0wl18 Posted October 20, 2014 Share Posted October 20, 2014 If we have to resort to guessing in the year 2014 the game is royally f**ked up. I wouldn't trust that particular lineman to get himself dressed in a morning, he was woeful all game. What other alternative is there? It's the same with I'd say 30% of all decisions,you can't be certain all the time so it's a game of guess work like it or not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DJMortimer Posted October 20, 2014 Share Posted October 20, 2014 Round we go again... This thread is absolutely hilarious, no matter how many times the laws of the game are referenced people still dismiss them and in a few cases actually demand changes to the law to suit their opinion! I think the important thing to remember here is that the rule is the rule and cannot be misinterpreted at all. You can misunderstand it but that's not the same. People asking "But what constitutes an advantage? Thats what's up for debate!" But the truth is that the meaning of advantage is also written in the rules, you just have to read on a little further... GAINING AN ADVANTAGE “Gaining an advantage by being in that position†means playing a ball… That rebounds or is deflected to him off the goal post, crossbar or an opponent having been in an offside position. That rebounds, is deflected or is played to him from a deliberate save by an opponent having been in an offside position. A player in an offside position receiving the ball from an opponent, who deliberately plays the ball (except from a deliberate save), is not considered to have gained an advantage. It doesn't mean what you might consider typically to be an advantage in a different phase of play, it has a very specific meaning. The video posted earlier explaining the rule shows this perfectly and cannot be questioned. It is exactly correct. I'm sorry you think it's a bad rule (I don't think it's a great one!) but it is the rule and each sub-section of what constitutes an an 'active' player is clearly defined further on in the rules. The amount of people posting their opinion as fact is ridiculous and the amount of people that don't understand the offside rule is worrying for a bunch of football fans. Here's the facts based on yesterday contested goal. *Vydra was offside when the ball was played, just, a very tight call and one that I'm sorry for you was wrong. It's a shame that it was missed but I think understandable considering the pace of play at the time, officials are most certainly not infallible. Some you win, some you lose. That's football.*Ighalo wasn't interfering with play during that phase, he was running back and did not collect the ball - fun fact*** he could have even motioned towards the ball, not collected it and he still would've been considered inactive (seriously, watch the video, it explains it very clearly and has a great example of this). *You must be in front of the ball to be in an offside position meaning that Ighalo was onside almost immediately and the position of the defenders is inconsequential as he was behind the ball. *Phase 1 finished when Vydra collected the ball. That's it. Any (even perceived) advantage is irrelevant thereafter, as mentioned above. *Ighalo was onside when he collected the ball and scored. Nothing to see there. ** BONUS ROUND ** An apparently little known fact about the offside rule is that it doesn't matter what direction the ball is played, only if the offending player is in an offside position. For instance, player A plays the ball slightly backwards, player B who was in front of the ball then moves back slightly to collect it is still offside as he was in an offside position when the ball was played. I'm not going to try explaining it all yet again. There's little more to be said that hasn't been already. At least one person won't accept that the rules and their application are specific and consistent and I don't consider it my purpose to make everyone in the world agree. The goal was legitimate; get over it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest wilyfox Posted October 20, 2014 Share Posted October 20, 2014 Round we go again... I'm not going to try explaining it all yet again. There's little more to be said that hasn't been already. At least one person won't accept that the rules and their application are specific and consistent and I don't consider it my purpose to make everyone in the world agree. The goal was legitimate; get over it. Interfering with play and gaining an advantage are different issues. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest wilyfox Posted October 20, 2014 Share Posted October 20, 2014 The goal was legitimate; get over it. And the goal was not legitimate, because Vydra was offside irrespective of the Ighalo debate. So stop your pompous touting of the rules, please. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest JonTheOwl66 Posted October 20, 2014 Share Posted October 20, 2014 He wasnt offside. