2016-17 UEFA Champions League

martyos121

Just to clear it up once and for all since some here are adamant the goal should've been ruled out, proof that Sterling was onside:



The camera angle is deceiving because it's not a straight on view from the side, the ball is pretty much dead level with Sterling when it's played if not a bit ahead of him, so it's a fair goal.

Jayop

blueser wrote: »

Why so?

Spoofer Bill

sReq | uTeK

Best champions league game I've watched this year. Fantastic for the neutral.

End to end

GreNoLi

Very satisfying half.

niallo27

elefant wrote: »

So far we've three posters who think it was a penalty.

Two guys names TheCitizen and Blueser, and Andersonisgod.

I don't think it's everyone else being biased...

If the keeper does get a touch it's not a penalty but if he doesn't I think it is. Augero doesn't have to hurdle him.

tayto lover

Cracking match. Very enjoyable for the neutral.

Mr.Nice Guy

Great advert for Ligue 1. A league that is often disrespected.

Unearthly

Were they booing the ref?

martyos121

Mr.Nice Guy wrote: »

Great advert for Ligue 1. A league that is often disrespected.

They have three great teams now, I'm really looking forward to seeing Nice in the CL next season as long as they aren't raided in the summer by the bigger clubs.

~Rebel~

martyos121 wrote: »

Just to clear it up once and for all since some here are adamant the goal should've been ruled out, proof that Sterling was onside:



The camera angle is deceiving because it's not a straight on view from the side, the ball is pretty much dead level with Sterling when it's played if not a bit ahead of him, so it's a fair goal.

Still verrrry close, but on reflection I can't say I'd have a problem with it being given though. It's close enough that i'd like the benefit of the doubt to go to the attackers (even though it seldom does)

TheCitizen

elefant wrote: »

So far we've three posters who think it was a penalty.

Two guys names TheCitizen and Blueser, and Andersonisgod.

I don't think it's everyone else being biased...

I'm not a Man City fan. That was a penalty, take off whatever coloured specs you're wearing. A ridiculous decision.

Monaco are as serious outfit, could be dark horses this season. That has nothing to do with the referee's error in not awarding a penalty to Man City.

GreNoLi

blueser wrote: »

?

Only joshing, city in trouble though, a chasm in midfield and 2 Argentinean headless chickens at the back.

Jayop

IMO if you need more than 3 replays to prove if a goal was onside then it was onside.

LuckyGent88

Game is certainly living up to expectations. Great pace to it. City certainly the better team for the first half hour and took a deserved lead but Monaco have come back brilliantly even if it's taken some horrendous defending from city.

Superb call for the non-penalty. Keeper got a knick on the ball first. Maybe a tad harsh giving Aguero a yellow for diving though in my mind.

Still more goals to come in this. I'll say 3-3

Andersonisgod

sReq | uTeK wrote: »

Pep is just making this city team so beatable playing Tiki taka when they can clearly not do it

This City side is so far ahead in it's development path than where anybody probably thought they'd be. This is a fantastic Monaco side and their matching them attack for attack (something that no other side in England could probably do) and they sit 2nd in the league, all the while carrying some players who are probably past their best or just not up to the level you need. It's incredible that anyone would write off City like this after that half of football.

martyos121

~Rebel~ wrote: »

I wouldn't say that's 'proof'. It shows it's certainly very close, but we knew that...

On reflection I can't say I'd have a problem with it being given though. It's close enough that i'd like the benefit of the doubt to go to the attackers (even though it seldom does)

It is proof though. The ball is laterally closer or at least as close to the six yard line as Sterling. Level is onside too, the forward gets the benefit of the doubt. I don't see a proper argument for it being offside tbh.

~Rebel~

martyos121 wrote: »

It is proof though. The ball is laterally closer or at least as close to the six yard line as Sterling. Level is onside too, the forward gets the benefit of the doubt. I don't see a proper argument for it being offside tbh.

yeah, i've reassessed, and did a sneaky ninja edit - you got me before i hit save it looks like though

martyos121

~Rebel~ wrote: »

yeah, i've reassessed, and did a sneaky ninja edit - you got me before i hit save it looks like though

Evens out my "moneyball" blunder to be fair. :pac:

niallo27

Just watched it again it's a penalty for me. He cleared him out. Shocking to book him.

GreNoLi

City goal was onside and I also thought it was a peno.

CalamariFritti

Aguero lucky not to be sent off for that dive

No City fan but how was that not a peno?

corny

TV3. 30 seconds chat then back to the adds.

blueser

At least the Sterling goal has been cleared up. Now, if we can just erase our (non) defending!

Andersonisgod

Not sure what kind of springs Souness thinks Aguero has on his feet if he thinks he can jump over the keeper's challenge, given the way his body is contorted in order to change direction. Particularly odd opinion given that Souness was a top player and should understand such things.

lertsnim

Keeper touched the ball so not a penalty. Wasn't a dive either.

