sussex_guy2k2
Well-known member
- Jun 6, 2014
- 4,082
Whilst he was utterly awful yesterday, he was level.
What was wrong with our first (disallowed) goal?
- Thread starter Hornblower
- Start date
Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊
Captain Sensible
Well-known member
Have you watched any football over the last few years? He was offside (arguably) when the shot came in so by being in that position he gained an advantage when he slotted the rebound in. Had the shot gone straight in then the goal would have stood because his offside position at that point didn't interfere with the keeper. I suspect the vast majority of fans would see the shot and the rebound all part of phase 1.
Obviously I've watched a bit more than you!
DarrenFreemansPerm
⭐️⭐️⭐️⭐️
Even though the photo clearly indicates he wasn't?
timco
Well-known member
I think the problem here is not if he was offside when the ball was played, which having seen it on replay he clearly was not at the time the original shot is taken, but in the rule itself which is clearly too complicated, this rebound stuff needs to go as does all this interfering with play nonsense.
As was once said if he is not interfering with play what is he doing on the pitch.
Get it back to simple rules if it touches the arm or hand it is handball none of this intention stuff and if the ball comes off an opposition player you can't be offside.
As was once said if he is not interfering with play what is he doing on the pitch.
Get it back to simple rules if it touches the arm or hand it is handball none of this intention stuff and if the ball comes off an opposition player you can't be offside.
Postman Pat
Well-known member
When did the whole 'daylight between the attacker and defender' thing stop.
That is pretty tight to have gone either way and you would hope the attacker gets benefit of doubt when that close.....unless on the wrong end of it.
That is pretty tight to have gone either way and you would hope the attacker gets benefit of doubt when that close.....unless on the wrong end of it.
Kuipers Supporters Club
Well-known member
It's in the FA Match Officials 'guidelines' somewhere, but the attacker does get the benefit of the doubt when level.
So for ll those saying (not you) that the 'benefit of the doubt' should go to the defending side - they are wrong.
If that is the case then why are you suggesting that he is offside in phase two? What a load of crap. You may have watched football but you seem to have missed quite a bit in relation to interpretation of the rules. The only real argument is whether he was in an offside position when the ball left Teixeira foot. Your rubbish about phase two just because the keeper saved it is meaningless.
To be offside, either your head, body or feet are closer to the goal than the second last defender (although your arms aren't included).
Oh, and just for the record, I've been watching for nearly 50 years. Longevity isn't the point though.
I think you're right but you very rarely see that happen!
symyjym
Banned
It was a perfectly good goal and he was robbed.
This is a good example of why video replays for the ref should be introduced. If a goal is scored the play has stopped anyway, and the linesman could admit to the ref that he needs to see it again. A quick replay and pausing wouldn't take 30 seconds, it wouldn't ruin the game, it would only add to the suspense and there would be an extra goal celebration if it was legit.
This is a good example of why video replays for the ref should be introduced. If a goal is scored the play has stopped anyway, and the linesman could admit to the ref that he needs to see it again. A quick replay and pausing wouldn't take 30 seconds, it wouldn't ruin the game, it would only add to the suspense and there would be an extra goal celebration if it was legit.
What about where a player bursts through from just inside the opponents half and the linesman flags so the ref blows the whistle. Should the player run on for 40 yards before placing the ball in the net and then wait for the review. You will also need many more cameras so you can get an exact view along the line where the offside occurred. In an ideal world the linesman would get it right everytime but then in an ideal world CMS would have had 3 first half goals!
Creaky
Well-known member
I'm in favour of instant replays where this doesn't disrupt the flow of play.
If however such replays followed the protocol of those in cricket and Rugby League where the on-field official gives their decision, (eg. in this case the linesman would give offside), then this decision is only overturned IF it is 100% clear that the decision was wrong. There is no way that in this case the 'video ref' could be certain that the offside decision was wrong and the goal would be disallowed.
seagullsovergrimsby
#cpfctinpotclub
A bit of a silly guideline because if the attacker and defender(s) are level then it isn't offside.
symyjym
Banned
It wouldn't be for every offside decision, just the shot inside the box if a goal is scored. The linesman could signal with his flag a possible offside and a replay would only be used if a goal is scored. So in effect on something so marginal just continue the game.
It is just a real shame that perfectly good goals are crossed out, and this shouldn't happen. A replay is not something that will happen 20 times a game and it would probably only happen every now and then. It would only be used if the linesman was unsure, and wouldn't happen if players and the dugout were calling for a replay.
Whilst I would like to see every decision being correct, this would be the thin end of the wedge. Starts with deciding whether a goal was offside and then it would be every offside decision. It would then be for penalties whether it was a dive or a free kick or was it hand ball or did he get his chest to it. It would go on and on and then there would be no flow to a match. GLT is fine because it is instant but going to a video review would take time and would still be down to someone's opinion.
Captain Sensible
Well-known member
My response was to your condescending reply, it got the response it deserved. You can be in an offside position if the ball is not played to you. You can be offside, then defenders get back and play you on. If you then receive the ball when in an onside position, you are onside. It is not an offence to be in an offside position if you do not receive the ball from a team mate. My argument is that I don't think he was off in the first place. I haven't seen the replay, I only saw it live. I think I remember defenders getting back when CMS put the ball in. If there wasn't then fair enough, but if they played him on, then he's on. The offside rule has changed over 50years. As I said though, live I thought it was level and I sit in the East upper level with the north penalty area, I had a decent view. The Lino only flagged when CMS put the ball in, not earlier.
I think you would do well to check out the moment again because you will see that at no time does CMS go from an offside position to an onside one. It's on BBC i-player at 35 mins 30 seconds. There was no second phase before CMS put the ball away.
BensGrandad
New member
I read sometime ago that a study by a uni in the USA that studied over 5000 offside decisions of different leagyes ar different levels, some given and some not given and the result was that over 60% were incorrectly judged. Either given and shouldnt have been or missed and should have been given.
symyjym
Banned
None of the instances you have suggested are situations where the ball has hit the back of the net. What you are talking about is when the ball is still in play and the ref blows his whistle to stop the game for an offence. Scoring a goal from an offside position isn’t an attempt to cheat the ref. Like I said the linesman would have to request a replay if he was unsure about a marginal offside, not the players hastling the ref for one.
I refuse to believe that is true.