GWT: EPL Match Day 2

Jersey Fresh

Video Et Taceo
Feb 23, 2004
26,154
9,093
T.A.
No way that's a straight red. Or no way it should be. Could see it given based on the fact that depending on the ref no one knows game to game, I suppose.

Tadic's tackle in today's match was wayy worse and wasn't red.
 

Blender

Registered User
Dec 2, 2009
51,305
45,253
His boots were on the ground and he won the ball. Yellow at most. Not to mention the stoke players dragging Ox like a wind-sprint parachute leading up to it.

His right leg was off the ground and his cleats were up, plus he went in pretty reckless without being in control of himself. Yellow at a minimum, could have been a red.
 

Havre

Registered User
Jul 24, 2011
8,459
1,733
His right leg was off the ground and his cleats were up, plus he went in pretty reckless without being in control of himself. Yellow at a minimum, could have been a red.

This.

I think the ref might have regretted not having given Arsenal a free kick first. Absurd to give nothing.
 

KJS14

Registered User
Jun 13, 2013
2,899
878
His right leg was off the ground and his cleats were up, plus he went in pretty reckless without being in control of himself. Yellow at a minimum, could have been a red.

His right foot was the one that won the ball, no? It wasn't above the center of the ball.
 

Blender

Registered User
Dec 2, 2009
51,305
45,253
His right foot was the one that won the ball, no? It wasn't above the center of the ball.

His foot is most definitely above the center of the ball. For one the ball is bouncing so it's a bit off the ground, and then Mustafi comes down on it from an angle with his leg well above it coming down to the upper half of the ball. His leg follows through and his cleats came down right on Pieters foot/ankle.
 

Live in the Now

Registered User
Dec 17, 2005
53,029
7,489
LA
Arsenal will struggle whenever they don't have Sanchez and whenever they don't play some actual central defenders.
 

KJS14

Registered User
Jun 13, 2013
2,899
878
His foot is most definitely above the center of the ball. For one the ball is bouncing so it's a bit off the ground, and then Mustafi comes down on it from an angle with his leg well above it coming down to the upper half of the ball. His leg follows through and his cleats came down right on Pieters foot/ankle.

I'll wait to see it again, but his foot was not as high as you are making it out to be. Even the commentators said it was at ball level, and the ball was not bouncing when he made contact.

Arsenal will struggle whenever they don't have Sanchez and whenever they don't play some actual central defenders.

Not saying you're wrong, but they had a good goal denied and possibly 2 penalty claims denied today. They should have at least gotten a draw.
 

Paulie Gualtieri

R.I.P. Tony Sirico
May 18, 2016
12,312
3,052
That offside call was quite debatable. Looked to me that he could've been offside by just an inch. If it was that close most refs probably wouldn't call at all.
 

S E P H

Cloud IX
Mar 5, 2010
30,706
16,238
Toruń, PL
It's the year 2000 and effin 17 and we still don't have replays for offside and onside goals. I get that penalties are harder to judge, but it's such a crime for offsides.

Lacazette's goal was obviously one of the worst good onside goals I've seen in a long time. But I have a bigger issue involving this squad....

I am an Avs fan and last season I saw goals against from all certain aspects in hockey. You wouldn't believe how many goals happened against us which came from offencive turnovers. It's beyond the rational thought to count and any Avs fan here can conclude that they witnessed the same scenario. A similar situation to the Avs is the AMOUNT of chances an opponent team gets when Mesut ****ing Ozil turns the ball over in the offencive zone. He's done it numerous times last season and so far he's done it at least five to seven times in two ****ing games. Stoke's only goal comes from a pathetic Ozil turnover which gave them space on the counterattack and eventually score against a backline of Mustafi and Monreal. I cannot simply state how ****ing INFURIATING it is to watch a player like him.

I love Monreal and the amount he's developed here should go down as one of the best in the EPL. But he's not a CB and doesn't have the strengths to be a CB. Where the **** is Laurent Koscielny? When did he get an red card to miss like five matches? But don't worry, because Cahill at the Community Shield is able to play the next ****ing match. The definition of insanity for all the pro-Wenger posters here by the logic of Einstein's famous line...

"Insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results."

It's beyond ridiculous how Arsenal are a team who win because the strengths solely on two players; Cazorla and Sanchez. Cazorla has a ludicrous amount of IQ to know what decisions to make and at what times similar to the same impact Verratti has for PSG. You won't find these players anymore for 20, 30, or 40 million and how much Wenger wants Xhaka to be that, he isn't. Xhaka is looking more like a deep-lying playmaker with a temper than he does as a genuine BXB midfielder. And because Wenger is old and senile and stubborn he doesn't have a clue that a proper CDM would benefit immensely for a system which is 3 defenders wide and break down any counterattack. Hell, not even a CDM, but a powerful BXB which Man United have in Pogba and Matic. With Sanchez, you have a player who's unbelievable work ethic and technical skills gives Arsenal a dangerous player for inside the box. For the people who watched today, Arsenal are allergic to get inside the box except for one or two players (Alexis changes this a great deal).

I hope this post starts to give some understanding to the pro-Wenger crowd that he's past his prime.

Some other notes...

- WTF is with the camera angle at Anfield, disastrous? On the topic of Anfield, it's like a Neil Diamond concert; a lot of singing-along, but rather toothless.

- Mkhitaryan has to be the worst CAM/LAM shooting forward that has talent. His shooting is so bad that it's like a man trying to pick up chicks in a Lesbian bar.

- I was going to give Man United some credit because they look damn good, but both wins have come against dreadful sides. West Ham is looking like a relegation team, all that potential they had a couple seasons ago is all falling apart. Swansea deserved a better fate though IMHO.

