Loading video...

Video Failed to Load

There was a problem loading this video. This could be due to a temporary network issue or the video might be unavailable.

How is this goal not called back for offside. Diaz’ presence had an effect on the defender’s ability there and directly losing the ball, Diaz pounced on it. That’s offside anyday. This is a PGMOL riddled season in favour of Liverpool

Crypto Arsenal

3,232 subscribers

960,302 views • 1 year ago •via X (Twitter)

Sports Comedy News & Politics

Anya Rossi• Live Now

Private livecam show

0 Comments

No comments available

Comments from the original post will appear here

Related Videos

Looking back how on earth is this offside?? Jackson defo on, and the ball was played infront of laps so? #bcafc

Looking back how on earth is this offside?? Jackson defo on, and the ball was played infront of laps so? #bcafc

Cameren Bowers (P)

43,977 views • 3 months ago

How is this an offside or am I watching the back of a pitch? This is clear onside goal, why did they remove the other Egyptian player. Iran has been robbed.

How is this an offside or am I watching the back of a pitch? This is clear onside goal, why did they remove the other Egyptian player. Iran has been robbed.

wizkidpikin

10,870 views • 1 month ago

THE REFS JUST MISSED A CLEAR OFFSIDE ON THE PACKERS How is this even possible??

THE REFS JUST MISSED A CLEAR OFFSIDE ON THE PACKERS How is this even possible??

Dov Kleiman

319,497 views • 9 months ago

This is another example of how VAR is useless for anything beyond offside calls. It only adds noise and more inconsistency. This was a clear penalty. Konsa did not touch the ball. Should have been reviewed, but VAR did not intervene.

This is another example of how VAR is useless for anything beyond offside calls. It only adds noise and more inconsistency. This was a clear penalty. Konsa did not touch the ball. Should have been reviewed, but VAR did not intervene.

Roozbeh Hosseini

168,177 views • 1 month ago

#RUFC have had fewer issues with officials this season than in the Championship BUT… This ‘offside’ call is a shocker. Absolutely abysmal.

#RUFC have had fewer issues with officials this season than in the Championship BUT… This ‘offside’ call is a shocker. Absolutely abysmal.

Lewis Oldham

74,418 views • 1 year ago

The Falkirk player pushes Maeda on to the goal- line which stops the ball going over the line. Any idea why this is given as an offside and not a penalty, especially as they have to look over the entire incident as it’s one phase of play?

The Falkirk player pushes Maeda on to the goal- line which stops the ball going over the line. Any idea why this is given as an offside and not a penalty, especially as they have to look over the entire incident as it’s one phase of play?

Lint

131,165 views • 6 months ago

This has been credited as a Barry foul on Ballard. It is clearly the Gueye foul on Mukiele. The flag is up but the referee clearly blows for a foul and no offside is credited. Just sort it out the standard of opta in the absolute bin right now. OptaJoe Opta Analyst This is not a fucking Barry foul on Ballard.

This has been credited as a Barry foul on Ballard. It is clearly the Gueye foul on Mukiele. The flag is up but the referee clearly blows for a foul and no offside is credited. Just sort it out the standard of opta in the absolute bin right now. OptaJoe Opta Analyst This is not a fucking Barry foul on Ballard.

JF Tips

40,318 views • 9 months ago

SEC Officiating called this a false start for being an exaggerated clap that drew the defense offside. What the hell is happening to football?

SEC Officiating called this a false start for being an exaggerated clap that drew the defense offside. What the hell is happening to football?

Jon Tweets Sports

264,286 views • 9 months ago

Stützle's goal is called back for "interference" because Svechnikov isn't strong on his stick. Has to be up there for the most atrocious calls of the season. Not only is the goal erased, but Ottawa goes to the penalty kill.

Stützle's goal is called back for "interference" because Svechnikov isn't strong on his stick. Has to be up there for the most atrocious calls of the season. Not only is the goal erased, but Ottawa goes to the penalty kill.

Everyday Sens

158,515 views • 1 year ago

MASSIVE CONTROVERSY on Newcastle’s second goal. 😳🔥 VAR released the footage, but the offside line was drawn near Rúben Dias’ elbow. Man City fans are furious, pointing out FA rules: Arms and hands don’t count for offside. The boundary should be the bottom of the armpit, not the elbow. Was it offside? #PremierLeague (Via X/ PLMatchCentre)

MASSIVE CONTROVERSY on Newcastle’s second goal. 😳🔥 VAR released the footage, but the offside line was drawn near Rúben Dias’ elbow. Man City fans are furious, pointing out FA rules: Arms and hands don’t count for offside. The boundary should be the bottom of the armpit, not the elbow. Was it offside? #PremierLeague (Via X/ PLMatchCentre)

DAZN Football

1,490,243 views • 8 months ago

This clip of Man Utd coming out for the offside trap and Kenny Dalglish missing an open net at Old Trafford still gets me. What on earth is this?? 😭😭

This clip of Man Utd coming out for the offside trap and Kenny Dalglish missing an open net at Old Trafford still gets me. What on earth is this?? 😭😭

