Wright-Philips Goal

_blank_

His goal against Spurs in the so called "Comeback of the Century"TM was clearly offside.

Why has no-one even mentioned it. Typical of the ABU attitude.

The outcry after Ruud van Nistelrooy's goal against Southampton on saturday was deadening, and it wasn't even offside with the new interpretation.

Wright- Philips gained advantage, end of.

cITY are Liars.

zAbbo

Originally posted by seansouth
cITY are Liars.

Clarify these lies for me

SuprSi

The goal was definitely offside, but it didn't matter anyway as they would have scored again regardless. Spurs had given up at this stage, and it was better that they were put down quickly with the 4th goal before going through another 30 minutes of pain.

_blank_

Originally posted by SuprSi
The goal was definitely offside, but it didn't matter anyway as they would have scored again regardless. Spurs had given up at this stage, and it was better that they were put down quickly with the 4th goal before going through another 30 minutes of pain.

It wasn't the fourth goal in the "Comeback of the Century"TM , but the THIRD.

Now, at 3-2 up, Spurs could easily have taken the game back to cITY, scored again, and won the tie.

But at 3-3, the Spurs heads went even further down, and it was plain as day that they had decided that the game was not worth playing in.

Originally posted by bazH
Clarify these lies for me

I will

cITY are Liars

SuprSi

I didn't say it was the fourth goal, I said the fourth goal was needed to stop any further embarrassment by going into 30 minutes of extra time where City probably would have scored more than 4.

_blank_

It doesn't matter about the result or probable outcomes.

All I was asking is, Where is the outcry from the people who ranted about Ruud van Nistelrooy's goal on saturday against Southampton?

And all I am saying is that it is typical of the ABU attitude so many people seem to have, that if United get a refereeing decision that goes for them then a section of people jump on it, and make bits if United, on the other hand, any other club that the same decision goes for,although I would say that Wright-Philips was definitely offside,no question, and the decision is brushed under the carpet, no-one mentions it, and cITY are hailed as heros.

Give me a break.

An example from last nights "punditry" on SkySports.

Richard Keyes(to Niall Quinn): "but surely he was offside"
Niall Quinn: "it doesn't matter...take nothing away from the lad"

Now I know Quinn is a Blue-nose at heart and a total feckwit of the highest order, but come on "It doesn't matter"

What, the rules of football don't matter, we'll only dig them up when we want a pop at United?

cITY are Liars

Pacifico

Originally posted by seansouth


An example from last nights "punditry" on SkySports.

Richard Keyes(to Niall Quinn): "but surely he was offside"
Niall Quinn: "it doesn't matter...take nothing away from the lad"

Did he say that?

sounds like something he'd say alright.

Hyzepher

Listen - nearly every game has some soft of issue - penalty decision here, offside there - the point is that **** happens and that's just it. The reason RvN goal was debated is that it was Utd - plain and simple - get over it. City aren't as popular so an outcry hasn't the same impact. Lets face it - the soccer forum is nothing more than a 'my team is better than yours' at the moment - if it doesn't get up someone's back then it's not worth saying.

Until we can have genuine discussions about the issues etc. without the teams taking centre stage then it will continue.

btw - the fact that the goal stand made it a better game - to the neutral. I think he was marginal enough that it didn't matter - its about time the attackers got the breaks anyway

Hyzepher

_blank_

Yeah...he said it. I was watching it with me dad, and I nearly fell off me chair after he said it.

Me mam had heart failure because of me shouting at him across the sitting room AND it was the first time i ever used the "C" word in front of her.

Anyway, Henry_14, you seem to have a proper football head on your shoulders, what do you think of my point?

even though your an arsenal fan?

Pepe LeFrits

Originally posted by seansouth
Why has no-one even mentioned it. Typical of the ABU attitude.

The outcry after Ruud van Nistelrooy's goal against Southampton on saturday was deadening, and it wasn't even offside with the new interpretation.

It was hardly deafening, besides, it's largely related to the popularity of the club - compare the handling of the 'Battle of Old Trafford' to other worse incidents involving smaller teams since. Nobody really gives a shit when it involves small clubs that they dont follow.

SuprSi

Heh, can't believe he said that! What a joke to come up with something like that - I'm glad I switched the TV off as soon as the match was finished.

About your point Sean, I sort of agree with what you're saying but I'm sure Man U fans will disagree. I think the reason that there was no outcry from a) Spurs was cos they'd already given in, from b) fans cos they were too shocked to see what was going on than to notice, and from c) the pundits because of the manner of the performance. They want entertainment, as do the neutrals, and they would overlook something like the offside in these circumstances.

Now, if the game had been 1 - 1 with a couple of minutes to go, and both teams were still fighting, there would be outcry, but only one team was fighting when SWP scored that goal.

thegills

The goal was definitely offside

What about this 'air' rule. I thought that you were level unless the linesman could see air between the 2 players. In this case W-P was onside as opposed to VN who was about 2 yards offside. You could also argue as in the VN case that W-P wasn't interfering with play as Fowler didn't mean to play the ball to him, more like a hopeful thump towards the corner flag. Similar to the Utd. free-kick which was again a hopeful punt into the box.

