martin_p** » Tue Jan 29, 2019 11:17 pm

I know they’re very difficult for linesmen to see, but it’s a little galling to be on the wrong side of injury time calls in consecutive league matches.

Rileybobs · Post by **Rileybobs** » Tue Jan 29, 2019 11:24 pm

Doesn’t look off to me

Sutton-Claret · Post by **Sutton-Claret** » Wed Jan 30, 2019 9:06 am

Solskjaers comments about 'the brilliant comeback' are a joke.... The brilliant comeback consisted of a dubious penalty and a lucky, dubious goal that looked offside and was handballed by Jones. The 'brilliant comeback' was undoubtedly helped by the ref.

ClaretTony · Post by **ClaretTony** » Wed Jan 30, 2019 9:18 am

Rileybobs wrote:Doesn’t look off to me

I've not seen any pictures that would answer this one way or the other. I watched the Sky programme last night but they weren't prepared to give us any clues. Probably they were too busy editing out most of what we did. No sign of the McNeil shot in the second half at 1-0.

Hibsclaret · Post by **Hibsclaret** » Wed Jan 30, 2019 9:22 am

Looks off to me but hard to tell.

Unbelievable that with VAR we’d likely have 4 extra points from just the last 2 games. God knows what it would be for the season, certainly one of Arsenal’s goals would have gone for a start

Rick_Muller · Post by **Rick_Muller** » Wed Jan 30, 2019 9:24 am

Two things I notice after taking this screenshot:

1 - He is definitely offside when the ball is headed, our players are the other side of the 6 yard box whereas Lindelöf must be inside the 6 yard box

2 - Bardsley hasn't lost the use of his legs with a grown man placing his hand on his shoulder...

: equaliser.jpg (73.22 KiB) Viewed 4640 times

RammyClaret61 · Post by **RammyClaret61** » Wed Jan 30, 2019 9:28 am

ClaretTony wrote:I've not seen any pictures that would answer this one way or the other. I watched the Sky programme last night but they weren't prepared to give us any clues. Probably they were too busy editing out most of what we did. No sign of the McNeil shot in the second half at 1-0.

The commentators on the Optus feed here made a clear remark about it, “and the flag stayed down” in a kind of surprised tone. Imo.

Down_Rover · Post by **Down_Rover** » Wed Jan 30, 2019 9:48 am

If you look at the still on Clarets player it looks as if Bardsley is playing lindelof onside

ClaretTony · Post by **ClaretTony** » Wed Jan 30, 2019 10:09 am

RammyClaret61 wrote:The commentators on the Optus feed here made a clear remark about it, “and the flag stayed down” in a kind of surprised tone. Imo.

You've got the Sky commentary then, although the same commentary team were very keen to see whether Chris Wood was offside for our second goal.

ClaretTony · Post by **ClaretTony** » Wed Jan 30, 2019 10:21 am

I've just watched it again on Sky, the pic they show from our right back side. From that you can clearly see that Lindelof is in front of our defenders.

Stan Tastic · Post by **Stan Tastic** » Wed Jan 30, 2019 12:21 pm

There surely can't be any Burnley fans against VAR after the last two league games.

Unless they believe the idiotic theory that decisions even themselves out over the season.

martin_p · Post by **martin_p** » Wed Jan 30, 2019 12:26 pm

Stan Tastic wrote:There surely can't be any Burnley fans against VAR after the last two league games.

Unless they believe the idiotic theory that decisions even themselves out over the season.

They tend to even themselves out over a couple of seasons, which means we're due some referees llowing goals when we ARE offside next season! Shame VAR will have turned up by then and subsequently rule them out.

Caballo · Post by **Caballo** » Wed Jan 30, 2019 12:55 pm

martin_p wrote:They tend to even themselves out over a couple of seasons, which means we're due some referees llowing goals when we ARE offside next season! Shame VAR will have turned up by then and subsequently rule them out.

I must have missed all the decisions that went our way last season that prove your statement.

martin_p · Post by **martin_p** » Wed Jan 30, 2019 1:16 pm

Caballo wrote:I must have missed all the decisions that went our way last season that prove your statement.

Ah, but last season is paired up with the season before last!

Spijed · Post by **Spijed** » Wed Jan 30, 2019 1:19 pm

Last season, there was the Lowton handball away to Everton which could easily have resulted in a penalty late on.

Can't think of any others at the moment.

moaninclaret · Post by **moaninclaret** » Wed Jan 30, 2019 1:24 pm

Once again we were robbed by dodgy officials who were bias.

Carport · Post by **Carport** » Wed Jan 30, 2019 1:49 pm

Clear handball by Westwood last night not spotted by Moss.

IndigoLake · Post by **IndigoLake** » Wed Jan 30, 2019 2:09 pm

Down_Rover wrote:If you look at the still on Clarets player it looks as if Bardsley is playing lindelof onside

I haven't seen ClaretsPlayer highlights but the clip I saw made me think that.

