West Ham United Football Club verdict

[rubyloo]

Apparently while thousands of wolves fans celebrated and the players gathered for the restart, video assistant referee Tim Robinson ‘spotted’ Chirewa in an offside position- well done Tim ! - one to tell the grandkids about I’m sure!

You must be especially delighted that no one can ever remember a goal like that being ruled out before - you really are setting new standards.

Bravo! - a great afternoon’s work.

 

[SingYourHeartsOut]

What's that got to do with anything? He WAS interfering with play. He had to be, he was standing right in front of Fabianski.

No he doesn't have to be, this is the law.

Offside offence

A player in an offside position at the moment the ball is played or touched* by a team-mate is only penalised on becoming involved in active play by:

• interfering with play by playing or touching a ball passed or touched by a team-mate or
• interfering with an opponent by:
  
  • preventing an opponent from playing or being able to play the ball by clearly obstructing the opponent’s line of vision or
  • challenging an opponent for the ball or
  • clearly attempting to play a ball which is close when this action impacts on an opponent or
  • making an obvious action which clearly impacts on the ability of an opponent to play the ball

Which bit do you think he's guilty of?

As soon as everyone agrees there's no way Fabianski is saving the header then there's no way Chirewa can be offside.

 

[northnorfolkwolf]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1776644448765538422

Post it here too, if our goal from a corner is disallowed why wasn’t theirs,? 2 West Ham players in the line of Sa’s sight of the ball. Isn’t that interference?

You can't be offside from a corner. Totally different situation from our disallowed goal.

 

[lobodelsur]

Guessing no one is going to moan about VAR when in the same game they had one ruled out for a very soft reason that would have made it 2:1 a lot earlier than the JWP corner……

Don't think that Emerson treading on Semedo's achilles can really be called 'soft'.

 

[Monketron]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1776708970327007683

When you have the opposition fans saying that it says it all!

 

[maws]

You can't be offside from a corner. Totally different situation from our disallowed goal.

Obstruction! Does he touch Sa yes, does he challenge for the ball no! Yes it’s pedantic yes every corner will be a foul but you can’t go ohhh this rule got this but not for that

 

[Sussex Wolf]

GON says Moyes and Fabianski both said it was a 'scandalous decision'. I don't believe either would have criticised the decision and certainly not using the word scandalous.

Because you’re a close personal friend of Moyes and Fabianski… LOL

 

[northnorfolkwolf]

Out of interest, what makes you think he'd make that up though?

FFS, get real. What manager and/or player after a game is going to say a VAR decision in their favour was 'scandalous'. FFS.

 

[SingYourHeartsOut]

For anyone who thinks Fabianski couldn't see the header

https://twitter.com/x/status/1776689236781003009

 

[rubyloo]

We need a cold case review of every goal that’s been scored from a corner for the last hundred years- i think about 50% of them should be ruled out.

 

[SakosRightFoot]

The agendas of some people on here to scapegoat Doherty at any opportunity is impressive. If you watch the video he gets a toe to the ball to win it back, Toti inexplicably plays it back to him when he’s facing his own goal so he pokes it back to Toti to clear who takes another touch and loses it, followed by Kilman sticking his arm out and palming the ball out of play, yet out of all that it’s all Doherty’s fault? Not a single person on this thread has questioned why Toti didn’t clear it on 1 of the 2 occasions he could have done, they just blame Doherty for passing it to him.

 

[Fenrir_]

Every goal is different. Our lad was standing in an offside position right in front of the keeper and obviously interfering with play. If he'd been in an offside position, say standing by one of the posts the goal would have stood. I can't see how you or anyone else can't see this. You're letting your emotion affect your judgement.

Unless Fabianski's eyes are in his right shoulder his view was in no way obstructed by Chirewa

 

[northnorfolkwolf]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1776708970327007683

When you have the opposition fans saying that it says it all!

FFS, a fan, not 'opposition fans'.

 

[Mancwolf56]

FFS, a fan, not 'opposition fans'.

Didn’t he say West Ham fan?

 

[SingYourHeartsOut]

Because you’re a close personal friend of Moyes and Fabianski… LOL

Moyes oddly didn't want to admit they'd got away with one in his post match interview - this says a lot about how it all works for me, everyone wants to make the refs think they've been unfairly treated (although obviously we actually have been!)

 

[Mancwolf56]

FFS, get real. What manager and/or player after a game is going to say a VAR decision in their favour was 'scandalous'. FFS.

GON used the word ‘scandalous’, he said Moyes said it was a bad decision

 

[SingYourHeartsOut]

FFS, a fan, not 'opposition fans'.

Just a simple question. If Chirewa wasn't stood there would Fabianski have saved it?

 

[JadeWolf]

Every goal is different. Our lad was standing in an offside position right in front of the keeper and obviously interfering with play. If he'd been in an offside position, say standing by one of the posts the goal would have stood. I can't see how you or anyone else can't see this. You're letting your emotion affect your judgement.

