|
|
|
Rank: Football League
Groups: Referee, Registered
Joined: 6/5/2009
Posts: 288
Points: 879
Location: The ref's room
|
the maninblack8 wrote:Not seen it, but from the way Eakes and also the report in the Daily Telegraph, It should have been offiside.
Law 11 Offside reads 'A player in an offside position is only penalised if, at the moment the ball touches or is played by one of his team, he is, in the opinion of the referee involved in active play, by:
Interfering with play
interfering with an opponent
gaining an advantage by being it that position.
I should added of course that the attacker must be nearer his opponents goal line than the ball, at the moment the ball is played, and is in the opponents half.
|
|
|
|
Rank: Championship
Groups: Referee, Registered
Joined: 5/31/2009
Posts: 1,578
Points: 4,737
Location: 'Slip
|
The way I interpret the offside law - even if it deflects off an oppo player on it's way through then it's offside. I thought that was correct. In fact I would have been 100% sure before I saw that. Maybe because the Bath player miskicked it rather than it being an 'accidental' deflection that's what made it onside? I would certainly be flagging for that if I was the assistant. Makes me think about the law change that happened about 5 years ago, which I saw Ronaldo take advantage of last season. He went down inside the penalty area on the left hand side. Play broke back up field with all players except him (and the goalie) moving back towards the halfway line. Madrid regained position and at this point Ronaldo was back on his feet but still in the penalty area, in an offside 'position' by a good 30 yards. Madrid played the ball down the right flank and a player broke the offside trap and was through on goal, albeit wide on the right. He ran into the box with only the keeper to beat, he squared it to Ronaldo who tapped in. The previous law said that Ronaldo should be offside for the original pass down the right side but it was changed. Which makes a mockery of the bit that says 'a player is offside if gaining an advantage from being in that position'. Surely Ronaldo being 30 yards away from the nearest opponent is an advantage?? Congratulations to Woodies.
|
|
|
|
Rank: Championship
Groups: Referee, Registered
Joined: 5/31/2009
Posts: 1,578
Points: 4,737
Location: 'Slip
|
Just re-read how FIFA define 'gaining an advantage'... 'Gaining an advantage by being in that position means playing a ball that rebounds to him off a goal post or the crossbar having been in an offside position or playing the ball that rebounds to him off an opponent having been in an offside position'. So the last bit clearly states that last nights goal should not have stood. I can't believe that the referee didn't overrule his assistant as it was blatently offside. Or even go and talk to his assistant! Congratulations to Woodies.
|
|
|
Rank: Championship  Groups: Registered, Moderator, Manager Joined: 5/29/2009 Posts: 1,533 Points: 4,602 Location: Woodies
|
the maninblack8 wrote:Not seen it, but from the way Eakes and also the report in the Daily Telegraph, It should have been offiside.
Law 11 Offside reads 'A player in an offside position is only penalised if, at the moment the ball touches or is played by one of his team, he is, in the opinion of the referee involved in active play, by:
Interfering with play
interfering with an opponent
gaining an advantage by being it that position.
I would say that he wasn't interfereing with play or an opponent but was definitely gaining an advantage from being in that position. To me it was offside, and they got it wrong.
|
|
|
|
Rank: Football League
Groups: Referee, Registered
Joined: 6/5/2009
Posts: 288
Points: 879
Location: The ref's room
|
Eakes wrote:the maninblack8 wrote:Not seen it, but from the way Eakes and also the report in the Daily Telegraph, It should have been offiside.
Law 11 Offside reads 'A player in an offside position is only penalised if, at the moment the ball touches or is played by one of his team, he is, in the opinion of the referee involved in active play, by:
Interfering with play
interfering with an opponent
gaining an advantage by being it that position.
I would say that he wasn't interfereing with play or an opponent but was definitely gaining an advantage from being in that position. To me it was offside, and they got it wrong. Agreed, it only has to be one of three, and not all three at once to be offiside. From what I read point 3 was the one that occured in this case and that should have been good enough for the offside decision.
|
|
|
Rank: Championship  Groups: Registered, Manager Joined: 5/25/2009 Posts: 1,140 Points: 3,435 Location: Castle Green AFC
|
I concur, definately offside. In my book, even if a forward sneezes beyond the last man, he's offside, end of. Like I always tell the linesman, they always know if it's offside because I'll shout and do the Tony "arm in the air" Adams routine, so they know to put the flag up. Always like to help assistants  Green Army!"You don't stop playing football because you get old, you get old because you stop playing football"Mangotsfield and Castle Green URC
|
|
|
|
Guest
|
YAFVision Theme by Jaben Cargman (Tiny Gecko)Powered by YAF |
YAF © 2003-2009, Yet Another Forum.NETThis page was generated in 0.154 seconds.
