Euro 2008....Holland v Italy...Predictions

[Barrel of Fun]

Ah Sneaky George. Why did George and various other players stand off the pitch, until the goalkeeper threw the ball down or were they on the pitch?

 

[Icy Gull]

No, no they weren't. They could have had 3 or 4 themselves and if there's any justice, France (& Romania) will be knocked out shortly.

I hope and expect France to raise their game when playing the next two games against two teams that seem to want to attack. Romania came for a draw or a win on the break and totally stiffled the game. Be interesting to see how they do against Holland and Italy as from what I saw in the 2nd half they were very effective at it.

Let's see how the other two do against Romania before condemning France

 

[Behind Enemy Lines]

Ah Sneaky George. Why did George and various other players stand off the pitch, until the goalkeeper threw the ball down or were they on the pitch?

Never any question that Mr Parris' goal was 100% legitimate Barrel, unlike Van Nistelrooy's travesty last night.

 

[sten_super]

Never any question that Mr Parris' goal was 100% legitimate Barrel, unlike Van Nistelrooy's travesty last night.

Why was it a travesty? I don't really understand why there's been all this fuss about it. Admittedly my first thought is 'it's offside', but when you see the rule that relates to this situation it actually makes perfect sense. If Panucci had fallen over actually ON the goal line, he would have been playing everyone onside and there would have been no debate. Just because he falls behind the line suddenly people think he's not involved?

I thought Holland were superb and fully deserved their win. Italy though didn't look bad at all and I think those two will qualify from the group, although presumably now Italy will have to win both remaining games.

 

[Trufflehound]

presumably now Italy will have to win both remaining games.

A win and a draw will be enough if Holland win their last two.

Two score draws might even do it with the right results in the other games.

 

[Easy 10]

So what if Pannucci AND a Dutch player had fallen behind the goal-line, and Pannucci fouled the dutch player (grabbed him or held him down preventing him from getting back on the pitch or something). As we now know, he is deemed as still being active whilst off the pitch, so does the ref award a penalty ?

Or what ?

 

[Behind Enemy Lines]

Why was it a travesty? I don't really understand why there's been all this fuss about it. Admittedly my first thought is 'it's offside', but when you see the rule that relates to this situation it actually makes perfect sense. If Panucci had fallen over actually ON the goal line, he would have been playing everyone onside and there would have been no debate. Just because he falls behind the line suddenly people think he's not involved?

I thought Holland were superb and fully deserved their win. Italy though didn't look bad at all and I think those two will qualify from the group, although presumably now Italy will have to win both remaining games.

So what are YOU saying - the goal wasn't offside?

 

[Man of Harveys]

Just to check, if Panucci was being carried off on a stretcher behind the goaline, would he still be playing him onside?

 

[Barrel of Fun]

I agree with you Sneaky George. Why was it important for the players to be off the pitch, before running back on and scoring? The rules seem to contradict that action.

 

[sten_super]

So what are YOU saying - the goal wasn't offside?

Yes. Panucci was knocked over by his own player, and fell off the field, but played Van Nistelrooy onside.

Article 11.4.1 of the refereeing code (shamelessly copied and pasted from BBC Sport)

"an opposing player cannot be offside when one of the last two defenders has left the field of play"

Just to check, if Panucci was being carried off on a stretcher behind the goaline, would he still be playing him onside?

Apparently not; in that situation the referee has given the player permission to leave the field, so he is not active in the game.

 

[SULLY COULDNT SHOOT]

[smug smile]
As Marc can testify it was I who first proved the goal onside.

 

[shaun_rc]

I watched the game flicking between German TV and ITV, and the German commentator immediately said the rules stated that the Italian player lying off the pitch made the first Dutch goal onside.

Whether that's a good or bad thing, it's interesting that no-one associated with the ITV coverage even thought to ask that question...

Either way, the Dutch well deserved the win...

 

[Silent Bob]

Just to check, if Panucci was being carried off on a stretcher behind the goaline, would he still be playing him onside?

