Couldn't tell from Match of the Day, because the picture they showed was taken after the ball had been kicked. You can see the ball is at least a foot away from McNeil's foot. They presumably didn't have frame of film taken at the moment the ball was kicked.ClaretTony wrote:How close was the offside decision for the goal ruled out by VAR? The player in the right back position looks as though he could be playing him onside.
Match of the Day
Re: Match of the Day
-
- Posts: 11547
- Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 12:33 pm
- Been Liked: 3197 times
- Has Liked: 1876 times
- Contact:
Re: Match of the Day
martin_p wrote:Even if that were true it’d be ‘they had about 5 chances and scored 2 of them. Westwood is good at corners but I don’t think him swinging one in can be considered a chance
Maybe he’s thinking Wood’s “first” goal should have stood
Re: Match of the Day
I watched that stream too, but the problem is the line us on Woods arm not his foot, so he is naturally leaning forward. When did offside change to any part of the body rather than feet?Vegas Claret wrote:inches but he was off, the coverage over here actually showed the VAR drawing 2 lines on the pitch, sooner they bring in a daylight rule the better.
-
- Posts: 67962
- Joined: Thu Dec 24, 2015 3:07 pm
- Been Liked: 32574 times
- Has Liked: 5287 times
- Location: Burnley
- Contact:
Re: Match of the Day
The saves his goalkeeper was making must have all been a blur to himTheOriginalLongsider wrote:Pellegrini - they had about 5 chances and scored 3 of them.
-
- Posts: 3108
- Joined: Sun Jan 03, 2016 9:46 pm
- Been Liked: 1132 times
- Has Liked: 302 times
- Location: Melbourne, Australia.
Re: Match of the Day
Where have you been the last 4 months?ClaretAL wrote:When did offside change to any part of the body rather than feet?
-
- Posts: 1349
- Joined: Thu Jan 24, 2019 2:08 pm
- Been Liked: 217 times
- Has Liked: 543 times
Re: Match of the Day
we had 12 shots on target, surely a record ?ClaretTony wrote:The saves his goalkeeper was making must have all been a blur to him
Re: Match of the Day
Yep that’s what I said - would be surprised if that wasn’t our highest total in the premier league.AndyClaret wrote:we had 12 shots on target, surely a record ?
The ratio of shots to shots on targets was very impressive too - which is partly down to how much time and space our players were given yesterday.
As for MoTD would it be too difficult for them to have a bit of consistency and give the Wood VAR the same comment as the ruled out Sheff United goal ? It’s exactly the same point Murphy is making....even though he was wrong about the “clear and obvious” bit and should be saying that we need to change the offside rule now (just like needing to change the hand ball rule).
Re: Match of the Day
I'm in Fuerteventura so watched on Bein Sports. Andy Gray was going spare at half time, he showed it from a different angle and when the ball was played the right back was playing Wood onside.ClaretTony wrote:How close was the offside decision for the goal ruled out by VAR? The player in the right back position looks as though he could be playing him onside.
He was fuming at full time, he reckoned it was the shadow of the Sheffield United player's boot that was offside.
VAR will not work in England due to the incompetence of the referees. They want to make up their own rules to prevent legitimate goals been scored. Hopefully the upcoming meeting might change things however due to the arrogance of the PL referees I can't see things improving.
This user liked this post: k90bfc
-
- Posts: 1719
- Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 8:39 am
- Been Liked: 690 times
- Has Liked: 406 times
- Location: Chalfont St. Giles
Re: Match of the Day
VAR needs to be run by technical / analytical people and not football people.
People who can focus just on the data.
Otherwise it’s the same old referees making the same old interpretations.
People who can focus just on the data.
Otherwise it’s the same old referees making the same old interpretations.
This user liked this post: Rick_Muller
-
- Posts: 3221
- Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2016 2:23 pm
- Been Liked: 746 times
- Has Liked: 927 times
Re: Match of the Day
As pathetic as it was NOT to highlight McNeil`s wing play, I don`t think it`s an anti-Burnley thing. I suspect it is simply down to the fact over the games shown, they are given a remit to highlight one example of excellence, another example of ineptitude and let`s say one of great team cohesion, etc, etc. If there was a finer, more creative performance though I`d be amazed (suspect poker boy Maddison could fit the bill as he seems to be the golden boy and he scored a goal).
THAT cross for Wood`s disallowed goal though was as good as you will see and it was criminal to not show it.
THAT cross for Wood`s disallowed goal though was as good as you will see and it was criminal to not show it.
Re: Match of the Day
Yes very much a what went wrong episode.cbx750 wrote:We're not, West Ham are.
Re: Match of the Day
Mike Riley needs to be sacked. Mike Halsey tweeted about not following protocol of using the pitch side monitors.
It appears the English referees , in their wisdom, have come up with their own version of VAR.
It appears the English referees , in their wisdom, have come up with their own version of VAR.
Re: Match of the Day
We are up next on Goals on Sunday
-
- Posts: 25445
- Joined: Sat Mar 26, 2016 12:46 am
- Been Liked: 6930 times
- Has Liked: 11660 times
- Location: Leeds
Re: Match of the Day
Even though it's around 25 years since, the MOTD theme tune STILL reminds me of remembering I had to get up at 6am the following morning to do my Sunday morning paper round.
Re: Match of the Day
I reckon Rice had watched Seans post match interview on Player before saying that...tiger76 wrote:Yeah! weird how they never showed that incident.I found it amusing the commentator praising their keeper for making saves at 3-0 down,after he'd gifted 2 goals away,fat lot of good pulling off shot stops when the game is effectively over as a contest.
Declan Rice was honest in his comments,we bullied them all over the park,and they didn't fancy it,a complete role reversal from last week.
The stats reckon 71 .... yes no kidding ... they actually stated we committed 71 fouls to their 10
https://www.burnleyfootballclub.com/claretsplayer/#" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
-
- Posts: 2512
- Joined: Sat Jan 23, 2016 9:21 am
- Been Liked: 1667 times
- Has Liked: 2985 times
Re: Match of the Day
McNeill's incredible De Bruyne-like cross followed by Wood's thunderous header......footballing perfection sadly chalked off by, maybe, an arm offside. Still, I'll be re-running it on the iplayer a few times this week I'm sure.
This user liked this post: FactualFrank
-
- Posts: 30735
- Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2016 4:00 am
- Been Liked: 11063 times
- Has Liked: 5668 times
- Location: clue is in the title
Re: Match of the Day
ClaretAL wrote:I watched that stream too, but the problem is the line us on Woods arm not his foot, so he is naturally leaning forward. When did offside change to any part of the body rather than feet?
Agree 100% Al, it's a complete nonsense
-
- Posts: 25445
- Joined: Sat Mar 26, 2016 12:46 am
- Been Liked: 6930 times
- Has Liked: 11660 times
- Location: Leeds
Re: Match of the Day
It was quite orgasmic I agree.Stalbansclaret wrote:McNeill's incredible De Bruyne-like cross followed by Wood's thunderous header......footballing perfection sadly chalked off by, maybe, an arm offside. Still, I'll be re-running it on the iplayer a few times this week I'm sure.
-
- Posts: 176
- Joined: Wed Apr 03, 2019 8:34 pm
- Been Liked: 34 times
- Has Liked: 31 times
Re: Match of the Day
Thanks Sandy.SandyLaneClaret wrote:Ref blew his whistle before the ball went in the net.