it was garner booked.
Armstrong made no contact with the ball and nobody was impacted by his position. If the officials gave it as a foul against O'Brien then it would be in line with football being a non contact sport in the modern game but at least it would have made some sort of sense.For the majority of the time the offside rule has existed, there was never the concept of a player ‘not interfering’ with play.
Does anyone?My biggest issue is that I no longer truly understand the offside rule because it's applied so inconsistently week in, week out.
I can understand why it was disallowed, but then you have times with players stood offside, in front of the keeper's view, and it's given. Make it make sense.
Keep singing blues
No, the cut off has gone now so you need 10.5th booking for Garner. That him suspended for the next game then?
Theres a lot to be said about Dave but he’s the least kopite of us all that’s for sureI see Dave is extra pissed off today, must be the RS result yesterday.
5th booking for Garner. That him suspended for the next game then?
Anything that involves words like 'clear and obvious 'interpretation' 'onfield decision > reality' is open to biases of any kindMy biggest issue is that I no longer truly understand the offside rule because it's applied so inconsistently week in, week out.
I can understand why it was disallowed, but then you have times with players stood offside, in front of the keeper's view, and it's given. Make it make sense.
Join the Everton conversation today.
Fewer ads, full access, completely free.