Off Side or not Off side

If someone is stepping up to make you offside, you are immediately interfering. He wouldn’t step up if you wasn’t there

They’ve interpreted the law in an extremely literary sense but in truth, even with the law, you can argue all you like but Rashford is offside, in an offside position and is interfering.

If they’re arguing Rashford being only a few inches from the ball isn’t offside then you may as well stick someone on the six yard line to mirror the movement of the keeper…under the interpretation used in this instance they couldn’t be offside…

I’m also cynical to think had that goal been against Man Utd or indeed at most other games it would’ve been disallowed…

They’ll argue they’re right and had behind interpretation but there’s not a real football fan anywhere, really, that thinks the goal should’ve stood…

By the rules it’s onside, but anyone that’s played or watched football will say it should be offside.  The powers that be think have really messed up the offside rule and the handball rule.
FIFA/UEFA/FA have also taken away the ability of referees to apply their judgement in decisions trying to make everything black and white (and not in the good way!). I think it comes down to the money at the top of the game and the thought that a bad decision can cost x amount of millions so they feel the need to have as absolute rules as possible.  There aren’t thoughts of how much it’s effecting the quality of the game itself though.
The Man United conspiracies are boring, it’s happening everywhere at the top of the game.  

It was offside.

I get why a couple of people think it might be onside, but they're scraping the barrel a bit. Not sure if it's to play devil's advocate or what, but the simple truth is that the rules are not clear and cannot be universally understood or applied consistently.

I've read the rules, heard the arguments and I'm still of the opinion that Rashford was interfering with play.

There's no way Fernandez would've got the ball had Rashford put his hands up in the way that players sometimes do when they know they're offside and clearly affecting play.

I reckon Rashford could've shoulder barged the defender into the post a la Jack Lester and Steve Walsh and Peter Walton would be saying that it's fine because he didn't touch the ball.

Looks to me as if the keeper is moving into position to deal with a shot from Rashford, and so Rashford was definitely interfering with play.

I'm on the fence with this one. It's not as simple as what some people are stating.... People are trying to simplify it when in reality, it's not.

Either way, it's not Rashfords, nor is it the team's fault. You are taught to play to the whistle. The offside and interviewing with play laws are very loose in matters like this. It really comes down to two things. Did Rashford touch the ball? Did he make efforts to move out of the way? and did he obstruct the Goalkeeper's view?

- Well he never touched the ball
- He didn't move away from he ball, but the momentum of the play could be argued.
- He was nowhere near the goalkeeper.

In fact, it was simply bad defending from City. As i said, you play to the whistle where you're scoring a goal or defending. City defenders switched off completely and they only have themselves to blame.

absolute farce VAR incompetence at the highest level  making one of footballs simplest rules  mind boggling this rule changes every week  what a mess

I find it hilarious that the interpretation of the law and various others have become more complex and controversial since the introduction of something that was introduced to eradicate that…

Without VAR that goal is flagged offside, is given offside and nobody moans and we all crack on…simples.