The Importance of Alphonso Davies

[trc2014]

1 hour ago, dyslexic nam said:

Decent (quick) interview with Herdman at half.  The main takeaway is that there is no word on Ayo’s decision but it seems like Herdman is doing what he can to get him.   Kudos to Wileman for at least asking the question.  

I might be glass half empty on the whole thing but that doesn’t sound good to me....

[Obinna]

Only caught the second half, but Tigres gave a pretty good account of themselves and the region. Happy our guy won though. Positives overall today!

[dyslexic nam]

2 minutes ago, trc2014 said:

I might be glass half empty on the whole thing but that doesn’t sound good to me....

He just hasn’t made a decision yet. IMO, we are no better or worse off than we have been for a while.  Would have been good to get him to the January camp, but the incentive for playing with a young dynamic Canadian team is exactly the same as it was.  

[Aird25]

1 hour ago, RS said:

There is no "main" TSN network any more. 

It was on 4 and 5, which are the default TSN channels for everyone in Ontario and eastward. I suspect most people get TSN 1,3,4 & 5 these days, with TSN 2 the only true national channel.

A "full" network broadcast nowadays is when the same thing is being shown on 1,3,4 & 5. Anything else is a regional broadcast.

Huh we only get 1 and 2 where I am

[RS]

1 hour ago, Aird25 said:

Huh we only get 1 and 2 where I am

That means you're likely in BC, yes? TSN 1 is the equivalent of Sportsnet Pacific.

[SthMelbRed]

3 hours ago, MM3/MM2/MM said:

The 2nd was the correct call also.😎

I watched the mini-match when I woke up this morning, and based on the replays shown, I have to question your interpretation of the offside law. Both calls were wrong. The Kimmich goal should have stood and the Pavard goal should have been called back.

[Aird25]

55 minutes ago, RS said:

That means you're likely in BC, yes? TSN 1 is the equivalent of Sportsnet Pacific.

Yeah, BC. I had no clue. Thanks. To be honest I haven't had cable in ages but I'm not at home at the moment. still you'd think Phonzie would still have a following in BC

[toontownman]

3 hours ago, trc2014 said:

I might be glass half empty on the whole thing but that doesn’t sound good to me....

Going half glass full, Herdman was very relaxed if not exuding some quiet confidence when talking about it. Definitely no air of frustration or defeat. 

Time will tell!

[dyslexic nam]

1 hour ago, SthMelbRed said:

I watched the mini-match when I woke up this morning, and based on the replays shown, I have to question your interpretation of the offside law. Both calls were wrong. The Kimmich goal should have stood and the Pavard goal should have been called back.

Bingo.  They offset each other but that isn’t how it is supposed to work. 

[CanadaFan123]

1 hour ago, SthMelbRed said:

I watched the mini-match when I woke up this morning, and based on the replays shown, I have to question your interpretation of the offside law. Both calls were wrong. The Kimmich goal should have stood and the Pavard goal should have been called back.

If you’re offside and jump out of the way of a ball headed toward goal it’s offside. It’s black and white. You don’t need to be screening the keeper, you’re impairing his ability to stop the ball while you’re offside.

[SthMelbRed]

19 minutes ago, CanadaFan123 said:

If you’re offside and jump out of the way of a ball headed toward goal it’s offside. It’s black and white. You don’t need to be screening the keeper, you’re impairing his ability to stop the ball while you’re offside.

You're wrong about the offside law. It's not an offense to be in an offside position. Lewandowski didn't impair the goalkeeper's vision on the play, nor did he impede the goalkeeper's movement. It was a poor call by the officials. I suspect that they realised this after the fact, since they allowed the second goal to stand, even though Lewandowski's knee and shoulder were clearly beyond the left back's trailing foot on the play.

[MM3/MM2/MM]

I can give you the first one, though you could argue that since the ball went "through" Lewandowski, he temporarily blocked the keeper's view of the ball and prevented the keeper from having a play on the ball.  When I am instructing/mentoring referees I tell them if you remove the offending offside player would the goal still be scored, in this instance I think you could argue yes. I think VAR used the former to make their decision.

On the second, not sure if the replay you saw showed the line across the field but from what I saw the only part of Lewandowski past the trailing foot of the defender was his arm, which is not an offence.  And if any part was it was so fractional that it shouldn't be a consideration.

If FIFA wants to increase goal scoring, to be offside should require that the whole of the body of the offside player be past the second to last opponent, it wouldn't cut down on controversy around goals, but a lot less would be called back. With VAR I can see this change coming. 

[dyslexic nam]

I just don’t see how Lew is offside.  He doesn’t impede the keeper view. The keeper is in the centre of the goal, the ball goes into the far corner (well out of his reach) and Lew is coming at it from the other side of the ball’s path.  Yes, he has to hit the brakes to avoid any chance of contact, but he is absolutely not impeding the keeper’s view.  
 

I must be wrong because VAR concluded differently but that call goes against my understanding of offside.  

[SthMelbRed]

36 minutes ago, dyslexic nam said:

I just don’t see how Lew is offside.  He doesn’t impede the keeper view. The keeper is in the centre of the goal, the ball goes into the far corner (well out of his reach) and Lew is coming at it from the other side of the ball’s path.  Yes, he has to hit the brakes to avoid any chance of contact, but he is absolutely not impeding the keeper’s view.  
 

