Today's Football 2014/15

[loooweee]

Finally!

 

[FOXINPEACE]

What a save!

 

[Seamus Colemole]

great from gomis, has to be offside for me though. would the defenders c*cked up had it been for his presence behind them? they would probably have left it for the keeper.

oh wait, they changed it from a law to an interpretation so nobody can really know.

If you look on the FA website it gives clear examples as to what is offside and what isn't.

When the ball was played by a Swansea player Gomis was between the defenders and the goal but not attempting to play the ball or blocking the keepers site so not offside. Then the ball is played to him by a Hull player so he is onside.

Personally, i agree and think he should be offside in that situation because his presense in an offside position can be deemed to interfering with the defenders attempt at clearing it, thus meaning he got an advantage from being in that offside position.

But the law is clear enough as it stands that he isn't offside.

 

[toffeejack]

If you look on the FA website it gives clear examples as to what is offside and what isn't.

When the ball was played by a Swansea player Gomis was between the defenders and the goal but not attempting to play the ball or blocking the keepers site so not offside. Then the ball is played to him by a Hull player so he is onside.

Personally, i agree and think he should be offside in that situation because his presense in an offside position can be deemed to interfering with the defenders attempt at clearing it, thus meaning he got an advantage from being in that offside position.

But the law is clear enough as it stands that he isn't offside.

but leaves to interpretation what constitutes as involvement. seeing the replay it's just bad defending because they don't look behind and get put off by him. but in other instances i see defenders and they have to make a snap judgement, they can't leave it thinking the striker is offside just in case they're wrong so in that split moment they make a rash clearance and the team score. i just don't trust that officials have this in mind when thinking about interference.

you see something like this every week where people will have different views, just go back to the old law imo, it was simple. i don't believe it was a stupid law, if players are too lazy to get back onside then silly offsides should be given to make them learn.

 

[potato]

i was trying to look for crespo's goal when he pretended to tie his shoelaces off the pitch then ran on and scored after a poor backpass.

no footage anywhere

 

[LinekersLegs]

but leaves to interpretation what constitutes as involvement. seeing the replay it's just bad defending because they don't look behind and get put off by him. but in other instances i see defenders and they have to make a snap judgement, they can't leave it thinking the striker is offside just in case they're wrong so in that split moment they make a rash clearance and the team score. i just don't trust that officials have this in mind when thinking about interference.

you see something like this every week where people will have different views, just go back to the old law imo, it was simple. i don't believe it was a stupid law, if players are too lazy to get back onside then silly offsides should be given to make them learn.

Even worse the defenders can never be fully confident that the linesman will have realised the striker is offside so in an abundance of caution they often have to make the rash clearance.

 

[toffeejack]

Even worse the defenders can never be fully confident that the linesman will have realised the striker is offside so in an abundance of caution they often have to make the rash clearance.

exactly ... but that would be the case with the old rule haha

 

[blue4eva77]

Huge win today! Mad game but great result

Cambiasso is a different class

He's prem class.

Where do you think he'll be next year mate?

 

[LinekersLegs]

exactly ... but that would be the case with the old rule haha

Yes but iirc in the old rule they flagged when a player was in any offside position whereas now you can be in an offside position but they will only flag if the player is deemed to be interfering with play/an opponent or gaining an advantage.

 

[ijjysmith]

i was trying to look for crespo's goal when he pretended to tie his shoelaces off the pitch then ran on and scored after a poor backpass.

no footage anywhere

Have you tried the Internet?

 

[potato]

Have you tried the Internet?

yup

 

[ijjysmith]

yup

Maybe ask Hernan himself mate. I've got his email here:

hernan.jorge.crespo9@compuserve.com

You never know.

 

[toffeejack]

Yes but iirc in the old rule they flagged when a player was in any offside position whereas now you can be in an offside position but they will only flag if the player is deemed to be interfering with play/an opponent or gaining an advantage.

i was making the point that they'll still make mistakes. any offside is a gamble, even the ones you believe are clear cut.

 

[LinekersLegs]

i was making the point that they'll still make mistakes. any offside is a gamble, even the ones you believe are clear cut.

It just seemed simpler in the old system, defenders had a a chance to look at the linesman and if no flag they could assume there wasn't going to be and make the dodgy clearance.

But that is probably my recollection playing tricks on me - the passing years and wine tend to do that

 

[toffeejack]

It just seemed simpler in the old system, defenders had a a chance to look at the linesman and if no flag they could assume there wasn't going to be and make the dodgy clearance.

But that is probably my recollection playing tricks on me - the passing years and wine tend to do that

it certainly was, it was a law, not something open for interpretation. hope figo gets in and reverts back to it. stupid things like players standing in front of keepers, when the linesman can't view the keeper's sight are what irk me.