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DJMortimer Posted October 20, 2014 Share Posted October 20, 2014 And the goal was not legitimate, because Vydra was offside irrespective of the Ighalo debate. So stop your pompous touting of the rules, please. Even that much is debatable. At the very most he was offside by a few inches whilst running through at speed. The guidelines are that officials give the benefit of the doubt to the attacker so that can't really be argued much either. Plus, there are grounds to doubt that the best evidence on this site (the still showing Vydra just beyond the last defender) is entirely accurate as it may be a split second too late for the moment the ball is struck. If anything, the linesman should be congratulated for getting the judgement spot on, when thousands thought he was wrong. Yeah, I should stop touting the offside rules (and 'pompously' as well). What in the world could they possibly have to do with an offside decision? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BIG D Posted October 20, 2014 Share Posted October 20, 2014 He was offside but not offside enough Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Sheff Owl Posted October 20, 2014 Share Posted October 20, 2014 Well Gray today said that he has watched the video (and i guess numerous times) and he said it's offside so you would imagine he knows the rules and he's probably better qualified than most. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DJMortimer Posted October 20, 2014 Share Posted October 20, 2014 (edited) Well Gray today said that he has watched the video (and i guess numerous times) and he said it's offside so you would imagine he knows the rules and he's probably better qualified than most. So when two managers disagree about a decision (you know, like they do dozens of times EVERY league weekend), then they are both right? Gray was wrong, and the rules make it clear why. Edited October 20, 2014 by DJMortimer Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest wilyfox Posted October 20, 2014 Share Posted October 20, 2014 'kinel, now he's even claiming Vydra was on. I tell ya what, you distort the rules and their application however you like; I get the feeling you enjoy doing that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Sheff Owl Posted October 20, 2014 Share Posted October 20, 2014 Yeah of course Gray was wrong, if it makes you feel better, you're like a dog with a bone. Football managers should just pack it in then, why don't you go for a job, you seem to know EVERYTHING!! Utter ridiculous. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DJMortimer Posted October 20, 2014 Share Posted October 20, 2014 (edited) 'kinel, now he's even claiming Vydra was on. I tell ya what, you distort the rules and their application however you like; I get the feeling you enjoy doing that. Hmm, an ad hominem response. I'll refrain from making the logical conclusion based on that. I said it was "debatable" and that there were ""grounds to doubt". But that is not the first time I've been misrepresented in this thread. We have not seen a still image from the moment the through ball was played. The one we have does seem to be a split second too late for the true moment of contact. Given the motion of Vydra, I think it's fair to wonder if he would have been actually onside at that point if this was corrected. But even if the one we have is a true reflection, asking the linesman to be that precise at full speed is entirely unrealistic. Give the directive of 'benefit of the doubt', he still made the right call. EDIT : As previously observed by others, the picture below shows the ball just off the ground and therefore not quite at the point of impact. Edited October 20, 2014 by DJMortimer Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cowl Posted October 20, 2014 Share Posted October 20, 2014 Vydra looks offside from this still which is just as the ball was being played, however understandable it may be that the linesman missed it given the speed of it - although that is what they're there for. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DJMortimer Posted October 20, 2014 Share Posted October 20, 2014 Yeah of course Gray was wrong, if it makes you feel better, you're like a dog with a bone. Football managers should just pack it in then, why don't you go for a job, you seem to know EVERYTHING!! Utter ridiculous. So in yesterday's game, both Mark Hughes and Garry Monk were correct about Stoke's penalty even though their opinions were diametrically opposed? Just because they're managers and therefore know the rules better than me? I'd say that was "utter ridiculous" (sic). And if Gray is so infallible, just because of his position, why is this site rammed with criticisms of his selections, substitutions, tactics, signings, interviews...? Another ad hominem attack? Again, I'll resist the temptation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Geörge Whitebread Posted October 20, 2014 Share Posted October 20, 2014 DJM, you had a good go at it yesterday, and as I said at the time, I appreciated the fact that you engaged in the debate and attempted to clear it all up. We're now at 24 pages though, so you're probably within your rights to leave it there. For anyone else that is still unsure... The summary page from FIFA's website was my full understanding of the law. If