York v Darlington

[MB86DFC]

Also, all this shite about there never being an offside goal is laughable. If the requirement of proof is concrete VAR standard camera angle evidence, especially when most teams at NL level only have one halfway line positioned camera to cover the entire game, then mistakes are never going to be conclusively shown. Just because its not captured by frame by frame in line camera doesn't mean it hasn't happened.

Well obviously...but that is still what the data says and that is the only conclusive evidence.

Reject the evidence of your eyes and your ears ...

[lo36789]

Unfortunately science has shown that to be somewhat unreliable.

Flash lag effect specifically causes eyes and brain to miss the cross overs.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flash_lag_illusion

[Darlogramps]

You do realise the stunning hypocrisy of your position Lo, don’t you? Denouncing people who were actually there as unreliable and biased, yet you yourself (who wasn’t there) are biased in favour of the officials (because you are one yourself).

The key point is regardless of club bias, the answers have all been entirely unanimous- that it was offside. It is stunningly arrogant of Lo to reject this and call people there unreliable and/or biased, on the basis of one video. As I say, even if there was conclusive evidence, he’d find a way to argue against it.

Lo’s insular mentality of defend referees at all costs is the perfect encapsulation of why standards are declining. He really is embarrassing himself.

[Lallacab]

I repeat, decision could have definitely been wrong, but the guidance is if it looks just offside it is usually well onside.

Are you really trying to tell us that the above is official guidance ???

[lo36789]

Yes. Literally the person speaking in that video at 06:05 is the head of Assistant Referees in the England.

He is asked by Carragher is that the guidance and the training and the answer is yes "If it looks a metre off then it is almost certainly onside."

https://youtu.be/_pGMRN5KN8M

[LoidLucan]

And if someone is stood several yards offside (which he was) normal guidance would be to stick your flag in the air. He was either not paying enough attenton, distracted, not up with play or influenced perhaps by the stick that the York fans were dishing out over some of the decisions or a combination of these. Either way it was just a rank bad decision at a critical time and that was pretty much game over. Everyone in the ground saw it and believes it was way offside and the video confirms what a dreadful error it was. No amount of links to other games or guidance to officials changes that. Pretty much only Lo out of all those at the game or looking at the video believes it may have been an excellent spot by the man running the line.

[lo36789]

No I have no idea, as I have repeatedly said, weird thing on this forum the more you say something the more you are accused of saying something different. The one thing I have explicitly said is I don't know and it could have been wrong but would be interesting to see how tight it was if it was.

I'm saying that in my experience it is rare for a goal at our level to be incorrectly judged as onside when it was off. This is based on incomplete data but the best data available, and I'd say upwards of 90% of a data set. Considerable less than 1 in 10 judgements aren't visible on a camera.

I have no proof either way the video doesn't show it, so I have no idea if he was right or wrong, I've said that but it is clearly beyond your comprehension.

The player looks comfortably offside on the video, but I get 15-20 clips per week to review. Many of which look as far if not further off on initial viewing but the alternative camera angle shows otherwise.

[onewayup]

Lo were you at the game,or are you making assumptions on video evidence ,either way the fact is the player in question was well off side only you are questioning the York management and all the fans at the game who saw it as it was fact he was definitely off side which was glaringly missed by the official, cannot be argued against. It happen .

[quaker4life]

No I have no idea, as I have repeatedly said, weird thing on this forum the more you say something the more you are accused of saying something different. The one thing I have explicitly said is I don't know and it could have been wrong but would be interesting to see how tight it was if it was.

I'm saying that in my experience it is rare for a goal at our level to be incorrectly judged as onside when it was off. This is based on incomplete data but the best data available, and I'd say upwards of 90% of a data set. Considerable less than 1 in 10 judgements aren't visible on a camera.

I have no proof either way the video doesn't show it, so I have no idea if he was right or wrong, I've said that but it is clearly beyond your comprehension.

The player looks comfortably offside on the video, but I get 15-20 clips per week to review. Many of which look as far if not further off on initial viewing but the alternative camera angle shows otherwise.

Whenever I see your name I keep thinking it says Io, as per the name of one of Jupiter's moons and I began to wonder if the random sequence of numbers in your name was actually not random at all but in fact your relative distance from earth at the time you registered, because if you're even trying to suggest York's second goal on Tuesday night wasn't offside you're not on this planet.

[quaker4life]

No I have no idea, as I have repeatedly said, weird thing on this forum the more you say something the more you are accused of saying something different. The one thing I have explicitly said is I don't know and it could have been wrong but would be interesting to see how tight it was if it was.

I'm saying that in my experience it is rare for a goal at our level to be incorrectly judged as onside when it was off. This is based on incomplete data but the best data available, and I'd say upwards of 90% of a data set. Considerable less than 1 in 10 judgements aren't visible on a camera.