Rick_Muller · Post by **Rick_Muller** » Wed Jan 30, 2019 2:26 pm

Down_Rover wrote:If you look at the still on Clarets player it looks as if Bardsley is playing lindelof onside

as shown in the screenshot I posted above it looks like he was offside. I've now seen other highlight clips and it's not so clear.

What I am struggling with is this - If Lingard "wins" a penalty because Hendrick places his hand on his shoulder, why does Bardsley not "win" a free kick for what appears to be a clear use of his shoulder as leverage for the header?

I know I sound bitter, and perhaps I am, but I watched us (for the second time at Old Trafford) lose a 2 goal lead due to dubious officiating and it stinks.

Down_Rover · Post by **Down_Rover** » Wed Jan 30, 2019 5:05 pm

Rick_Muller wrote:as shown in the screenshot I posted above it looks like he was offside. I've now seen other highlight clips and it's not so clear.

What I am struggling with is this - If Lingard "wins" a penalty because Hendrick places his hand on his shoulder, why does Bardsley not "win" a free kick for what appears to be a clear use of his shoulder as leverage for the header?

I know I sound bitter, and perhaps I am, but I watched us (for the second time at Old Trafford) lose a 2 goal lead due to dubious officiating and it stinks.

How naïve are you.

Put quite simply, Lingard plays for a worldwide, crowd pulling, media favourite brand and Bardsley plays for someone else.

On that point I am surprised that no one mentioned Pogba landing horizontally on Barnes head in our area towards the end of the game. He could have broken Ashley's neck. But then again I suppose he is allowed to

cricketfieldclarets · Post by **cricketfieldclarets** » Wed Jan 30, 2019 6:58 pm

Caballo wrote:I must have missed all the decisions that went our way last season that prove your statement.

Plenty of examples. Everton handball as above. Vokes v swansea. Vokes v leicester.

Im definitely against var. Even though it means big decisions against big clubs are far less likely to go our way. For or against.

That said, they have to get referred any way. And would yesterdays have been referred? Would watfords? And theyd still find and inch to punish us by even thoigh thats not what offside is about.

Hipper · Post by **Hipper** » Wed Jan 30, 2019 7:23 pm

This is the equaliser I use:

https://www.amazon.co.uk/Behringer-DEQ2 ... B000CCN152" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

martin_p · Post by **martin_p** » Thu Jan 31, 2019 12:03 am

Think the freeze frame on MOTD tonight leaves no room for doubt. It was offside.

martin_p · Post by **martin_p** » Thu Jan 31, 2019 12:08 am

aggi · Post by **aggi** » Thu Jan 31, 2019 12:11 am

Stan Tastic wrote:There surely can't be any Burnley fans against VAR after the last two league games.

Unless they believe the idiotic theory that decisions even themselves out over the season.

A few of us were discussing this in the pub after the Watford game. Of the 4 of us, 1 wanted VAR, one wasn't sure, 2 of us were willing to accept **** ref decisions rather than VAR.

It doesn't even itself out but I'll take that hit rather than ruining the game.

cricketfieldclarets · Post by **cricketfieldclarets** » Thu Jan 31, 2019 12:47 am

Looking at that freeze frame. Its very very close. But marginally off. However benefit should always go to the attacker. And in this case although he is a toe off, the right call was given under the rules.

Had we scored that and it was disallowed I would be ****** off put it that way. Its way too close to call. If VAR start giving them then we are ******. Totally ruins the game.

Has it gone against us? Yes. Will it improve the game? Imo no!

BFCmaj · Post by **BFCmaj** » Thu Jan 31, 2019 6:20 am

cricketfieldclarets wrote:Looking at that freeze frame. Its very very close. But marginally off. However benefit should always go to the attacker. And in this case although he is a toe off, the right call was given under the rules.

Had we scored that and it was disallowed I would be ****** off put it that way. Its way too close to call. If VAR start giving them then we are ******. Totally ruins the game.

Has it gone against us? Yes. Will it improve the game? Imo no!

It’s the whole of his lower leg that’s off though. And the benefit didn’t go to the attacker when Wood’s Goal against Watford was disallowed. We should be 4 points better off but for incompetent officials.

MDWat · Post by **MDWat** » Thu Jan 31, 2019 6:36 am

cricketfieldclarets wrote:Looking at that freeze frame. Its very very close. But marginally off. However benefit should always go to the attacker. And in this case although he is a toe off, the right call was given under the rules.

Had we scored that and it was disallowed I would be ****** off put it that way. Its way too close to call. If VAR start giving them then we are ******. Totally ruins the game.

Has it gone against us? Yes. Will it improve the game? Imo no!

Totally agree

Indecisive · Post by **Indecisive** » Thu Jan 31, 2019 7:23 am

Although people say the benefit should go with the attacker... is that really what happens?