Come on now. I know you like to take the opposite view sometimes for debate but you can’t seriously think it’s offside.

 

[Sussex Wolf]

Moyes oddly didn't want to admit they'd got away with one in his post match interview - this says a lot about how it all works for me, everyone wants to make the refs think they've been unfairly treated (although obviously we actually have been!)

We don’t know what was said in private. If either Moyes or Fabianski objected to how Gary described their private comments in his public post match, then I imagine they would make some public statement themselves.

 

[lobodelsur]

I'm going there. Because I can't stand to hear that was the correct call and/or utilisation of VAR or implementation of the offside law.

So...

Laws of the game:

OFFSIDE if interfering with an opponent by:

• preventing an opponent from playing or being able to play the ball by clearly obstructing the opponent’s line of vision.

VAR to intervene if there's a clear and obvious error. There's just no proof however you spin it that he's clearly obstructing Fabianski's line of vision. Standing in front of someone does not necessarily constitute 'clearly obstructing an opponents line of vision.'

So how can a decision be made on whether he did or not?

(There's a reason GON and the players were so incensed. Playing the game you know these things. Fabianski saw that all the way. Hence no complaint, just disappointment.)

So back to the original question, how can a decision be made by VAR on this? It's difficult but not impossible...

1. It shouldn't be a 'subjective' look.
2. It should be based on the (admittedly limited) evidence available.

This is the process they SHOULD have taken to come to the correct decision:

*Image one- Moment of header: 10 feet in the air above both players. GKs eye on it. Nothing to suggest clear obstruction due to height of ball.

*Image two-MILLISECONDS later BEFORE the ball is even in the net. GK is still eyes on- head completely turned to the right arm outstretched, body turned. You can't fake that, it's reactive. If he didn't see it how could he react? Why aren't VAR considering these things before making season ending decisions? On a subjective matter such as 'could that man see that ball' - Pathetic. I agree with GON. It's scandalous.

Sheer incompetence.

I've said it before. They make it up as they go along, I honestly don't think the officials brush up on the laws of the game or the implementation of VAR, they are complacent- proven by the fact that they are no more knowledgable on the laws of the game than the average fan.

Case in point. 'Oh yeah look mate the Wolves lad is stood in front of him. Offside.'

If you wanna make the game forensic you gotta be forensic, it's a mock-forensic examination everytime- they don't actually know what they are looking at, or for, but worryingly they think they do. That's the core of the problem and it happens week after week.

Feel free to disagree but I think it's gonna be a struggle for me to change my mind on this.

Can't stand it anymore, don't even celebrate goals when they go in anymore.

To add to that, Kilman is 6ft 4 and about 2ft off the ground when making contact, so there is no way on earth that Fabianski cannot see the ball, regardless of Chirewa standing in front of him. As an aside, why do GKs have the benefit of a law to ensure their view of the ball is unobstructed when every other player doesn't have that benefit ?

 

[Lobo de Ouro]

Come on now. I know you like to take the opposite view sometimes for debate but you can’t seriously think it’s offside.

I've seen it a few times now and have to say I went from thinking it was a bad decision to one that was probably correct. It's far from being the insanely bad call a lot of people think it is, in my opinion. We've had a lot worse.

The acid test will be when a team scores against us in exactly the same fashion... Will it be objectively ruled offside then? Or objectively ruled onside? I have my suspicions which way it will go.

 

[SingYourHeartsOut]

We don’t know what was said in private. If either Moyes or Fabianski objected to how Gary described their private comments in his public post match, then I imagine they would make some public statement themselves.

Yes, maybe. Just think it's typical that when the first question was about the disallowed goal he took umbrage, despite moaning repeatedly about bad VAR calls. This is the problem with all of them, they love to moan, but never admit when they've benefitted. That's why it's not going away.

 

[colincameron]

FFS, get real. What manager and/or player after a game is going to say a VAR decision in their favour was 'scandalous'. FFS.

Ok, but I asked what makes you think he would make it up??

 

[colincameron]

I've seen it a few times now and have to say I went from thinking it was a bad decision to one that was probably correct. It's far from being the insanely bad call a lot of people think it is, in my opinion. We've had a lot worse.

The acid test will be when a team scores against us in exactly the same fashion... Will it be objectively ruled offside then? Or objectively ruled onside? I have my suspicions which way it will go.

What made you change your mind mate?

 

[maws]

I've seen it a few times now and have to say I went from thinking it was a bad decision to one that was probably correct. It's far from being the insanely bad call a lot of people think it is, in my opinion. We've had a lot worse.

The acid test will be when a team scores against us in exactly the same fashion... Will it be objectively ruled offside then? Or objectively ruled onside? I have my suspicions which way it will go.

What a stupid comment….. as if VAR would disallow it against us lol, they’d check the badge and say goal

 

[Frank Lincoln]

Just a simple question. If Chirewa wasn't stood there would Fabianski have saved it?

No.