I have no proof either way the video doesn't show it, so I have no idea if he was right or wrong, I've said that but it is clearly beyond your comprehension.

The player looks comfortably offside on the video, but I get 15-20 clips per week to review. Many of which look as far if not further off on initial viewing but the alternative camera angle shows otherwise.

Whenever I see your name I keep thinking it says Io, as per the name of one of Jupiter's moons and I began to wonder if the random sequence of numbers in your name was actually not random at all but in fact your relative distance from earth at the time you registered, because if you're even trying to suggest York's second goal on Tuesday night wasn't offside you're not on this planet.

[lo36789]

Lo were you at the game,or are you making assumptions on video evidence ,either way the fact is the player in question was well off side only you are questioning the York management and all the fans at the game who saw it as it was fact he was definitely off side which was glaringly missed by the official, cannot be argued against. It happen .

Nope I said I was looking at footage and basically explained why it's hard to know based on inconclusive footage. Belief in a ground from people "in line" is a terrible unreliable source.

I hoped there would be a wider angle as I have an incline it will make for an interesting clip if it has been caught, but alas it hasn't.

Don't think you realise how sort of unique a clip it would be if he is offside in this situation. Most flag as the last thing officials want is a dodgy goal being scored a dodgy defensive free kick is much more forgettable.

Was hoping it would show it to be correct as well from a football perspective. Always think results are easier to move on from if it isn't under a cloud of a dubious decision as otherwise people just focus on that rather than addressing things.

[Yarblockos]

I always assume that the darlofans radio commentators are mistaken/biased when they call out decisions as being clearly wrong, and that when we see the footage it would turn out the York player was maybe somehow onside. But in that video it really looks like it was impossible for him to be onside. He was facing his own goal, not timing a run as the defence pushed up. So moving towards his own goal and still two or three yards offside. Was the linesman distracted or something, or was he waiting for the VAR decision!

[theoriginalfatcat]

Always think results are easier to move on from if it isn't under a cloud of a dubious decision as otherwise people just focus on that rather than addressing things.

I don't think many on here are questioning the result. I can't speak for anyone else but I had a cracking view of this match and York were the better team, so personally I don't need to "move on" from anything. However, even to my unskilled eyes it looked way offside and I've been waiting for some unusual reason to justify the referee's decision but there isn't one, and even the York manager said as such, very clearly in fact.

[Yorkfan]

I was at the game. It was THE most blatant offside I have ever witnessed, the whole group I was with were in disbelief

[MB86DFC]

I was at the game. It was THE most blatant offside I have ever witnessed, the whole group I was with were in disbelief

Unfortunately this view won’t be accepted by Lo as there aren’t 5 different camera angles to back you up.

[lo36789]

It's the view of those there that's the reality. I legitimately can't say anyway what it actually looked like can I?

Just disappointed that such a contentious one isn't visible to be honest as they usually generate some of the best debate.

[50 years]

Our lasses cousin, a big York fan, was sat in line with the Darlington defence, and he text me to say " that was miles offside" and he is biased (although a nice guy to be honest). Think that tells me all I need to know.

[LoidLucan]

It's the view of those there that's the reality. I legitimately can't say anyway what it actually looked like can I?

Just disappointed that such a contentious one isn't visible to be honest as they usually generate some of the best debate.

Your biggest disappointment should be that your team was on the wrong end of such an awful decision.

[lo36789]

It's the view of those there that's the reality. I legitimately can't say anyway what it actually looked like can I?

Just disappointed that such a contentious one isn't visible to be honest as they usually generate some of the best debate.

Your biggest disappointment should be that your team was on the wrong end of such an awful decision.

But I didn't see it? It is pretty hard to feel that way about someone else's opinion of an event you didn't see.

[jjljks]

Despite Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle & quantum theory allowing the possibility, even in a parallel universe and Schoedinger's cat in his box would have seen it was offside

[don'tbuythesun]

A blatant offside goal and a sloppy bit of defending lost us the game. On another day we'd have drawn. I'm not sure the huge debate about angles and theories is worth the effort. We lost 3-1. On to Hereford.

[theoriginalfatcat]

York’s new stadium keeps in the crowd noise and on Tuesday night the home fans were very partisan, some of these lower league refs won’t be used to this hostile atmosphere and will bend.

I wonder how much a ref gets paid for this level.

Lo?

[lo36789]

York’s new stadium keeps in the crowd noise and on Tuesday night the home fans were very partisan, some of these lower league refs won’t be used to this hostile atmosphere and will bend.

I wonder how much a ref gets paid for this level.

Lo?

Used to be just under £60 - that was 5 years ago though.

The clubs are the ones who decide at the league AGM. Not one of those things which you would expect to be top of anyone's agenda to motion for a change let alone vote for it.

