Offside?

[Jim Smith 2,610]

 

they did a VAR check on it I think so but surprised they allowed it. Mind you Krul should have saved it anyway. 

[The Great Mass Debater 1,202]

They said he wasnt interfering with play. Ruled not to have obstructed Krul's view

[Wacky Waving Inflatable Arm Flailing Tube Man 4,615]

The check took a while as it was such a tight call, but I think the check showed him to be onside. Had he been off then the goal would've been disallowed, as McLean's was against Leicester.

[Wacky Waving Inflatable Arm Flailing Tube Man 4,615]

2 minutes ago, The Great Mass Debater said:

They said he wasnt interfering with play. Ruled not to have obstructed Krul's view

Oh, really? That surprises me if that was the case; I would've thought VAR would've disallowed that had he been offside.

[Jim Smith 2,610]

I’ve been told elsewhere that Aaron’s was playing him on but not seen the video replay. Would be interesting to know if it was allowed for that reason or because he was not considered to be interfering. 

[Wacky Waving Inflatable Arm Flailing Tube Man 4,615]

39 minutes ago, Jim Smith said:

I’ve been told elsewhere that Aaron’s was playing him on but not seen the video replay. Would be interesting to know if it was allowed for that reason or because he was not considered to be interfering. 

The replay looked extremely tight as to whether he was off, really borderline. I assumed that's why the check took about a minute or so, because offside checks are generally the longest. 

For what it's worth though, I don't think Raphinha's presence had any bearing whatsoever on the goal, but then again, neither did Todd Cantwell's against Leicester.

[shefcanary 2,950]

Looked played onside by Aarons from what I saw on Sky, so even though he blocked Krul's early view of the ball, it's an irrelevance.

[Ken Hairy 4,272]

If you see the wider picture Aarons is playing him on, however even if he's off I think he's far too far out to bring into the interfering with the keepers sight argument anyway. 

[Jim Smith 2,610]

[Wacky Waving Inflatable Arm Flailing Tube Man 4,615]

8 minutes ago, Jim Smith said:

He looks offside in that still because of the position of their feet. Raphinha's foot is the most advanced part of his body whereas Aarons is leaning towards the goal, so his shoulder is the furthest body part back. 

If you look at it side on, it's extremely close to call; pretty much dead level.

[By Hook or Ian crook 943]

Think Aarons shoulder plays him onside 

[Ken Hairy 4,272]

That still shows he's clearly onside, and questions should be asked of Aarons as to why he's a yard further back than the rest of the defence. 

[Jim Smith 2,610]

21 minutes ago, Ken Hairy said:

That still shows he's clearly onside, and questions should be asked of Aarons as to why he's a yard further back than the rest of the defence. 

How so? The Leeds players foot is much further into the box than any part of Aarons’s body?

[Wacky Waving Inflatable Arm Flailing Tube Man 4,615]

3 minutes ago, Jim Smith said:

How so? The Leeds players foot is much further into the box than any part of Aarons’s body?

 

27 minutes ago, Wacky Waving Inflatable Arm Flailing Tube Man said:

He looks offside in that still because of the position of their feet. Raphinha's foot is the most advanced part of his body whereas Aarons is leaning towards the goal, so his shoulder is the furthest body part back. 

If you look at it side on, it's extremely close to call; pretty much dead level.

.

[keelansgrandad 6,680]

Onside. VAR while pedantic is accurate with offsides using the parameters it has.

[Yellow Wal 315]

I don't think the problem was whether he was onside or offside but that, if he was offside, was he interfering with Krul's sighting of the ball as he is so far away from the goal.