Noisy Neighbours - the Man City thread

[Marky147]

Aguerrrrrrrrrrrrnoooooo.

[nirvana]

One of the best games I've seen for a while - can't quite believe how Spurs hung in there over both games but fair play to them

[tikay]

One of the best games I've seen for a while - can't quite believe how Spurs hung in there over both games but fair play to them

All that.

A game which will live in the memory for a very long time indeed.

Wonderful entertainment, unless you are a City fan.   

[Karabiner]

Why didn't they show pictures of the VAR offside for the final "goal"?

[Marky147]

Why didn't they show pictures of the VAR offside for the final "goal"?

Fergie got hold of the keypad.

[Archer]

One of the best games I've seen for a while - can't quite believe how Spurs hung in there over both games but fair play to them

All that.

A game which will live in the memory for a very long time indeed.

Wonderful entertainment, unless you are a City fan.  

Wonderful entertainment as a City fan. At 1-3 down in the tie after 90+10 mins and then winning the last 80 mins 4-1 was heady stuff.  But then bloody VAR kicks in and it's 3-1 not 4-1 for the last 80 mins. Ouch.

[Archer]

Why didn't they show pictures of the VAR offside for the final "goal"?

BT did there attempt in the post-match stiff with a single black line. Definitely off-side on that and zero complaints. But I've not seen the official VAR shots anywhere.

In the BT highlights show (but not the post-match stuff) there was a very clear view of the Morientes "handball". Indisputably hit his arm first and then hip before going in. Apparently, based on the guidelines UEFA gave to refs in January, this should have been disallowed irrespective of all other hand-ball rules re intent, deliberate or not, clear and obvious, silhouettes etc. But the ref wasn't given the clips where it was clear. I don't like that.

[Pokerpops]

Why didn't they show pictures of the VAR offside for the final "goal"?

BT did there attempt in the post-match stiff with a single black line. Definitely off-side on that and zero complaints. But I've not seen the official VAR shots anywhere.

In the BT highlights show (but not the post-match stuff) there was a very clear view of the Morientes "handball". Indisputably hit his arm first and then hip before going in. Apparently, based on the guidelines UEFA gave to refs in January, this should have been disallowed irrespective of all other hand-ball rules re intent, deliberate or not, clear and obvious, silhouettes etc. But the ref wasn't given the clips where it was clear. I don't like that.

If the ball had struck a City defender in exactly the same fashion and been diverted away to safety, would it have been a penalty? The arm was clearly inside the body silhouette and there was no movement of the arm toward the ball.

I haven’t seen any of the evidence that makes it “indisputably handball”, only what was shown at the time, which looked pretty ok to me.
I’d say it’s one of those decisions where, if it had been Kompany’s intervention that scored a goal for City you would be absolutely horrified to have it disallowed.

[hhyftrftdr]

Why didn't they show pictures of the VAR offside for the final "goal"?

BT did there attempt in the post-match stiff with a single black line. Definitely off-side on that and zero complaints. But I've not seen the official VAR shots anywhere.

In the BT highlights show (but not the post-match stuff) there was a very clear view of the Morientes "handball". Indisputably hit his arm first and then hip before going in. Apparently, based on the guidelines UEFA gave to refs in January, this should have been disallowed irrespective of all other hand-ball rules re intent, deliberate or not, clear and obvious, silhouettes etc. But the ref wasn't given the clips where it was clear. I don't like that.

If the ball had struck a City defender in exactly the same fashion and been diverted away to safety, would it have been a penalty? The arm was clearly inside the body silhouette and there was no movement of the arm toward the ball.

I haven’t seen any of the evidence that makes it “indisputably handball”, only what was shown at the time, which looked pretty ok to me.
I’d say it’s one of those decisions where, if it had been Kompany’s intervention that scored a goal for City you would be absolutely horrified to have it disallowed.

There is a very clear angle from behind the goal that shows how the ball hits his arm first before going in off his hip. For some unknown reason, the ref either didn't request or didn't get to see this angle when making his judgement.

Think it's a very close decision and it might not have swayed his mind, however surely the whole point of VAR is to offer the best views possible on incidents so the ref can benefit from the technology and ensure the correct decision is made. Why he only saw the front facing reply last night is beyond me and makes a mockery of the whole VAR set up.

https://www.skysports.com/football/news/11679/11696773/pep-guardiola-questions-angle-used-for-fernando-llorentes-var-goal-review

[Archer]

Why didn't they show pictures of the VAR offside for the final "goal"?

BT did there attempt in the post-match stiff with a single black line. Definitely off-side on that and zero complaints. But I've not seen the official VAR shots anywhere.

