Carabao Cup Final - Liverpool v Chelsea

[rudedog]

He didn’t block him. The Chelsea player wasn’t going be jumping against vvd. Endo never became active, he just stood still 18 yards from goal. We have seen decisions where players are in the eye line of the keeper, or interfering with the a defender who’s about to tackle, but not to players being passive near a defender miles from goal who may or may not have possibly had some involvement if some hypothetical scenario had happened. It was a hugely tenuous interpretation of the office rule, the likes of which has never been seen before, and they pulled it out in a cup final.

On the footage they showed the ref, one of the angles was looking toward the goal as the ball was played - Endo only had eyes on Colwill, he never looked at the ball.

So from that, it looked clear that Endo’s intention was to block Colwills run (which he did), this made him ‘active’ in terms of the offside decision.

If Endo had been onside when the ball was played the goal would have stood.

Technically, the decision was correct.

[Buzzo]

He literally stood still while Colwill ran into him, he was entirety passive. We could replay that exact goal but with endo holding his arms in the air shouting “I’m not involved” and it would have gone exactly the same way. If Colwill had tried to go passed him and he’d made a move to stop it then fair enough, that is a block, but he didn’t. The idea that a random player can look for a player in an offside position, run into them to make them active and have a goal disallowed is clearly not the intention of the rules, but this interpretation makes that a valid strategy from now on.

Yeah the precedent is the thing here. They were literally making it up as they went along yesterday.

[Buzzo]

On the footage they showed the ref, one of the angles was looking toward the goal as the ball was played - Endo only had eyes on Colwill, he never looked at the ball.

So from that, it looked clear that Endo’s intention was to block Colwills run (which he did), this made him ‘active’ in terms of the offside decision.

If Endo had been onside when the ball was played the goal would have stood.

Technically, the decision was correct.

But the law isn’t, ‘you have to be looking at the ball at all times’.

Endo was never looking to become active or take part in the play. He just stood still. If Collwill wants to challenge he has to run around him. If Endo moved at all in any way towards Collwill then yes, it is a foul. But this was not the case.

As Kenneth says the outcome of this could be that any defender on a set piece just runs at an attacker and goes down this winning a free kick.

[Scratch]

Arsenal are the most effective team from set pieces this year - they do thus all the time with 2 or 3 ”blockers” and not a word. As Kenneth said - to pull this out in a cup final stinks

https://twitter.com/stevemartinynwa/...91893950988429

This is before the kick is taken tho. Are those players still stood there at the moment the ball is struck, or do they dart back into line just before?

On the footage they showed the ref, one of the angles was looking toward the goal as the ball was played - Endo only had eyes on Colwill, he never looked at the ball.

So from that, it looked clear that Endo’s intention was to block Colwills run (which he did), this made him ‘active’ in terms of the offside decision.

If Endo had been onside when the ball was played the goal would have stood.

Technically, the decision was correct.

I actually agree. I was in disbelief at the time, but he was offside as the ball was struck and became active when he got involved with the defender. As the cross was coming in from that side, there is a good chance that if Endo hadn't blocked him, he would have stopped the ball from reaching Virg.

But, if the free kick was from the other side of the pitch, there is no chance he would have beaten our man to the ball, so be interesting to see what they would have ruled there.

[Exiled_red]

I think taking a step back Endo is clearly in an offside position and he isn't there by accident, he is there as a blocker, at that point I can see why people might have an issue. But when you watch what he does he just stands his ground and makes Colwell either move around him or run into him, if he was using his arms (outstretched or holding) to stop Colwell getting past then it's a foul, but what he does isn't a foul (and isn't given as a foul) the officials have exploited the offside rule to disallow it where there is a much lower threshold. As has been pointed out before, lots of teams do this and I don't think I have ever seen it punished before, so to pull it out in the cup final is really bizarre and is inconsistent from what we have seen all season, which is the problem with the officiating all season no-one knows where they stand.

Similar things happen at corners, so I feel that officials are making a rod for their own back here, because obviously you can't be offside directly from a corner and the threshold of that type of block isn't sufficient for a foul. So what you are effectively saying is you are allowed to block from corners but not freekicks

[RichC]

I'll be amazed if we see a goal ruled out for this again, I don't think we've seen it before and I don't think we'll see this again. Bit like the Virgil red for dissent.

The lack of consistency is as ever the main issue with this type of thing.

[Buzzo]

I'll be amazed if we see a goal ruled out for this again, I don't think we've seen it before and I don't think we'll see this again. Bit like the Virgil red for dissent.

The lack of consistency is as ever the main issue with this type of thing.

Yeah, this is becoming a theme this season for us also. Unprecedented outcomes never to be repeated. We are having to be so clean to win games it is unreal.

We had to win it twice yesterday FFS.

[RichC]

If the clubs could actually get past the tribalism with decisions and as a collective pushed for change and consistency we might actually see improvements, but it's the "I'm alright Jack approach and that's just bad luck" until it happens to them, rinse and repeat!

[badpiggy]

It's a crazy attitude - police the weird little technicalities as if the game depends on it but **** the players who are getting hurt. The fact that fat bejewelled knacker "Poch" didn't even have to consider taking Caicedo off as a liability for an imminent red is crazy. I'd also say that we need to be careful about giving too much credence to ex-players who do the whole "the game is gone" thing when talking about physicality - anyone can get hurt playing a team sport obviously but players have the right to be protected from reckless players and play.

[DerKrampus]

The decision gets more outrageous every time I see it. He didn’t block anyone, he did **** all other than exist and stand still. Refs are a ****ing disgrace.


The ell highlights has a view from behind that shows just how bad it was (7 mins 30 seconds)
LIVERPOOL MAKE IT TEN! | Chelsea v Liverpool extended highlights - YouTube

Um, not sure what you're seeing but Endo makes eyes at him, turns his body then stands still. He effectively blocked him. If it were a corner then the goal would have stood.

[Buzzo]

Um, not sure what you're seeing but Endo makes eyes at him, turns his body then stands still. He effectively blocked him. If it were a corner then the goal would have stood.

What is he supposed to do? Obligingly move out of the way to let Collwill through? Dig a hole and jump into it? It's a smart play, it's a contact sport. Endo has no obligation to get out of the way if he moves to block Colwill and match the run then it is a foul but he doesnt.

[rudedog]

What is he supposed to do? Obligingly move out of the way to let Collwill through? Dig a hole and jump into it? It's a smart play, it's a contact sport. Endo has no obligation to get out of the way if he moves to block Colwill and match the run then it is a foul but he doesnt.

You are missing the bit where he started in an offside position though.

If you are going to deliberately stand in the way of a defender trying to get to the ball, don't be in an offside position when the ball is played.

We can argue inconsistent application of the rules all day but it doesn't change the fact that the this was technically the correct decision.

[Buzzo]

But he is never active. Collwill isn't marking Van Dijk.

[Scratch]

But he is never active. Collwill isn't marking Van Dijk.

He is ball side of Virg tho, so had he been allowed to run he would most likely have headed the ball clear before it reached our man. Had the free kick been from the other side, then that's different, but in this case, without Endo being there, Colwill might have cleared the ball. Thus Endo is interfering with play from an offside position.

[Buzzo]

We could keep this going for ages, but I will try and break serve with this:

Qweev, Vigil and Endo all getting 9/10's.