Match Thread Coventry City v Manchester United - FA Cup Semi-Final (2 Viewers)

[SeaSeeEffCee]

The idea that we were the victims of some sort of corruption falls down a bit when you consider we were given a pen in the 90th minute that was hardly nailed on. Surely the shadowy cabal who were intent on United making it to the final would have simply not given us the pen?

 

---

[Calista]

He was on

One last try on this.
Here's the pictures I posted back in April. At the crucial moment (pics 3 &4), Haji stuck his leg out and under the inflexible rules (that give zero leeway to the attacker) he was offside. If you want to spend the rest of your life disbelieving it, that's up to you.

 

[Ccfcisparks]

One last try on this.
Here's the pictures I posted back in April. At the crucial moment (pics 3 &4), Haji stuck his leg out and under the inflexible rules (that give zero leeway to the attacker) he was offside. If you want to spend the rest of your life disbelieving it, that's up to you.

View attachment 39173

Not a very good angle for you to conclude on

 

[Hutch11]

Yes, you can argue that the rules should be changed to give more leeway to the attacking team, but that's a different matter. I confirmed in a series of photos I posted at the time that it was offside under the rules as they stand. I don't get why people are carrying this lifelong burden that we were robbed. Frustrating and incredibly unlucky, but no robbery involved.

Who confirmed that your lines were exact?

 

[Perennial Lurker]

Who confirmed that your lines were exact?

Stevie Wonder

 

[Calista]

Not a very good angle for you to conclude on

It's crystal clear to me, and that makes me comfortable with it. But believe what you want.

 

[Calista]

Who confirmed that your lines were exact?

VAR

Edit: you've got to move them a hell of a lot to get the answer you'd like

 

[clint van damme]

It wasn't given. Cherish the memories but move on.

 

[Brighton Sky Blue]

It wasn't given. Cherish the memories but move on.

One heck of a memory mind.

 

[Robinshio]

One last try on this.
Here's the pictures I posted back in April. At the crucial moment (pics 3 &4), Haji stuck his leg out and under the inflexible rules (that give zero leeway to the attacker) he was offside. If you want to spend the rest of your life disbelieving it, that's up to you.

View attachment 39173

Your argument cannot be conclusive without a lot more frames between 2 onside and 3 offside unless you get an offside in advance of o hare touching it

 

[Sky_Blue_Dreamer]

The line going straight through Wan-Bissaka's boot has never been explained has it?

I remember someone somewhere saying that it was only illustrative and not the actual image used by VAR, though that has never made sense to me. If it's not what the decision is being made on why show it? May as well get one of those court artists in.

 

[David O'Day]

The line going straight through Wan-Bissaka's boot has never been explained has it?

yes it has, that was a thickened line used only for TV pictures. It's not the line used for the decision.

 

[David O'Day]

He was on

On the pitch yes, onside? Sadly no

 

[skybluegod]

Do people really still think it was onside?

It was off, the argument you should be having is was it off be enough to justify VAR involvement but in the current system where the question is a binary onside or offside the call was right.

Tbf I'm not sure there is an argument for a change away from binary on or off-side. The other options would be to add an arbitrary distance to it which would still present the same problem of 'its only a toenail over that distance' and then the other way would be a subjective 'clear advantage gained' call which would only cause more faff.

As much as wright gained no advantage and I would love for it to have counted, I wouldn't have the offside implementation changed.

 

[Calista]

Your argument cannot be conclusive without a lot more frames between 2 onside and 3 offside unless you get an offside in advance of o hare touching it

I'm not VAR. If you want 'conclusive', go to their decision taken with all the equipment at their disposal. My pictures were a genuine attempt to see if there was any mileage in accusing VAR of cocking it up, but trying to draw lines to make Haji onside is an impossible job, which explains why nobody has done it.

Alternatively, just say forever that we were robbed.

 

[Brighton Sky Blue]

I'm not VAR. If you want 'conclusive', go to their decision taken with all the equipment at their disposal. My pictures were a genuine attempt to see if there was any mileage in accusing VAR of cocking it up, but trying to draw lines to make Haji onside is an impossible job, which explains why nobody has done it.

Alternatively, just say forever that we were robbed.

VAR lines drawn by the same experts who go ‘yeah that looks about right’?

 

[Skybluekyle]

One last try on this.
Here's the pictures I posted back in April. At the crucial moment (pics 3 &4), Haji stuck his leg out and under the inflexible rules (that give zero leeway to the attacker) he was offside. If you want to spend the rest of your life disbelieving it, that's up to you.

View attachment 39173

Take these pictures down please, my FIFA Ultimate Team name is predicated on the idea of Wright being onside.

"WrightWasOnside" is more succinct than "WrightMaybeOnButCalista'sPicturesSuggestHeMayNotHaveBeen

The latter is too wordy!

 

[CovInEssex]

It isn't that the goal was offside that hurts. It's that VAR robbed us. If VAR didn't exist the linesman either a) plays on and we score or b) we play on for a second before play is stopped, no Torp goal and no dreaming.

 

[Frostie]

yes it has, that was a thickened line used only for TV pictures. It's not the line used for the decision.

Where was that said mate? Is there a link?

 

[PUSB-We_are_going_up]

I think the offside rule needs a change, should be to the benefit of the attacker but its now for the benefit of the defenders.
I propose:
If a clear advantage is gained by being offside such as a 1 yard gap remains offside, if a not so clear advantage stays up with the ref and linos they can make their minds up, and a clear disadvantage such as a boot in it but being the wider player or marked by a defender or numbers disadvantage.
As such an offside may be ruled if there is a clear advantage gained but if its something like a boot or head or knee but doesnt lead to an advantage to the attacker by having it offside can either be subjective to the referee or ruled onside. Such as the Torp goal remaining onside and standing, as Haji gains no advantage from how marginal this offside was.

 

[shepardo01]

Are people aware that the ex head of PGMOL was interviewed specifically about this goal.
He said that the cameras used in the current system - the regular stadium cams - are not fit for purpose to judge calls such as this
Due to low frame rate it is impossible judge exactly when the ball is played so an accurate call cannot be made when it is as tight as this.

They were looking for a frame showing he was offside. If they looked for a frame where he was inside, they could have found one!

The new system (not yet being used in the UK - but used by UEFA) has a sensor in the ball and purposely placed and appropriate cameras.

Anything shown in previous posts just does not and cannot show accurately that he was offside!!

 

[SIR ERNIE]

Who confirmed that your lines were exact?

Bob Higgins, the bloke who drives the mower that makes the lines.

 

[skybluecam]

Can we stop guys, just reading the thread title annoyed me again.

 

[shmmeee]

One last try on this.
Here's the pictures I posted back in April. At the crucial moment (pics 3 &4), Haji stuck his leg out and under the inflexible rules (that give zero leeway to the attacker) he was offside. If you want to spend the rest of your life disbelieving it, that's up to you.

View attachment 39173

Nah he’s on