Not a very good angle for you to conclude onOne 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
Who confirmed that your lines were exact?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.
Stevie WonderWho confirmed that your lines were exact?
It's crystal clear to me, and that makes me comfortable with it. But believe what you want.Not a very good angle for you to conclude on
VARWho confirmed that your lines were exact?
One heck of a memory mind.It wasn't given. Cherish the memories but move on.
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 itOne 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
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.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.The line going straight through Wan-Bissaka's boot has never been explained has it?
On the pitch yes, onside? Sadly noHe was on
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.
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.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
VAR lines drawn by the same experts who go ‘yeah that looks about right’?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.
Take these pictures down please, my FIFA Ultimate Team name is predicated on the idea of Wright being onside.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
Where was that said mate? Is there a link?yes it has, that was a thickened line used only for TV pictures. It's not the line used for the decision.
Bob Higgins, the bloke who drives the mower that makes the lines.Who confirmed that your lines were exact?
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
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?