I think the referee would have to give permission for them to come to him, making no longer in the game. Bollocks rule though.

Why is it anyway that if a striker was there he'd be inactive but if it's a defender he is active? The whole offside law is a disaster at the moment imo.

 

[Behind Enemy Lines]

If Panucci had fallen over on the goalline, in my view, he would have still been active because technically he still has the ability to effect play ( for example, block a shot). But he was not on the goalline, he was off the pitch in a position where he couldn't possibly have any influence on the game. That fact should surely be the overriding factor here rather than UEFA digging up an obscure rule nobody has ever heard of. No, I'm sorry, the " goal" was offside.

 

[Easy 10]

If Panucci had fallen over on the goalline, in my view, he would have still been active because technically he still has the ability to effect play ( for example, block a shot). But he was not on the goalline, he was off the pitch in a position where he couldn't possibly have any influence on the game. That fact should surely be the overriding factor here rather than UEFA digging up an obscure rule nobody has ever heard of. No, I'm sorry, the " goal" was offside.

The linesman had clearly heard of that rule - and obscure or not, its his JOB to know about it. You can't just declare a goal offisde because the rule is too obscure !

Last night I thought it was an atrocious decision. Now I've seen this obscure rule, it was indeed the correct decision. Whether you AGREE with the rule or not is neither here nor there, if its in the rulebook, its got to be imlpemented. Fair play to the lino, he got it spot on.

 

[sten_super]

If Panucci had fallen over on the goalline, in my view, he would have still been active because technically he still has the ability to effect play ( for example, block a shot). But he was not on the goalline, he was off the pitch in a position where he couldn't possibly have any influence on the game. That fact should surely be the overriding factor here rather than UEFA digging up an obscure rule nobody has ever heard of. No, I'm sorry, the " goal" was offside.

The point of the rule is to stop defenders using stepping over the touchline as an offside trick; and this is obviously regardless of where on the pitch the player is. The idea of being active or otherwise does not exist for attackers, only for defenders. I think, to be honest, that bringing that in would complicate matters even more.

I can see the point of the rule, and while I agree it's not ideal, I don't really know how you could improve it in a simple and easy to understand way.

 

[Easy 10]

I've not seen anyone have a stab at this yet either....cos I havn't got a CLUE !

So what if Pannucci AND a Dutch player had fallen behind the goal-line, and Pannucci fouled the dutch player (grabbed him or held him down preventing him from getting back on the pitch or something). As we now know, he is deemed as still being active whilst off the pitch, so does the ref award a penalty ?

Or what ?

 

[Barrel of Fun]

I've not seen anyone have a stab at this yet either....cos I havn't got a CLUE !

I would guess it would be deemed an off ball incident and dealt with when play finishes.

What would happen if Pannucci and a Dutch player were off the pitch, but Pannucci was closer to the pitch than the Dutch player. Would that be offside or would he be negated as he is not intefering with play?

 

[sten_super]

I would guess it would be deemed an off ball incident and dealt with when play finishes.

What would happen if Pannucci and a Dutch player were off the pitch, but Pannucci was closer to the pitch than the Dutch player. Would that be offside or would he be negated as he is not intefering with play?

He would not be interfering with play, so would not be offside. As for Easy's question, I would go along the same lines as you; however even this doesn't necessarily clear it up. It's similar to when you get fisticuffs or something similar in the penalty area before a corner; as the ball is not in the area should the ref give a penalty/free kick, or just book/send players off accordingly and then let the corner happen? There doesn't seem to be a consensus, we've seen both happen.

So basically my answer is 'who knows'?

 

[Silent Bob]

I watched the game flicking between German TV and ITV, and the German commentator immediately said the rules stated that the Italian player lying off the pitch made the first Dutch goal onside.

Whether that's a good or bad thing, it's interesting that no-one associated with the ITV coverage even thought to ask that question...

Clive Tydsley would have been too bust reading his pre-prepared lines and David Pleat is senile.