In the BT highlights show (but not the post-match stuff) there was a very clear view of the Morientes "handball". Indisputably hit his arm first and then hip before going in. Apparently, based on the guidelines UEFA gave to refs in January, this should have been disallowed irrespective of all other hand-ball rules re intent, deliberate or not, clear and obvious, silhouettes etc. But the ref wasn't given the clips where it was clear. I don't like that.

If the ball had struck a City defender in exactly the same fashion and been diverted away to safety, would it have been a penalty? The arm was clearly inside the body silhouette and there was no movement of the arm toward the ball.

I haven’t seen any of the evidence that makes it “indisputably handball”, only what was shown at the time, which looked pretty ok to me.
I’d say it’s one of those decisions where, if it had been Kompany’s intervention that scored a goal for City you would be absolutely horrified to have it disallowed.

I've read a bit more about this now. It is an IFAB change in the laws of the game which are effective from 1st June this year (and for the Champions League final):

The following ‘handball’ situations, even if accidental, will be a free kick:
• the ball goes into the goal after touching an attacking player’s hand/arm
• a player gains control/possession of the ball after it has touches their hand/arm
and then scores, or creates a goal-scoring opportunity  

Meanwhile, UEFA issued a directive to CL referees that they should apply the new rules now in advance of the official date.

So it is very specific, black and white almost, when there is evidence the ball simply touched a hand or arm before a goal but unlike penalties for handball which are subject to a completely different criteria.

On reflection it means it wasn't even a marginal decision and, if this is the rule,  the goal should have been disallowed. It is a matter of fact the ball touched his arm when you see the clearest replay.  No blame to the referee here because he could only work on the replays presented to him. And VAR has messed up.

[hhyftrftdr]

The irony that not having VAR fucked us over in the CL last season, and having VAR has fucked us over in the CL this season.

Can't wait for next years fucking over

[Pokerpops]

Why didn't they show pictures of the VAR offside for the final "goal"?

BT did there attempt in the post-match stiff with a single black line. Definitely off-side on that and zero complaints. But I've not seen the official VAR shots anywhere.

In the BT highlights show (but not the post-match stuff) there was a very clear view of the Morientes "handball". Indisputably hit his arm first and then hip before going in. Apparently, based on the guidelines UEFA gave to refs in January, this should have been disallowed irrespective of all other hand-ball rules re intent, deliberate or not, clear and obvious, silhouettes etc. But the ref wasn't given the clips where it was clear. I don't like that.

If the ball had struck a City defender in exactly the same fashion and been diverted away to safety, would it have been a penalty? The arm was clearly inside the body silhouette and there was no movement of the arm toward the ball.

I haven’t seen any of the evidence that makes it “indisputably handball”, only what was shown at the time, which looked pretty ok to me.
I’d say it’s one of those decisions where, if it had been Kompany’s intervention that scored a goal for City you would be absolutely horrified to have it disallowed.

I've read a bit more about this now. It is an IFAB change in the laws of the game which are effective from 1st June this year (and for the Champions League final):

The following ‘handball’ situations, even if accidental, will be a free kick:
• the ball goes into the goal after touching an attacking player’s hand/arm
• a player gains control/possession of the ball after it has touches their hand/arm
and then scores, or creates a goal-scoring opportunity  

Meanwhile, UEFA issued a directive to CL referees that they should apply the new rules now in advance of the official date.

So it is very specific, black and white almost, when there is evidence the ball simply touched a hand or arm before a goal but unlike penalties for handball which are subject to a completely different criteria.

On reflection it means it wasn't even a marginal decision and, if this is the rule,  the goal should have been disallowed. It is a matter of fact the ball touched his arm when you see the clearest replay.  No blame to the referee here because he could only work on the replays presented to him. And VAR has messed up.

banter incoming (mostly to deflect any comments on our world class goalkeeper and our surrender to the putative 2019 CL winners)

The ball didn’t go into the goal due to it’s touching his arm and he definitely didn’t gain control or possession due to the contact with his arm.



Seriously though; you conceded 3 goals at home, when did that happen last?

[hhyftrftdr]

Why didn't they show pictures of the VAR offside for the final "goal"?

BT did there attempt in the post-match stiff with a single black line. Definitely off-side on that and zero complaints. But I've not seen the official VAR shots anywhere.

In the BT highlights show (but not the post-match stuff) there was a very clear view of the Morientes "handball". Indisputably hit his arm first and then hip before going in. Apparently, based on the guidelines UEFA gave to refs in January, this should have been disallowed irrespective of all other hand-ball rules re intent, deliberate or not, clear and obvious, silhouettes etc. But the ref wasn't given the clips where it was clear. I don't like that.

If the ball had struck a City defender in exactly the same fashion and been diverted away to safety, would it have been a penalty? The arm was clearly inside the body silhouette and there was no movement of the arm toward the ball.

