Which opponent did he get?
[/quote]
Ogbonna gets his leg between Mane and the ball, Mane’s trailing (left) leg comes through the back of Ogbonna’s.
Mane also flies in at high speed with his right foot, studs showing, and misses the ball. Catches Fabianski a little bit, not too much, but understandable if that is deemed as being a bit dangerous.
Really don’t understand where the controversy is. It was a clear foul.
I watched replays of the disallowed goal a few times.
The only issue referred to by commentators was if Jota was offside. No mention of Mane fouling. Why? Because he didnt foul. Jota cannot be offside as the ball came off the defender.
VAR did us over. Once more.
Ok, personal attacks aside, you are not engaging on the points people are making. People are explaining why it is foul and you just keep reiterating a non-specific response that it wasn’t a foul. Why not? Do you not think he made contact with the west ham player? Do you acknowledge that he made contact with the defender but think that you’re allowed to lunge into a challenge miss the ball and get the man it not be a foul? On what basis? because he had the “right to go for it?”
Yeah, he actually can (depending on a series of other factors). But that doesn’t seem to have been the issue at play and the fact the commentators were discussing it doesnt mean that was what the officials were debating.
Gollum was very very angry,fucking fuming,it was nice to see that.
No personal “attacks”. But because you say something over and over doesn’t make it true.
Mane slides in for the ball.
There is a tangle of three players, no more, no less. If it happens out the pitch its play on. It is supposed to be a physical contest, so every coming together doesnt make it a foul. So far people are stating it was a foul on the keeper? There was no contact in the original challenge.
Then the defender? Its at best a xoming together of players going for the ball. Its not a foul.
No one is arguing that point.
It’s just “a coming together” in which our player lunged into a challenge, didnt get the ball and in the process took down the player who did get to the ball.
I think all three players actually lunged in and were at risk of offending Rule 12.
But the clash prior to Jota scoring was simply that.
This will go around in circles.
All 3 were clearly off their feet before any contact took place.
Did ‘you lot’ see the other angles that the referee wasn’t shown?
‘We’ got them on SFR and it wasn’t as clear as all that. The angle the ref got shown was the most damning for Mané. I didn’t understand why he wasn’t shown the other angles.
Anyway we won so who cares?
I do. It might come down to goal difference between us and Everton at the end of the season.
Hypocrisy much?
On Kane:
On Mo:
Yes it was a foul.
Ognonna kicks Mane’s foot, knocking Mane off-balance and preventing him from reaching the ball.
From the VAR footage:
Had the roles been reversed, I have no doubt that a penalty would have been awarded against us.
The comments on this thread highlight one major issue with VAR. No one knows what the fuck the decision was given for. Foul on the keeper, Foul on the defender, offside etc.
ref’s need to be miked so we can hear the conversation with the VAR refs.
After seeing that, it was a penalty. No doubt about it
Good view this shows that for me, as I said way back in this thread, Ogbonna actually left the ball to play Mane resulting in both contact with himself and the keeper. You can’t blame Friend in this as he was only shown one view of it, however VAR grrrrrrrrr
So, as that view clearly shows it was Mane who was fouled, it begs the question, how did the match officials rule in West Ham’s favour?
As @Sportbilly1966 said, they didn’t show friend this angle.
But whoever was on VAR must have seen it?
Interesting.
@Limiescouse what do you think now?