UF

1,317,801 views • 1 year ago

Brazil's equalizing goal was a clear offside, and this entire tournament is corrupt. VAR was designed to disqualify teams that don't use it properly. FIFA wants this for publicity and other reasons. This tournament is run by advertising companies, not FIFA. The first equalizing goal was clearly offside. The VAR code shows the Japanese player's foot and the Brazilian player's header. There was massive manipulation of the match production and VAR technology, and the direction was clearly biased. These are shots from the pitch, without any manipulation by the directors. You're playing inside a FIFA game. #Japon #FIFAWorldCup

Brazil's equalizing goal was a clear offside, and this entire tournament is corrupt. VAR was designed to disqualify teams that don't use it properly. FIFA wants this for publicity and other reasons. This tournament is run by advertising companies, not FIFA. The first equalizing goal was clearly offside. The VAR code shows the Japanese player's foot and the Brazilian player's header. There was massive manipulation of the match production and VAR technology, and the direction was clearly biased. These are shots from the pitch, without any manipulation by the directors. You're playing inside a FIFA game. #Japon #FIFAWorldCup

Ava Brooks

1,238,529 views • 1 month ago

#LEEAVL - 8’ The referee’s call of goal was checked and confirmed by VAR – with Gudmundsson in an onside position in the build-up. The VAR also checked the decision of no offside offence against Nmecha – with it deemed that he did not impact Martinez after Stach played the ball. Contact on Martinez prior to the goal was also deemed to not be a foul.

#LEEAVL - 8’ The referee’s call of goal was checked and confirmed by VAR – with Gudmundsson in an onside position in the build-up. The VAR also checked the decision of no offside offence against Nmecha – with it deemed that he did not impact Martinez after Stach played the ball. Contact on Martinez prior to the goal was also deemed to not be a foul.

Premier League Match Centre

592,651 views • 8 months ago

Imagine we start losing against the Dark Presence in the event and this is how the Seven come back 💀

Imagine we start losing against the Dark Presence in the event and this is how the Seven come back 💀

🇨🇦 Cryo⚡️

16,853 views • 8 months ago

This is the controversial goal that gave Highlanders victory over Scottland Football Club at Barbourfielss Stadium in Bulawayo at the weekend. This was clearly offside. If it was Scottland which had scored this goal, there will be noise in town with people making all sorts of allegations. Without taking anything away from Highlanders, such decisions are not meant to benefit Highlanders but a club chasing Scottland Football Club for the title. What’s your views, was this a goal or not. My opinion is that Scottland Football Club was robbed.

This is the controversial goal that gave Highlanders victory over Scottland Football Club at Barbourfielss Stadium in Bulawayo at the weekend. This was clearly offside. If it was Scottland which had scored this goal, there will be noise in town with people making all sorts of allegations. Without taking anything away from Highlanders, such decisions are not meant to benefit Highlanders but a club chasing Scottland Football Club for the title. What’s your views, was this a goal or not. My opinion is that Scottland Football Club was robbed.

Stanley Gama

72,754 views • 12 days ago

Porto are doing their thing again and this time it’s in Europe, the Portuguese criminal gang is robbing Stuttgart in broad daylight… clean goal disallowed for offside what the hell

Porto are doing their thing again and this time it’s in Europe, the Portuguese criminal gang is robbing Stuttgart in broad daylight… clean goal disallowed for offside what the hell

LIVE GOALS

56,050 views • 4 months ago

I’m sorry but this is completely and utterly against the spirit of the game. The player gained absolutely no advantage here. The IFAB can’t rewrite the offside rule fast enough to take into consideration the Wenger Law. I mean come on, his toenail is offside.

I’m sorry but this is completely and utterly against the spirit of the game. The player gained absolutely no advantage here. The IFAB can’t rewrite the offside rule fast enough to take into consideration the Wenger Law. I mean come on, his toenail is offside.

Billy ⚜️

237,931 views • 1 month ago

This is a textbook example of why the "ball to hand" rule exists. According to IFAB Law 12, a handball is not an offense if the ball is hit on the hand or arm directly from a teammate’s kick or header at close range. Vitinha smashed the ball into Neves from point-blank range and so, it is classified as “unpreventable contact”, the rule is superseded by proximity. Neves has zero reaction time to move his arm when the ball is coming off a teammate’s foot from two yards away. There’s also the fact that it was a defensive clearance and not an opponent's shot or a goal-bound ball, there is no "unfair advantage" gained. So, this wasn’t a pen, IMO

This is a textbook example of why the "ball to hand" rule exists. According to IFAB Law 12, a handball is not an offense if the ball is hit on the hand or arm directly from a teammate’s kick or header at close range. Vitinha smashed the ball into Neves from point-blank range and so, it is classified as “unpreventable contact”, the rule is superseded by proximity. Neves has zero reaction time to move his arm when the ball is coming off a teammate’s foot from two yards away. There’s also the fact that it was a defensive clearance and not an opponent's shot or a goal-bound ball, there is no "unfair advantage" gained. So, this wasn’t a pen, IMO

Morenikeji

46,957 views • 2 months ago

I've been saying it for years on this platform and I say it again today. There is a not small percentage of this country that is forever lost in this cult and never coming back.

I've been saying it for years on this platform and I say it again today. There is a not small percentage of this country that is forever lost in this cult and never coming back.

Don Winslow

927,890 views • 3 years ago