SuprSi

Originally posted by thegills
What about this 'air' rule.

I also agree with this rule, but to this date haven't seen it implemented in any EPL game. I was looking forward to the striker having the advantage this season, but although the offside rule was updated, the refs don't seem to acknowledge this.

Pacifico

Originally posted by SuprSi
Heh, can't believe he said that! What a joke to come up with something like that - I'm glad I switched the TV off as soon as the match was finished.

About your point Sean, I sort of agree with what you're saying but I'm sure Man U fans will disagree. I think the reason that there was no outcry from a) Spurs was cos they'd already given in, from b) fans cos they were too shocked to see what was going on than to notice, and from c) the pundits because of the manner of the performance. They want entertainment, as do the neutrals, and they would overlook something like the offside in these circumstances.

Now, if the game had been 1 - 1 with a couple of minutes to go, and both teams were still fighting, there would be outcry, but only one team was fighting when SWP scored that goal.

Yeah good point. Didnt see the game so cant comment. Had it to do with the new offside rules?

_blank_

Originally posted by thegills
What about this 'air' rule. W-P wasn't interfering with play as Fowler didn't mean to play the ball to him.

Wasn't interfering with play? Come off it, he put the ball in the net, and the "goal" counted.

van Nistelrooy wasn't offside in the 1st phase, the ball was played away from him after he was offside, then he was back onside when the ball came to him for the deflected shot.

Wright-Philips was offside when the ball was played to him, no matter if Fowler meant it or not, it was played in his direction, he was offside and gained an advantage, simple. It was the same "phase of play".

When Keyes mentioned it on SkySports last night, the so called expert said it didn't matter, like feck it didn't matter, he scored a goal, in the same "phase of play".

OK, so the linesman made a bad call, accepted, but the linesman made a good call in the United - Southampton game and still ended up being vilified

Originally posted by SuprSi
a) Spurs was cos they'd already given in, from b) fans cos they were too shocked to see what was going on than to notice, and from c) the pundits because of the manner of the performance. They want entertainment, as do the neutrals, and they would overlook something like the offside in these circumstances.

a) maybe they hadn't noticed, if I'd have lost in such circumstances, I certainly wouldn't have been reviewing video straight after the game.

b)granted;but the cITY fans will NEVER bring it up.

c)Neutrals - I'm sorry, but the same so called neutrals were all over the United - Southampton Ref/Linesman/van Nistelrooy/United after the game

Armen Tanzerian

seansouth, Red Issue fan? You do realise you're not from Manchester so you can drop 'the liars' and cITY (should be cITEH so you can affect the Manc accent you clearly desire). Why not throw in a few massives and floodlight jokes and, hey presto, you're as red as any Salfordian.

I really do laugh at the Irish PLC muppets who go to head office and try too hard to fit in. 'ave it, mate.

cournioni

Originally posted by Armen Tanzerian
seansouth, Red Issue fan? You do realise you're not from Manchester so you can drop 'the liars' and cITY (should be cITEH so you can affect the Manc accent you clearly desire). Why not throw in a few massives and floodlight jokes and, hey presto, you're as red as any Salfordian.

I really do laugh at the Irish PLC muppets who go to head office and try too hard to fit in. 'ave it, mate.

Do you know for SURE that he isn't from Manchester and living in Ireland?

_blank_

Yeah, I'm a Red Issue reader, but guess what...I only started reading it because the only place you can actually buy it is in Manchester(well, now 'net subscription).

I happen to have lived in Salford for three years when I was 8-11(I'm 24 now...you can do the maths). I have a strong affinity with the city, and the team I support.

what is your problem with my supporting Manchester United?

Crawl up your own arse and die Armen, if you've nothing constructive to say, then shut it, arse hole.

TwoShedsJackson

Originally posted by seansouth

Crawl up your own arse and die Armen, if you've nothing constructive to say, then shut it, arse hole.

Wow you really got him there, well done :rolleyes:

Another Man United fan with no brain.

quarryman

Originally posted by Armen Tanzerian
seansouth, Red Issue fan? You do realise you're not from Manchester so you can drop 'the liars' and cITY (should be cITEH so you can affect the Manc accent you clearly desire). Why not throw in a few massives and floodlight jokes and, hey presto, you're as red as any Salfordian.

I really do laugh at the Irish PLC muppets who go to head office and try too hard to fit in. 'ave it, mate.

then....

I happen to have lived in Salford for three years when I was 8-11(I'm 24 now...you can do the maths). I have a strong affinity with the city, and the team I support.

brilliant. armen you tw*t.

Pepe LeFrits

bigger teams get put under a microscope. deal with it

The Muppet

Its all a game. If it happend United all the other fans rant about it , if it happens Arsenal Liverpool and now chelseas the Utd fans rant about it and if it happens anyone else we can have a nearly civil discussion about it. Its the nature of things in this and every other soccer forum.

Armen Tanzerian

No problem with genuine PLC supporters, even the jester-hatted daytrippers (see, I can do RI-speak too), but Red Issue (which is an entertaining board) seems to have a fair few Irish muppets using term like twats, cITEH etc.

