St Mirren Equaliser

[DaveF]

Can so eone explain to this thicko why it wasn't given as offside as it looked clear cut to me but I'm presuming my eyes have missed something obvious?

[Gordy M]

Can so eone explain to this thicko why it wasn't given as offside as it looked clear cut to me but I'm presuming my eyes have missed something obvious?

Im the same, and to be honest, i thought the first was well offside too??

[CapitalGreen]

Can so eone explain to this thicko why it wasn't given as offside as it looked clear cut to me but I'm presuming my eyes have missed something obvious?

St Mirren attacker was deemed to be behind the ball.

[hibeejeebies]

Im the same, and to be honest, i thought the first was well offside too??

Glad I'm not the only one 🤷🏻

[Unseen work]

The lines drawn for both goals were absolutely comical

[Gmack7]

Can so eone explain to this thicko why it wasn't given as offside as it looked clear cut to me but I'm presuming my eyes have missed something obvious?

I think they're saying he was just behind the ball, I don't think he was

[OstKurve Hibs]

I Think the scorers foot was inline with the ball before the pass was made which kept him onside.
I didn't know either, that's the explanation I got fae my nephew.

[Green Man]

I thought the first was offside, even after seeing the lines drawn I’m not convinced it wasn’t. For the second I think he may have been in line with the ball even though he was in front of the defender so onside.

[TrumpIsAPeado]

The lines drawn for both goals were absolutely comical

Boy looked half a yard offside for the second St Mirren goal. The first may have just been onside.

[Gloucester Hibs]

The lines drawn for both goals were absolutely comical

Yep, for the first one the angle was dreadful and it wasn’t even clear which Hibs player they were using for the line marker

[GreenCastle]

The 2nd goal looked offside 100% but oddly the lines drawn were thick and nearly made it look onside.

When the ball was played the player looked in front of the Hibs backline - didn’t even look close.

Ref was awful and VAR lite basically showing itself to be a shambles again.

Scotland only uses 6 camera angles or something like that compared to the

English version has 30 I believe.

[JeMeSouviens]

Can so eone explain to this thicko why it wasn't given as offside as it looked clear cut to me but I'm presuming my eyes have missed something obvious?

The lines in question are for the ball (not the defender) and the furthest forward bit of attacker that can play the ball (not his arm). I’ve only seen it on my phone so far but I think it’s probably a correct call.

[Callum_62]

I Think the scorers foot was inline with the ball before the pass was made which kept him onside.
I didn't know either, that's the explanation I got fae my nephew.It shouldn't have been drawn from his feet as surely his shoulder was was furtherest part of his body that he could score with?

It looked fairly tight but the var lines looked crazy tbh

Like to see them again

Sent from my Pixel 7 Pro using Tapatalk

[Eyrie]

Both looked very tight given that we only saw one camera angle which was nowhere near being in line with the action.

[Viva_Palmeiras]

You mean you missed hearing the mic’d up refs ultimate onfield decision after review :) oh sorry wrong sport - it really is mental

[Not In The Know]

First goal line drawing is comical. Looks offside to the naked eye but contrived to be on.

massive call.

also 12 mins injury time in totals. wtf.


2nd goal prob on side and their (3rd) not much wrong. But 2-0 half time we win that game.

[DH1875]

Why was their 3rd ruled out?

[Gloucester Hibs]

Why was their 3rd ruled out?

A foul on Lewis Miller near the halfway line?

[TrumpIsAPeado]

Why was their 3rd ruled out?

It was ruled out for a foul. Although tbh, I thought it was harsh. I didn't see much of a foul in the build up. But then again, I was convinced that their equalizer was half a yard offside.

[DH1875]

A foul on Lewis Miller near the halfway line?

Will need to see replay of it. Definitely a foul?

[Gloucester Hibs]

Will need to see replay of it. Definitely a foul?

Not 100% sure!

[LaMotta]

It was ruled out for a foul. Although tbh, I thought it was harsh. I didn't see much of a foul in the build up. But then again, I was convinced that their equalizer was half a yard offside.


Will need to see replay of it. Definitely a foul?


Not 100% sure!

It was a clear foul on MIller when you see it properly. But the real question is why that donut of a ref didn't just give it at the time.

On the other 2 St Mirren goals - the fact of the matter is with those dodgy lines and poor camera angles that they are just guessing.

[Donegal Hibby]

It was a clear foul on MIller when you see it properly. But the real question is why that donut of a ref didn't just give it at the time.

On the other 2 St Mirren goals - the fact of the matter is with those dodgy lines and poor camera angles that they are just guessing.

Just after watching Robertson post match and he’s not happy that the goal was disallowed because it’s a different phase of play . Referee was away to card happy as well , Obita’s booking was harsh and don’t know why Triantis was booked ? .

[LaMotta]

He was in front of the last defender, but he was inline with the bali

Yeah from the lines the goal should stand. But only if we accept the lines were drawn correctly.....

[Hibbyradge]

St Mirren attacker was deemed to be behind the ball.

He was in front of the last defender, but he was inline with the bali

[Hibbyradge]

Yeah from the lines the goal should stand. But only if we accept the lines were drawn correctly.....

Is that like Trump saying the election was stolen? :wink

Yes, we accept it.

[LaMotta]

Is that like Trump saying the election was stolen? :wink

Yes, we accept it.

No, its an observation that the Var system we have for offside is crap as they draw dodgy lines from less than ideal camera angles.