Against the top six, the ‘big’ club inevitably gets the decision. Maybe subconsciously, the ref or linesman know if they make the wrong decision against a big club it’s going to get blown up and discussed at length on tv and in the papers. The levels of scrutiny are much greater than if they unfairly penalise us. That must be at the back of their minds.

cricketfieldclarets · Post by **cricketfieldclarets** » Thu Jan 31, 2019 8:00 am

Indecisive wrote:Although people say the benefit should go with the attacker... is that really what happens?

Against the top six, the ‘big’ club inevitably gets the decision. Maybe subconsciously, the ref or linesman know if they make the wrong decision against a big club it’s going to get blown up and discussed at length on tv and in the papers. The levels of scrutiny are much greater than if they unfairly penalise us. That must be at the back of their minds.

Its a fair point and I dont doubt it happens even subconsciously. But I honestly think those fine ones will still go their way even with the subjective VAR

cricketfieldclarets · Post by **cricketfieldclarets** » Thu Jan 31, 2019 8:02 am

BFCmaj wrote:It’s the whole of his lower leg that’s off though. And the benefit didn’t go to the attacker when Wood’s Goal against Watford was disallowed. We should be 4 points better off but for incompetent officials.

Looking back, yes it is a bit more than a toe. But all thats visible to us with the benefit of freeze frame is a foot. In real time it will have been extra marginal - especially with Bardsleys hand (yes I know that doesnt count) blocking the line of sight and with it moving so quickly.

Did we even appeal?

Rick_Muller · Post by **Rick_Muller** » Thu Jan 31, 2019 8:09 am

cricketfieldclarets wrote:Looking back, yes it is a bit more than a toe. But all thats visible to us with the benefit of freeze frame is a foot. In real time it will have been extra marginal - especially with Bardsleys hand (yes I know that doesnt count) blocking the line of sight and with it moving so quickly.

Did we even appeal?

I’ve had a day or so to calm down. I think we did appeal, but not enough.

The new screenshot above shows me where the issue is, IMO. The player behind the scorer was definitely offside, but the assistant referee had a judgement call to make in the split second and the 2 players would have been merged in his view, which would lead him to “give the benefit of the doubt” to the goal scorer. All my opinion, and it is “fine margins”. VAR will help with these decisions I'm sure.

I’m still disappointed, but we took a point from Utd at OT...

Bordeauxclaret · Post by **Bordeauxclaret** » Thu Jan 31, 2019 8:32 am

I’ve gone a full 180 on it in the last year or so.

I was dead against it this time last year but I’m now fed up of an uneven playing field being made worse by officials making the wrong calls.
Still a lot of things that need to be ironed out, speed, letting people know what’s going on but it’s needed now.

beddie · Post by **beddie** » Thu Jan 31, 2019 8:55 am

I watched just the highlights last night on MOD. Firstly it was a pen regardless of Lingards theatrics. The equaliser I agree was offside but as SD mentioned it's fine margins. Overall no complaints from me even though I'm dissapointed we let them back in, we'd have taken that before kick off. We need to keep this run going.

martin_p · Post by **martin_p** » Thu Jan 31, 2019 9:26 am

beddie wrote:I watched just the highlights last night on MOD. Firstly it was a pen regardless of Lingards theatrics. The equaliser I agree was offside but as SD mentioned it's fine margins. Overall no complaints from me even though I'm dissapointed we let them back in, we'd have taken that before kick off. We need to keep this run going.

It just annoying the number of times we’re the wrong side of these fine margins. Bring on VAR.

Claret Till I Die · Post by **Claret Till I Die** » Thu Jan 31, 2019 10:06 am

Is he offside after Heaton became the last player to touch the ball ?

Hipper · Post by **Hipper** » Thu Jan 31, 2019 10:44 am

Indecisive wrote:Against the top six, the ‘big’ club inevitably gets the decision. Maybe subconsciously, the ref or linesman know if they make the wrong decision against a big club it’s going to get blown up and discussed at length on tv and in the papers. The levels of scrutiny are much greater than if they unfairly penalise us. That must be at the back of their minds.

Of course that's completely untrue. On MOTD there were examples of things not going the big club's way: a Liverpool penalty for example, or Maguire not getting a red card.

Rick_Muller · Post by **Rick_Muller** » Thu Jan 31, 2019 10:54 am

Claret Till I Die wrote:Is he offside after Heaton became the last player to touch the ball ?

Yes, because of the phase of play - he was offside when his teammate played the ball forward in that phase

Erasmus · Post by **Erasmus** » Thu Jan 31, 2019 11:11 am

I am always biased in favour of Burnley, but I thought it was a penalty and that the second was just about onside, about the same as Wood's against Watford. I think we did benefit from a missed offside for our goal against Brighton when Wood, I think it was, went up to challenge their keeper just before we scored.