That offside call was quite debatable. Looked to me that he could've been offside by just an inch. If it was that close most refs probably wouldn't call at all.
You mean the Lacazette goal? It's not even close to being debatable, only part of him which was offside was his boot tip which was like 5 cm. It was as good of a goal that there is in the game of football. Wonderful finish though.
 
Last edited:

Havre

Registered User
Jul 24, 2011
8,459
1,733
So he is 5cm offside, but onside?

If he is offside he is offside. I agree it is not debatable. As it is clearly the correct decision.
 

S E P H

Cloud IX
Mar 5, 2010
30,706
16,238
Toruń, PL
So he is 5cm offside, but onside?

If he is offside he is offside. I agree it is not debatable. As it is clearly the correct decision.
You should go and watch another sport if a tip of his boot is deemed worthy of an offside call. And this was the absolutely worst outcome of the call, when you deem something offsides by a boot tip. In the end, if we account all aspects of the play, he was most definitely onside.

I'm not blaming the loss on the call though, Arsenal should have been better at all facets of the game today and they weren't (which shows Wenger's incompetence).
 

hatterson

Registered User
Apr 12, 2010
34,950
12,220
North Tonawanda, NY
I didn't watch the replays too close, but it seems extremely close, and he was moving the opposite direction of the defenders so being just a fraction of a second off means it goes from super tight to way offside. That makes it an extremely hard call for the linesman to make in real time.

It looks onside, but I have no idea, and its close enough replay may not overturn the offside call anyway.
 

Havre

Registered User
Jul 24, 2011
8,459
1,733
I thought Poll explained it very well in the studio. Stevie G is quite thick but even he kind of understood even if he didn't want to.
 

Evilo

Registered User
Mar 17, 2002
61,956
8,524
France
Even with the replay, it's hardly easy to call it offside. Which by the rules, is called onside.
 

YNWA14

Onbreekbaar
Dec 29, 2010
34,543
2,560
Even with the replay, it's hardly easy to call it offside. Which by the rules, is called onside.

You had a different stance on this literally a few days ago.

Offside is offside whether it's by a millimeter or a mile. If it's really close it won't be overturned anyway. Really looking forward to the game next weekend.
 

Havre

Registered User
Jul 24, 2011
8,459
1,733
Yes. I forgot. French player scoring offside goal = onside.

How the linesman got it right I don't know, but it really doesn't matter if it is 5cm or 5m. All the same.
 

Evilo

Registered User
Mar 17, 2002
61,956
8,524
France
You had a different stance on this literally a few days ago.

Offside is offside whether it's by a millimeter or a mile. If it's really close it won't be overturned anyway. Really looking forward to the game next weekend.

You're talking about Matip? There were 50 cms at least.
Here you can't even tell with the replay.

So stop lying, thanks.
 

Live in the Now

Registered User
Dec 17, 2005
53,029
7,489
LA
Carragher and Neville did a thing last year with the referee that made it seem like they were basically guessing on those calls.

They do need replay.
 

Evilo

Registered User
Mar 17, 2002
61,956
8,524
France
Yes. I forgot. French player scoring offside goal = onside.

How the linesman got it right I don't know, but it really doesn't matter if it is 5cm or 5m. All the same.

A rival team scores and gets called for a wrong offside, Havre = good offside.

Anyway, I still would like a proof he was offside. Because he wasn't. Even with replay.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

YNWA14

Onbreekbaar
Dec 29, 2010
34,543
2,560
http://hfboards.mandatory.com/showpost.php?p=132882515&postcount=977
http://hfboards.mandatory.com/showpost.php?p=132882827&postcount=980

He was going to block all those super prospects you had.

The only argument you could come up against this banter is coming with Ibra YET AGAIN (something you've done 3 or 4 times already) even though I recognized before mid-season I had underrated the Mourinho aspect?
Really? :laugh:

So I never said that I didn't like the Solanke signing and that there was nothing wrong with it? Thanks for clearing that up and proving yourself wrong again.

As for the Matip thing being a lie...lol...the picture clearly showed they were completely in line but because you have a bias there you change your offside opinions unsurprisingly. Whatever suits you. Keep grasping.

Well I mean the Ibra thing was just funny because you were losing it on anyone suggesting someone else might outscore him and you said it was a foregone conclusion he'd win the golden boot. But then came a long the illustrious Harry Kane...
 

Havre

Registered User
Jul 24, 2011
8,459
1,733
Even SEPH says he is 5cm offside. They showed the still image multiple times in the studio. If you can't even be bothered to see that before making one of your ridiculous statements that is on you.
 

S E P H

Cloud IX
Mar 5, 2010
30,706
16,238
Toruń, PL
I get that the actual rule says any body part is deemed offside.

HOWEVER, 80% of goals that come from offside/onside plays have arms, heads, legs, and even upper torsos by players in offside positions all the freakin' time. If you want to call that goal offside Havre, do it, but don't be a hypocrite in the future and deem that same type of goal onside if a Spurs or Reds player do it (I think you're a Liverpool fan).

We've seen worst offside's be called for good calls, so as a Gunner fan, I have a case that, that goal should be good.

Even SEPH says he is 5cm offside. They showed the still image multiple times in the studio. If you can't even be bothered to see that before making one of your ridiculous statements that is on you.
I was talking about the ABSOLUTE worst case scenario, which he might have been 5 cm with a boot tip. Everyone on NBCSN and Sky Sports said it was a good call and again go watch another sport if 5 cm should be considered offsides.
 

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

-->