I haven’t seen any of the evidence that makes it “indisputably handball”, only what was shown at the time, which looked pretty ok to me.
I’d say it’s one of those decisions where, if it had been Kompany’s intervention that scored a goal for City you would be absolutely horrified to have it disallowed.

I've read a bit more about this now. It is an IFAB change in the laws of the game which are effective from 1st June this year (and for the Champions League final):

The following ‘handball’ situations, even if accidental, will be a free kick:
• the ball goes into the goal after touching an attacking player’s hand/arm
• a player gains control/possession of the ball after it has touches their hand/arm
and then scores, or creates a goal-scoring opportunity  

Meanwhile, UEFA issued a directive to CL referees that they should apply the new rules now in advance of the official date.

So it is very specific, black and white almost, when there is evidence the ball simply touched a hand or arm before a goal but unlike penalties for handball which are subject to a completely different criteria.

On reflection it means it wasn't even a marginal decision and, if this is the rule,  the goal should have been disallowed. It is a matter of fact the ball touched his arm when you see the clearest replay.  No blame to the referee here because he could only work on the replays presented to him. And VAR has messed up.

banter incoming (mostly to deflect any comments on our world class goalkeeper and our surrender to the putative 2019 CL winners)

The ball didn’t go into the goal due to it’s touching his arm and he definitely didn’t gain control or possession due to the contact with his arm.



Seriously though; you conceded 3 goals at home, when did that happen last?

Palace at home this season off the top of my head.

The ball went into the goal after it touched his arm. It wasn't the final contact, but it helped get the ball over the line. So I think under this new directive it would be disallowed.

[Archer]

The irony that not having VAR fucked us over in the CL last season, and having VAR has fucked us over in the CL this season.

Can't wait for next years fucking over

Yep, I'd thought the same thing. We win 5-3 last night without VAR. Who knows what the Liverpool score would have been but VAR in the 1st leg would have ruled out a Salah goal for offside, given the Sane/Jesus goal, given the penalty for the for the non-subjective foul on Sterling and, in the 2nd leg, not disallowed the Sane goal.

We did have the penalty in the 1st leg against Spurs though

[Archer]

Why didn't they show pictures of the VAR offside for the final "goal"?

BT did there attempt in the post-match stiff with a single black line. Definitely off-side on that and zero complaints. But I've not seen the official VAR shots anywhere.

In the BT highlights show (but not the post-match stuff) there was a very clear view of the Morientes "handball". Indisputably hit his arm first and then hip before going in. Apparently, based on the guidelines UEFA gave to refs in January, this should have been disallowed irrespective of all other hand-ball rules re intent, deliberate or not, clear and obvious, silhouettes etc. But the ref wasn't given the clips where it was clear. I don't like that.

If the ball had struck a City defender in exactly the same fashion and been diverted away to safety, would it have been a penalty? The arm was clearly inside the body silhouette and there was no movement of the arm toward the ball.

I haven’t seen any of the evidence that makes it “indisputably handball”, only what was shown at the time, which looked pretty ok to me.
I’d say it’s one of those decisions where, if it had been Kompany’s intervention that scored a goal for City you would be absolutely horrified to have it disallowed.

I've read a bit more about this now. It is an IFAB change in the laws of the game which are effective from 1st June this year (and for the Champions League final):

The following ‘handball’ situations, even if accidental, will be a free kick:
• the ball goes into the goal after touching an attacking player’s hand/arm
• a player gains control/possession of the ball after it has touches their hand/arm
and then scores, or creates a goal-scoring opportunity  

Meanwhile, UEFA issued a directive to CL referees that they should apply the new rules now in advance of the official date.

So it is very specific, black and white almost, when there is evidence the ball simply touched a hand or arm before a goal but unlike penalties for handball which are subject to a completely different criteria.

On reflection it means it wasn't even a marginal decision and, if this is the rule,  the goal should have been disallowed. It is a matter of fact the ball touched his arm when you see the clearest replay.  No blame to the referee here because he could only work on the replays presented to him. And VAR has messed up.

banter incoming (mostly to deflect any comments on our world class goalkeeper and our surrender to the putative 2019 CL winners)

The ball didn’t go into the goal due to it’s touching his arm and he definitely didn’t gain control or possession due to the contact with his arm.



Seriously though; you conceded 3 goals at home, when did that happen last?

Palace at home this season off the top of my head.

The ball went into the goal after it touched his arm. It wasn't the final contact, but it helped get the ball over the line. So I think under this new directive it would be disallowed.

The bold bit is right.

And it was Palace. Think Mr Pops was fishing for us to say United in the 2-3 last season