[Old Git]

It's the view of those there that's the reality. I legitimately can't say anyway what it actually looked like can I?

Just disappointed that such a contentious one isn't visible to be honest as they usually generate some of the best debate.

Not contentious at all and I think the video highlights back this up. As the ball is played through the forward is facing his own goal and clearly several yards ahead of the defenders. Very briefly you can see across the pitch and there is no one in a white shirt in sight. Case closed.

[PierremontQuaker03]

While I am jealous of York's stadium and the fact that they are a full time club - they are nearly 10.5 million in the red and owe 8.5million to McGill.
I think I would prefer to be in our situation.
McGill is running the football club at a loss each year, building up more and more debt (to himself), and at the end he "could" say I want my money back (the very money he has been pi**ing up the wall for god knows how many years).
We need to be very careful that we do not become beholden to one person. I really think we could lead the way in how football clubs could be ran and sustained into the future at a lower level.

[spen666]

While I am jealous of York's stadium and the fact that they are a full time club - they are nearly 10.5 million in the red and owe 8.5million to McGill.
...

I thought the sale of Bootham Crescent was supposed to enable him to get his money back. If it didn't, I can't see how he can ever get his money back as York have no assets anymore

[loan_star]

Easy to try and make Wheater the scapegoat but AA will have been fully aware about his fitness. Clearly he played out necessity because Ellis and Storey weren’t fully fit (as evidenced by Ellis only playing six minutes and Storey not coming off the bench).

Don’t think AA would have started him last night had there been alternatives. Hopefully during the week and a half off we’ve now got, Ellis and Storey can get over those injuries and Wheater can have a decent rest to recover.

I wasnt particularly making Wheater a scapegoat but there were players on the pitch that had far worse games than usual yet people only seem to pick on Rivers and Cassidy.

As for lo trying to defend that offside, well hes making a tit of himself. When even the York fans are saying he was miles off you would think he would just admit the linesman made a horrendous error.

[theoriginalfatcat]

When even the York fans are saying he was miles off you would think he would just admit the linesman made a horrendous error.

Yep, this is it, s*** happens.

[Spyman]

While I am jealous of York's stadium and the fact that they are a full time club - they are nearly 10.5 million in the red and owe 8.5million to McGill.
I think I would prefer to be in our situation.
McGill is running the football club at a loss each year, building up more and more debt (to himself), and at the end he "could" say I want my money back (the very money he has been pi**ing up the wall for god knows how many years).
We need to be very careful that we do not become beholden to one person. I really think we could lead the way in how football clubs could be ran and sustained into the future at a lower level.

Which is more or less exactly what happened with Reynolds, Houghton and Singh. Debt piled up in the club's name and when they walked away they were the major creditors so had all the control over any CVA being approved.

It's insane that we still have supporters that would allow us to be in that situation again, just for the sake of a crack at a couple of promotions.

Sent from my Pixel 6 Pro using Tapatalk

[theoriginalfatcat]

While I am jealous of York's stadium and the fact that they are a full time club - they are nearly 10.5 million in the red and owe 8.5million to McGill.
I think I would prefer to be in our situation.
McGill is running the football club at a loss each year, building up more and more debt (to himself), and at the end he "could" say I want my money back (the very money he has been pi**ing up the wall for god knows how many years).
We need to be very careful that we do not become beholden to one person. I really think we could lead the way in how football clubs could be ran and sustained into the future at a lower level.

Which is more or less exactly what happened with Reynolds, Houghton and Singh. Debt piled up in the club's name and when they walked away they were the major creditors so had all the control over any CVA being approved.

It's insane that we still have supporters that would allow us to be in that situation again, just for the sake of a crack at a couple of promotions.

Sent from my Pixel 6 Pro using Tapatalk

Yes, I agree.

I previously thought that the sale proceeds from Bootham Crescent would end up with McGill to clear his debt however after having a prolonged trawl around the internet I have found nothing to confirm this but instead get the impression that this money went into construction costs. York's finances seem a bit of a mystery with McGill seemingly owed about £8 million Anyway, that aside below is a poignant bit of writing from an elderly York fan that i came across.

"When I first started supporting City it was a lovely little club who owned its own ground, a club that I always felt belonged to the people of York. Moving on sixty plus years, we play at a spanking new stadium, miles from the city centre, but its not our ground anymore. We are simply paying rent for the privilege of playing there. The club has gone cold, it doesn't have that welcoming feeling any more. York City Football Club exists in name only, its far from the club that I used to worship. I appreciate that football is big business these days, and the FA only have eyes for the Premier League, so the majority of the other clubs are in debt. But I will gladly settle for non league football for the rest of my days, if only our club could become that friendly little club it always used to be."