I must be wrong because VAR concluded differently but that call goes against my understanding of offside.  

I have seen enough 'elite' officiating teams make so many elementary mistakes in applying the Laws of the Game over the past 18 months that I wouldn't recommend going down the path of thinking, "well, the pros interpreted it this way, so that must be the way it is." The decision on the Kimmich 'goal' was a straight up error in the application of Law 11 and the current guidance around the interpretations of the law.

[masster]

Refs ended up getting both of the calls right.

[CanadaFan123]

11 hours ago, dyslexic nam said:

I just don’t see how Lew is offside.  He doesn’t impede the keeper view. The keeper is in the centre of the goal, the ball goes into the far corner (well out of his reach) and Lew is coming at it from the other side of the ball’s path.  Yes, he has to hit the brakes to avoid any chance of contact, but he is absolutely not impeding the keeper’s view.  
 

I must be wrong because VAR concluded differently but that call goes against my understanding of offside.  

 

12 hours ago, SthMelbRed said:

You're wrong about the offside law. It's not an offense to be in an offside position. Lewandowski didn't impair the goalkeeper's vision on the play, nor did he impede the goalkeeper's movement. It was a poor call by the officials. I suspect that they realised this after the fact, since they allowed the second goal to stand, even though Lewandowski's knee and shoulder were clearly beyond the left back's trailing foot on the play.

The keeper didn't even make an attempt on the ball because Lewandowski, who is offside, was there. The game at this level happens in split seconds.. the keeper is unable to realize that Lewandowski is offside and thus plays it safe and doesn't dive for the ball because for all he knows a deflection is about to happen. By the time the ball passes Lewandowski it's too late.

Remove Lewandowski and it's a save, or at least an attempt at a save. The strike wasn't a sure goal that a keeper ordinarily doesn't even move for.

[dyslexic nam]

1 hour ago, CanadaFan123 said:

 

The keeper didn't even make an attempt on the ball because Lewandowski, who is offside, was there. The game at this level happens in split seconds.. the keeper is unable to realize that Lewandowski is offside and thus plays it safe and doesn't dive for the ball because for all he knows a deflection is about to happen. By the time the ball passes Lewandowski it's too late.

Remove Lewandowski and it's a save, or at least an attempt at a save. The strike wasn't a sure goal that a keeper ordinarily doesn't even move for.

I get what you are saying and I won’t keep arguing the point.  I just know that I have seen plenty of goals where a player is in a similar offside position, in similar proximity to the path of the ball, and the goal was allowed to stand because they were deemed to not be interfering with the play.   That subjectivity is the only aspect of the modern interpretation of offside that I dislike.  

[Aird25]

An integral part of only the second team to win the sextuple. What an outstanding achievement. 

[CanadaFan123]

7 minutes ago, dyslexic nam said:

I get what you are saying and I won’t keep arguing the point.  I just know that I have seen plenty of goals where a player is in a similar offside position, in similar proximity to the path of the ball, and the goal was allowed to stand because they were deemed to not be interfering with the play.   That subjectivity is the only aspect of the modern interpretation of offside that I dislike.  

I agree with you there. FWIW I think if that ball is struck top bins it's not offside. There are a ton of factors at play.

[Kent]

I'm going to sidestep a chance to rant about VAR to say, we have a World Champion on our national team. That's the first time we have ever been able to say that about a soccer player.

[Dominic94]

44 minutes ago, Kent said:

I'm going to sidestep a chance to rant about VAR to say, we have a World Champion on our national team. That's the first time we have ever been able to say that about a soccer player.

He’s won everything there is to win at the club level and he’s 20 it’s crazy.

[frmr]

I wonder how long he'll stay at Bayern. They will no doubt want to keep but I wonder if he'll want a new challenge in a few years. Maybe Real or the Prem.

[SthMelbRed]

1 hour ago, frmr said:

I wonder how long he'll stay at Bayern. They will no doubt want to keep but I wonder if he'll want a new challenge in a few years. Maybe Real or the Prem.

He can do 10 years at Bayern, bag 7-8 Bundesliga winner's medals, a few DFP Pokals, and a couple of Champions League winner's medals, and still be young enough to get a big money transfer to England or Spain, leaving Munich as a club legend, much as Alaba is doing in the summer.

[Dominic94]

4 hours ago, SthMelbRed said:

He can do 10 years at Bayern, bag 7-8 Bundesliga winner's medals, a few DFP Pokals, and a couple of Champions League winner's medals, and still be young enough to get a big money transfer to England or Spain, leaving Munich as a club legend, much as Alaba is doing in the summer.

At this point it’s hard not to call him a club legend based on what he’s won alone. I do think he stays another 3 years but Real will come calling, or maybe it’s Barca ? The reality is that there isn’t anything left for him to win at Bayern and he’s likely to win the Bundesliga and Champions league again. 
 

[Cheeta]

OneSoccer Today panel were, of course, posing the question if Davies is already Canada's greatest.  Jenkins poking Wheeler who's all in.  I'm still firmly in the Hutch camp, the "one season does not a career make" camp to which the usual reply is "But what a season!"  Impossible to argue against that but my point still stands.

Hard to see the future.  Could be at Bayern a LONG time.  Think it would be awesome if he rightly felt restless and hunting for new challenges by the age of 24.  It's awesome that we can evern speculate about ithat and not sounding like crazy people.