Ardent

Watching it again, still think it's a peno. Game changer, Pep will be furious.

Mushy

I'll be corrected on the offside anyway, makes it an even better goal!

CalamariFritti

Aguero was happy to go over the keepers legs but has to be a peno imo

TitianGerm

martyos121 wrote: »

Just to clear it up once and for all since some here are adamant the goal should've been ruled out, proof that Sterling was onside:



The camera angle is deceiving because it's not a straight on view from the side, the ball is pretty much dead level with Sterling when it's played if not a bit ahead of him, so it's a fair goal.

The ball ends up very close to the line though when Sterling puts it in so the ball is played forward. Is that not offside?

Turtwig

Tv3 showed it was clearly onside. Good call. Why can't broadcastersee draw lines parallel to the pitch so the viewer isn't deceived by parallax.

I understand and agree wholly with the idea of playing out the ball from the back but you gotta have the players to do it. With City the risk reward ratio is still too high imo. Another goal in this for Monaco. City playing into their hands somewhat.

Andersonisgod

emmetkenny wrote: »

The ball ends up very close to the line though when Sterling puts it in so the ball is played forward. Is that not offside?

No because he's behind the ball when it's played.

Andersonisgod

Turtwig wrote: »

Tv3 showed it was clearly onside. Good call. Why can't broadcastersee draw lines parallel to the pitch so the viewer isn't deceived by parallax.

I understand and agree wholly with the idea of playing out the ball from the back but you gotta have the players to do it. With City the risk reward ratio is still too high imo. Another goal in this for Monaco. City playing into their hands somewhat.

I think they've gotten far better at playing out from the back and almost all of their big attacks have come from that. Personally I would have gone with Bravo tonight, but either way a new keeper is needed in the summer because that mistake (and Lahoz's) has turned the game.

GreNoLi

Alexei Lalas is an odd duck.

rwbug

Turtwig wrote: »

Why can't broadcastersee draw lines parallel to the pitch so the viewer isn't deceived by parallax.

BT sports drew the parallel line at half time, he was onside by a yard. Lineker, Gerrard, Ferdinand and Dunne all thought it was a blatant penalty.

Andersonisgod

By the way I'm talking too much about Man City. Monaco have been absolutely excellent, Jardim has done a tremendous job at that club and has promoted from within.

TitianGerm

TheCitizen wrote: »

I'm not a Man City fan. That was a penalty, take off whatever coloured specs you're wearing. A ridiculous decision.

Monaco are as serious outfit, could be dark horses this season. That has nothing to do with the referee's error in not awarding a penalty to Man City.

I just switched on and saw the slow-mo replay on TV3. Keeper touches the ball and you can see it because the ball spins differently after the touch and Augero looked to move his right leg to the keepers thigh.

No peno but at full speed a very hard one to call.

martyos121

emmetkenny wrote: »

The ball ends up very close to the line though when Sterling puts it in so the ball is played forward. Is that not offside?

Page 7 here: https://www.fifa.com/mm/document/afdeveloping/refereeing/law_11_offside_en_47383.pdf

It's the same scenario, doesn't matter if it's played forward as long as he's level or behind the ball when it's played.

blueser

GreNoLi wrote: »

Only joshing, city in trouble though, a chasm in midfield and 2 Argentinean headless chickens at the back.

We can't defend, simple as that. Otamendi is a liability. It just shows what a huge miss Vinnie is; pity he's made of glass. Stones has the potential to be a very good defender (not £50m good, but hey ho), but he needs to be playing alongside decent players. Even Kolarov would have been preferable to Otamendi; he hasn't been that bad at CB this season. Just keep him away from FB!

SlickRic

Andersonisgod wrote: »

Replay showed it's far closer than you think. Needs another replay with a line.

No it doesn't.

Jayop

blueser wrote: »

We can't defend, simple as that. Otamendi is a liability. It just shows what a huge miss Vinnie is; pity he's made of glass. Stones has the potential to be a very good defender (not £50m good, but hey ho), but he needs to be playing alongside decent players. Even Kolarov would have been preferable to Otamendi; he hasn't been that bad at CB this season. Just keep him away from FB!

Stoke will be spending 50m on cb's by the time Stones comes into his prime. If he becomes a top player then you haven't overpaid.

Giggsy11

That looked like a penalty..

PhilipsR

Correct decision.

BT will go mad over the delay more than anything as a deflection.

Andersonisgod

SlickRic wrote: »

No it doesn't.

It did...

LuckyGent88

Should have been a penalty

Oh **** me, he has now given it

GreNoLi

Peno?

BorneTobyWilde

The man behind the goal gave it .
Looks good call too

corny

Thats a penalty alright.

Skylinehead

Easy decision really

Unearthly

That was a pen

Turtwig

Was Falcao offside though?