Should Man. United’s equalising goal have stood?

[Leicesterbaggie]

In my opinion it was offside and should never have been allowed. Rashford was interfering with play in many ways. I’ve heard the views of various pundits etc. and to my mind the only ones to say that it should have stood were those connected with Utd! The vast majority said that it shouldn’t have been allowed. One actually said, and I can’t remember who it was, that it was Man. Utd. at Old Trafford, so what do you expect?

[SwedishBaggie]

No, should never have been allowed.

[kettering_baggie]

It was an appalling decision, how anyone with an iota of knowledge about football could say that was not offside is staggering!

I read that Rio Ferdinand said that it was not offside but why on Earth that bloke is used as a pundit is also staggering, one of the thickest blokes ever to blight our TV screens.

[baggieal]

It was a good decision based on Man City being the opposition and Greasy Jack having scored the opener!

[Dubbag]

Who made that brilliant statement that if you are on the pitch you are interfering with play...fecking classic that..

[kettering_baggie]

It was a good decision based on Man City being the opposition and Greasy Jack having scored the opener!

I must disagree with you, Al, although I have no love for moneybags City, I really dislike United, horrible club with the worst plastic ‘fans’, most of whom have never been to Manchester and couldn’t put a pin in a map in the correct place. It was one of the worst VAR decisions I have seen, quite unbelievable, it can only go down as Old Trafford/United bias.

[WBA1955]

Yes because I don't like City.
But this is why it's so hard to get anything at places like OT and Anfield, any 50/50 decisions go the way of the home side as Wolves found out.
Those 1-0, and 2-0 wins at Anfield a few years ago were so sweet. Still laugh when Klopp took the team in front of the Kop after they got a 1-1 draw with us.😁

[BaggieSingh]

I don’t know one person who agreed with it (for footballing reasons) or could even explain why he wasn’t interfering

Crazy decision

[baggieal]

I must disagree with you, Al, although I have no love for moneybags City, I really dislike United, horrible club with the worst plastic ‘fans’, most of whom have never been to Manchester and couldn’t put a pin in a map in the correct place. It was one of the worst VAR decisions I have seen, quite unbelievable, it can only go down as Old Trafford/United bias.

Agree Ketts goal should never have stood! Hate City more than Utd to be honest! The old song to City is true - where were you when you were s hit!! City still can’t fill their stadium every match!

[mickd1961]

The argument that Rashford didn’t touch it or didn’t interfere with play is just ludicrous.

The simplest way of clearing this nonsense up is the change the rule to state that the attacking player closest to the forward pass has to be onside.

This would cut out this sort of situation where Rashford was the obviously intended recipient of the pass but failed to connect.

When I had to do linesman duty on a Sunday morning I always worked to that basic premise regardless of FA rule twiddling.

If it went forward and in the direction of a player in an offside position I raised the flag.......end of.....no messing or guessing!