 

[wolfslair]

To add to that, Kilman is 6ft 4 and about 2ft off the ground when making contact, so there is no way on earth that Fabianski cannot see the ball, regardless of Chirewa standing in front of him. As an aside, why do GKs have the benefit of a law to ensure their view of the ball is unobstructed when every other player doesn't have that benefit ?

Goalies more often than not massively and way too overprotected……

I used to find it so weird that when catching a contested high ball in rugby so strange when it was like a bundle/in air collision with others and it was legal and in football if anyone brushed me I got a free kick…..

 

[sedgwolf1980]

Problem is, we are that through the looking glass I think it’s all just futile now. Only way this has the slightest chance of being reversed is if someone like GON refuses their side to play the following week unless VAR is removed

Even then, unless it’s a Klopp or Guardiola I still don’t think the majority world care. Football as we know it is dead. I genuinely can’t get my head round that today. I mean like, **** me, come on. Unbelievable

 

[Wonder Boyo]

Not long got home and after years of all this travel it does make me consider whether it is worth it. I'm sure it has all been said on here, so I won't repeat others. The first half was great, but the second half was not so; our own mistakes were our downfall. Despite that, we still should have drawn. I just felt so sick of it all at the final whistle. I could have accepted it more if the game had just petered out and ended in defeat.

Although in the big scheme of things I don't think the result really matters, as with other results, Europe would be a very long shot, I can't remember feeling so deflated after a game for a long time. It's a lot of money for the ticket and the travel, and for it to be ruined by yet another baffling VAR / referee decision is just a punch in the gut. Couldn't bear to listen to the Arsenal commentary or 606 on the way home, was just sick of football. I don't know any football fan who is now in favour of VAR. I think, in the past, people thought it could be tweaked or changed, or maybe better referee training, but everyone is just tired of it now and wants it gone. Bleugh.

 

[Lobo de Ouro]

What made you change your mind mate?

The sheer closeness of Chiwome to their keeper

 

[sedgwolf1980]

For those, utterly bizarrely, still in favour of VAR in any form, go back and rewatch your favourite 50 goals of all time. The ones that made you fall in love with football.

I guarantee at least 75% of them get, if not disallowed, as a bare minimum reviewed. Then think again why you fell in love with football.

It’s an absolute monstrosity, I despise it with every fibre of my being.

 

[maws]

The sheer closeness of Chiwome to their keeper

Wrong player, but as various photos show he’s not in the keepers way, you can see the keepers looking at the ball as it’s around 8foot in the air, Chiwera is not 8foot

 

[SingYourHeartsOut]

No.

There you go, so everything else becomes irrelevant, he didn't interfere with play, because play would have been exactly the same result without him. Anyway MOTD, let's see what they think......

 

[Fenrir_]

The sheer closeness of Chiwome to their keeper

Which is in no way an offence

This is a shocker whatever way you look at it. Fabianski has seen that ball from the corner kick to it settling in the net and hasn't been touched

 

[Perton Wolf]

To add to that, Kilman is 6ft 4 and about 2ft off the ground when making contact, so there is no way on earth that Fabianski cannot see the ball, regardless of Chirewa standing in front of him. As an aside, why do GKs have the benefit of a law to ensure their view of the ball is unobstructed when every other player doesn't have that benefit ?

That literally makes no sense because we're talking about offsides here when the GK is usually the last defender.

Would be the same if the GK moved forward and a CB was the last defender on the line or something.

 

[sedgwolf1980]

Not got much more to add other than **** off.

 

[sedgwolf1980]

That literally makes no sense because we're talking about offsides here when the GK is usually the last defender.

Would be the same if the GK moved forward and a CB was the last defender on the line or something.

Perton, I think you are a top poster on here, but at this rate the hole you are digging you will be waking up in Australia.

 

[Oliwolf44]

For those, utterly bizarrely, still in favour of VAR in any form, go back and rewatch your favourite 50 goals of all time. The ones that made you fall in love with football.

I guarantee at least 75% of them get, if not disallowed, as a bare minimum reviewed. Then think again why you fell in love with football.

It’s an absolute monstrosity, I despise it with every fibre of my being.

For a bit of positivity the first one came to mind that would be fine was Kennedy vs Sheff U in the play off final. Absolute Humdinger!

 

[sedgwolf1980]

For a bit of positivity the first one came to mind that would be fine was Kennedy vs Sheff U in the play off final. Absolute Humdinger!

Sorry, Shaun Newtons left tescticle was blocking Paddy Kenny’s view 52 seconds earlier so needs reviewing.

Celebration cancelled.

 

[Perton Wolf]

Perton, I think you are a top poster on here, but at this rate the hole you are digging you will be waking up in Australia.

He's saying the GK has special treatment but he doesn't, it's whoever the last defender is, which just happens to be the GK 99% of the time.

So in theory, our goal would still have been ruled out if it was Zouma on the line and not Fabianski. Supposedly anyway.....

Think I'm also fed up thinking about offsides now.