[Albion] Premier League 27/06 - 02/07

[The Wizard]

Chelsea can’t defend set pieces, shambolic.

 

[Silverhatch]

The dildo brothers and Brady have told the entire playing staff that the club gets wound up if they go down - and they’ll all get **** all.

 

[portslade seagull]

Chelsea haven't looked very good so far

 

[Icy Gull]

With the sense of injustice of being denied a goal and then conceding almost immediately I suggest WHU will be really up for this second half having then equalised

 

[The Fits]

Chelsea can’t defend set pieces, shambolic.

They desperately need a CB. Here's hoping they're over Dunk.

 

[Weststander]

£72m Kepa Arrizabalaga is a shocking keeper, it’s been an open secret for most the season that Lampard wants to replace him.

Alisson (£62m), Ederson (£35m) and Henderson are light years ahead of Kepa.

West Ham just have to get the ball into a crowded box and he’s calamitous.

 

[GT49er]

With the sense of injustice of being denied a goal and then conceding almost immediately I suggest WHU will be really up for this second half having then equalised

Let's hope Chelski catch them on the break then - several times!

 

[jcdenton08]

I really don't know about that one. It comes down to two things - eligibility and the offence.

Eligibility:

"Offside position
It is not an offence to be in an offside position.

A player is in an offside position if:
any part of the head, body or feet is in the opponents’ half (excluding the halfway line) and
any part of the head, body or feet is nearer to the opponents’ goal line than both the ball and the second-last opponent
The hands and arms of all players, including the goalkeepers, are not considered.
A player is not in an offside position if level with the:
second-last opponent or
last two opponents"

He WAS in an offside position. So that's the first criteria fulfilled. There is ample photographic evidence of eligibility for the offside call.



Which leads to the second criteria, the offence.

Not going to copy and paste the full law, but the relevant parts of this incident;

"interfering with play by playing or touching a ball passed or touched by a team-mate or
interfering with an opponent by:
preventing an opponent from playing or being able to play the ball by clearly obstructing the opponent’s line of vision or
challenging an opponent for the ball or
clearly attempting to play a ball which is close when this action impacts on an opponent or
making an obvious action which clearly impacts on the ability of an opponent to play the ball"


Whether he touched the ball is irrelevant in the application of the law in this decision, although it appears the player on the floor didn't while offside.

The decision appears to have been given due to interference while in an offside position, which given the goalkeeper's clear line of sight could only have been given for interference against Azpilicueta.

I feel such a margin call doesn't constitute a "clear and obvious error". Therefore the goal should have stood.

Sources; https://www.premierleague.com/news/1488423
http://www.thefa.com/football-rules-governance/lawsandrules/laws/football-11-11/law-11---offside

 

[Saunders]

The defender had to step over him to try and play the ball if that isnt interferring with play nothing is.

 

[Is it PotG?]

Certainly offside.

Anyway, on to 2nd half

Chelsea need a little more, erm, energy.

 

[The Wizard]

The defender had to step over him to try and play the ball if that isnt interferring with play nothing is.

When the defender is trying to step over him he’s not offside, he can only be given offside after the shot was taken. If it takes that long to make a decision just give it up honestly, it’s stupid.

If I was West Ham I’d just play for corners here, every one has caused chaos. Chelsea need to step it up.

 

[jabba]

It's irrelevant what the player on ground was doing if the standing foot of the striker was offside as he hit the ball?

 

[Weststander]

The defender had to step over him to try and play the ball if that isnt interferring with play nothing is.

This.

Plus the prone West Ham player was very much part of the situation faced by the keeper.

An offside goal all day long, pre and post VAR.

 

[Jimmy Grimble]

The defender had to step over him to try and play the ball if that isnt interferring with play nothing is.

This. It’s offside

Doesn’t help that all the pundits/commentators can’t see it.

 

[Stat Brother]

IF we'd lost all our 3 games we'd still be 15th.

I should have added:-

IF we'd lost all our 3 games we'd be 15th, in July, still having not won a game all year.

 

[RM-Taylor]

Just noticed on the pictures online that Chelsea are wearing a new kit. Has anyone else changed kit in the lockdown season break

 

[vagabond]

Come on Chelski...

 

[Dirty Dave]

West Ham 2-1 up

Sent from my SM-A405FN using Tapatalk

 

[Beach Hut]

Arse

 

[The Wizard]

Chelsea