If you are the ultimate muppet Anto, in no way can you construe this as an apology.

Emboss

Originally posted by The Muppet
Its all a game. If it happend United all the other fans rant about it , if it happens Arsenal Liverpool and now chelseas the Utd fans rant about it and if it happens anyone else we can have a nearly civil discussion about it. Its the nature of things in this and every other soccer forum.

Liverpool?

I think you missed the part about "bigger teams"

astrofool

wasn't arsenal's second goal at highbury last season blatantly offside ? or was it the first one ? I remember one bounced luckily off cole's leg, and the other was a mile offside and given. (against manu)

The Muppet

Originally posted by Emboss
Liverpool?

I think you missed the part about "bigger teams"

Ah I,m feeling sorry for the scousers this weather so I included them and don't forget next season they are going to win the premiership .;)

super_furry

Red Issue? That's that horrible Manc forum that despise their Irish support right? Visited it a couple of times and it was all "Peg selling, potato eating Paddies". Full of bigots and BNP wannabes.

eirebhoy

Originally posted by SuprSi
The goal was definitely offside, but it didn't matter anyway as they would have scored again regardless. Spurs had given up at this stage, and it was better that they were put down quickly with the 4th goal before going through another 30 minutes of pain.

I am probably reading this wrong but if I didn't, how the hell did you come up with that? If Wright Phillips was cought offside it would have still been 3-2, there would have been a free kick rather than a kick off, not to mention the psychological boost City would have missed out on from it been disallowed. From what I read you are presuming that if WP was cought offside, Macken still would have got his goal anyway?

Lets go back to the Leicester-Villa game, if Villa didn't score the first goal, by your presumption, they would have won 4-0?

[DF]Lenny

Ahh commonsense at last!!

Emboss

Originally posted by eirebhoy
I am probably reading this wrong but if I didn't, how the hell did you come up with that? If Wright Phillips was cought offside it would have still been 3-2, there would have been a free kick rather than a kick off, not to mention the psychological boost City would have missed out on from it been disallowed. From what I read you are presuming that if WP was cought offside, Macken still would have got his goal anyway?

Lets go back to the Leicester-Villa game, if Villa didn't score the first goal, by your presumption, they would have won 4-0?

Yes you're reading it wrong, the point is city were all over them spur's were on the rack they had nothing left if it had ended 3-3 at FT city would have ran away with it in extra time

it makes **** all difference at this stage city through bring em on!

Dr Bolouswki

This thread really made me laugh... there are bad desicions made all the time in football - for sure Wright Phillips was marginally offside, but for Sean South to be so irate about it? Man... don't worry pal...

Why has no-one even mentioned it. Typical of the ABU attitude.

What has it got to do with United? I think you've a bit of a chip on your shoulder - I didn't give two ****s about Van Horse being on/offside (personally I thought the new rules made him 'on' ) plus if you're going to biatch and moan about decisons what about Bartons sending off? When was the last time a united player got sent off for simply talking to the ref? Bartons sending off was a very poor decision, though it was a bit stupid of him to give lip when on a yellow...

Console yourself with the fact that you'll probably butcher us in the next round. I'll be sure to say hello to your friends in Salford when I'm over watching City this weekend... I'm sure they'll all remember you and can't wait for your next visit...

The Muppet

Originally posted by Killah_B
plus if you're going to biatch and moan about decisons what about Bartons sending off? When was the last time a united player got sent off for simply talking to the ref? Bartons sending off was a very poor decision, though it was a bit stupid of him to give lip when on a yellow...

Why was Barton protesting? he deserverd to go for the foul he got booked for in the first place IMO. Maybe the ref realising he was initally leniant and dismissed barton when he questioned his decision.

Dr Bolouswki

It was a bad looking foul allright - but my point really was to try and illustrate that there are bad/debatable decisions made in football the whole time - for seansouth to get so excited about wright-phillips being offside and not mention the barton decision seems a bit single sighted... I mean, he's simply adopting the same standards he complains about when other people were giving out about Van Horse's goal at the weekend? Personally I thought fair enough about Van horses goal - justice for Utd not getting the penalty decision the free kick came from...

The thread seemed to be to be sour grapes because of the blue/red rivalry. I say lets be thakful for an exciting match and lets hope the derby in the 5th round tops it for excitement!

And may the best team (on the day!) win!!

ZENER

I think City's surge in the second half was due to Barton getting sent off and Spurs thinking they had it in the bag. Were they wrong. To the neutral watching the game it had everything you could want, the losing team at half time down a man then come back and bag 4 goals to win.

I watched the game with a group of workmates, all neutrals where this match was concerned, and we were all on the edge of our seats ! OK maybe WP was marginally offside maybe a spurs player handled the ball in the box first half but there is no denying City deserved the win. To be honest when I saw the goal as it happened I thought it was a good one, it was only when Sky played about 10 replays was it suspicious. It was so marginal the linesman may just have missed it.

These kinds of situations happen every week and the neutral can overlook it while the fan will get upset but we just have to deal with it.

IMO it just added to the atmosphere of what was an excellent game of football.

Tinky