you read that and only that, it would suggest that the goal shouldn't stand and Ighalo would be offside. I needed to read on and see the detail though, and would advise anyone else that is unclear to do the same. The summary doesn't mention phases at all, nor does it explain what 'active' means (FIFA use an odd definition that is nothing like the dictionaries version - i.e. what the word actually means), and it certainly applies a different use of the word 'advantage'. I think we'd all agree that an advantage was gained; but it doesn't matter if the relevant player hasn't touched the ball before getting back into an onside position. Once those areas had been cleared up, I'd agree with Scram that it's not overly complicated. That's not the issue that I have with it though. Aside from the failure to use English words correctly (as stated above), the main issue for me are these hypothetical scenarios.... The ball is played through to Vydra (let's say he's definitely onside for the purposes of this), and Ighalo makes the same run that he did on Saturday: (1) A defender runs back with Vydra, slides in and knocks the ball across goal, without Vydra taking a touch. Am I right in thinking that Ighalo is offside as soon as he receives the ball? (2) As above, but Vydra also slides in. The ball is knocked across goal, with both getting a touch. Vydra is judged to have directed the ball into the area, so Ighalo is onside because a new phase is deemed to have started at that point. (3) As above, but Vydra's touch is judged to have been a deflection as the defender's movement was first. Is Ighalo then back to being offside? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest JonTheOwl66 Posted October 20, 2014 Share Posted October 20, 2014 Yeah of course Gray was wrong, if it makes you feel better, you're like a dog with a bone. Football managers should just pack it in then, why don't you go for a job, you seem to know EVERYTHING!! Utter ridiculous. Do you not think that Gray is saying this to take away from the fact it was utterly calamitous defending? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Geörge Whitebread Posted October 20, 2014 Share Posted October 20, 2014 He's probably seen a replay and still thinks it's offside. It does look off when you see it at full speed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest JonTheOwl66 Posted October 20, 2014 Share Posted October 20, 2014 It is onside. Whatever angle you look at it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DJMortimer Posted October 20, 2014 Share Posted October 20, 2014 DJM, you had a good go at it yesterday, and as I said at the time, I appreciated the fact that you engaged in the debate and attempted to clear it all up. We're now at 24 pages though, so you're probably within your rights to leave it there. Once those areas had been cleared up, I'd agree with Scram that it's not overly complicated. That's not the issue that I have with it though. Aside from the failure to use English words correctly (as stated above), the main issue for me are these hypothetical scenarios.... The ball is played through to Vydra (let's say he's definitely onside for the purposes of this), and Ighalo makes the same run that he did on Saturday: (1) A defender runs back with Vydra, slides in and knocks the ball across goal, without Vydra taking a touch. Am I right in thinking that Ighalo is offside as soon as he receives the ball? (2) As above, but Vydra also slides in. The ball is knocked across goal, with both getting a touch. Vydra is judged to have directed the ball into the area, so Ighalo is onside because a new phase is deemed to have started at that point. (3) As above, but Vydra's touch is judged to have been a deflection as the defender's movement was first. Is Ighalo then back to being offside? Thanks. I have no problem with debate and honest questions, and nor should I. The only problems come when people are adamant about something and refuse to see that they might be in error or resort to insults. My understanding is that all of your scenarios would see Ighalo ruled onside, regardless of how the ball makes it's way to him. He was deemed not to be interfering with ball or opponent in the so called first 'phase' and what happens after that is a separate issue. As long as he remains behind the ball, he cannot be offside in the second phase. If he is ahead of the ball, he would only be onside if the defender played the ball to him. A subsequent deflection off Vydra would be irrelevant as the judgement is made at the point the defender first contacts the ball. I appreciate why you're confused though given the descriptions in the rules. It's not the clearest terminology is it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest JonTheOwl66 Posted October 20, 2014 Share Posted October 20, 2014 I remember seeing a goal scored by Real Madrid once where Ronaldo was off the pitch at the time, behind the goal, the ball was played in behind for another player to run on to. Ronaldo got involved by running inside and he put it in the goal when it got squared to him Guess what? He wasnt offside. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now