Game 21: Netherlands vs France live from the Leipzig Stadium. BBC1 8pm

[Darren Moores Mum]

2 minutes ago, Rob1981 said:

England play badly but sit on four points: “An absolute shambles!”

France play badly but sit on four points: “Have we seen the potential winners tonight, Cesc?

Great stuff.

Desperate stuff

[The_jagster]

5 minutes ago, Rob1981 said:

England play badly but sit on four points: “An absolute shambles!”

France play badly but sit on four points: “Have we seen the potential winners tonight, Cesc?

Great stuff.

France were better, against a side with better players, than England were last night. It's all relative.

[The Amazing Dale Watkins]

2 minutes ago, Mr Wallin said:

Because they didn't think that Taylor had made a clear error, and tbh I think that was the correct decision. The only complaint I'd have is that it took too long but I guess they looked a few times extra to find a way to possibly allow the goal. 

I still don't know the exact rule, and the commentators were no help in clarifying that. Is it that there needs to be a clear obstruction of the keeper for the offsides to be active, or simply the potential obstruction based on the position of the player? If it's the former, then it's a judgment call, and the ref should have taken a look. If it's the latter, then it's a factual decision that he doesn't need to look at.

[ajw10]

2 minutes ago, The_jagster said:

France were better, against a side with better players, than England were last night. It's all relative.

France have created chances in both games too. Plus they are proven winners at this stage

[GunmaN1905]

2 minutes ago, The Amazing Dale Watkins said:

I still don't know the exact rule, and the commentators were no help in clarifying that. Is it that there needs to be a clear obstruction of the keeper for the offsides to be active, or simply the potential obstruction based on the position of the player? If it's the former, then it's a judgment call, and the ref should have taken a look. If it's the latter, then it's a factual decision that he doesn't need to look at.

Offsides are called if a player is between the ball at the moment of shoot and the keeper, impeding his vision.
Or if he's physically in keeper's way.

[Rob1981]

18 minutes ago, The_jagster said:

goal difference when one team might be rotating in the third game seems less fair as a decider than a match where both teams are definitely taking it seriously.

Dunno. When only 8/24 teams actually get knocked out and there are so many possible permutations with the four third place teams going through… just seems very harsh to still be leaving some teams with nothing to play for on MD3.

I also don’t like the inconsistency… where h2h record is the separator within the group but then GD is used to compare the third place teams across the groups.

Say you have 3rd and 4th place teams both on three points. And 4th place has a better goal difference than 3rd but are placed bottom on h2h. You could then have a situation where 3rd place doesn’t have a good enough GD to be among the four best third place teams. Then they both go out. Because even though 4th had a better GD that could have qualified them, they aren’t allowed to go through and to be compared against the teams in the other groups.

[Mr Wallin]

8 minutes ago, The Amazing Dale Watkins said:

If it's the former, then it's a judgment call, and the ref should have taken a look. If it's the latter, then it's a factual decision that he doesn't need to look at.

This is very much in the judgment call side of it. But the referee have already made his call and the only time VAR should send him to the screen for a second look is if VAR thinks the on-field decision was wrong. 

[The Amazing Dale Watkins]

9 minutes ago, Mr Wallin said:

This is very much in the judgment call side of it. But the referee have already made his call and the only time VAR should send him to the screen for a second look is if VAR thinks the on-field decision was wrong. 

Ok, so then, if the linesman had not called offside, they also wouldn't have overturned it because it wasn't a "clear error"? I think the linesman was probably in the worst position to make that call from that angle. 

[sc91]

39 minutes ago, Rob1981 said:

England play badly but sit on four points: “An absolute shambles!”

France play badly but sit on four points: “Have we seen the potential winners tonight, Cesc?

Great stuff.

Whisper it into Gareth's ear at night.

[Sned]

22 minutes ago, The Amazing Dale Watkins said:

Ok, so then, if the linesman had not called offside, they also wouldn't have overturned it because it wasn't a "clear error"? I think the linesman was probably in the worst position to make that call from that angle. 

That was my thinking.

I thought that since it could be considered subjective whether the attacker was actually interfering, it would have been far better to send Taylor over to the monitor to make his own decision rather than delaying for the VAR team to make the decision. In all honesty I thought that was already the process in situations like this, but I'm not even sure how the process works anymore