WHO Poll
Q: 2017/18 Brighton (h)
a. If e can stop being the masters of our own downfall we should take 3 points, win
75%
  
b. We seem too flaky at the moment and don't expect an easy game, draw
8%
  
c. We can't put teams away and have a soft underbelly, lose
9%
  
d. Did you know that Eurovision 1974 was held in Brighton and launched ABBA onto the world stage with Waterloo
5%
  
e. I love Friday Night Football, it gives me the chance to show everyone down the local just how big a West Ham nut I am, hat, scarf, shirt, you name it I'll be wearing it
3%
  



Sniper 2:22 Sun Sep 24
Offside - using james first as an example yesterday
Ok, I know over the years the law aroundnoffside has changed somewhat, essentially to stop the god awful trap grahams arsenal decided to use to ruin games week in week out

I understand that, if a player is 40 yards from the ba on the opposite fkankmand a millimetre offside walking back towards his goal when a oss is played tonaoneone on the opposite flank, he shouldn't be deemed active or interfering or whatever

However what I can't see is how, like with spurs' first yesterday, kane wasn't offside. When the balm is played to alli, Kane is anyard in front of our defence clearly offside. He's not walking back towards his goal, he's facing ours. He stops briefly, but never gets back into an 'onside' position, staying ahead of the dome fence the whole time.

I don't know if technically it should have been given, but if the laws state that isn't offside any more then that's utter bullshit

Replies - Newest Posts First (Show In Chronological Order)

arsene york-hunt 4:43 Tue Sep 26
Re: Offside - using james first as an example yesterday
Harry CUNT was in an off side position and his presence was streyching the West Ham defence. As soon as the ball touched him the ref could and should have blown up for offside.

I think Ali was slightly offside for their second

Razzle 1:56 Tue Sep 26
Re: Offside - using james first as an example yesterday
Alli is about 2m onside when the ball is played, that is undisputed - just watch the playback.

as regard to the LAW

Yes we all know (or should do) that it is indeed when the ball is played, if the receiving player is beyond the second from last defender when the ball is played the attacker has therefore gained an advantage and committed an offside offence

*yawn*.....end of thread.

jack flash 9:24 Mon Sep 25
Re: Offside - using james first as an example yesterday
Razzle 4:09 ~

Just to clarify "Ali onside when he receives the ball"

See rule 11 Paragraph 2

It isn't a question of being onside when he receives the ball, he appears to be offside when the ball was played to him (which is what the rule states, as opposed to being offside when he receives the ball)

There is an important & distinct difference

When the ball is played not when the player receives the ball

Razzle 7:56 Mon Sep 25
Re: Offside - using james first as an example yesterday
Just for you Morley you dogger https://youtu.be/dcN3Inbykx4

gph 6:54 Mon Sep 25
Re: Offside - using james first as an example yesterday
I was quoting this,
https://www.fifa.com/mm/Document/FootballDevelopment/Refereeing/02/36/01/11/LawsofthegamewebEN_Neutral.pdf
which is a couple of years out of date, but was the latest I could find online.

OK, you're right, but it looks like 18 months ago, I would've been...

ooooh Morley Morley 6:49 Mon Sep 25
Re: Offside - using james first as an example yesterday
Shhhh everyone, I think Razzle is trying to tell us something....

What is it boy? Tommy is stuck down the Well?

Razzle 6:39 Mon Sep 25
Re: Offside - using james first as an example yesterday
The current 2017/18 IFAB (FIFA joined the IFAB in 1913) Laws of the game Law 11 with regards to gaining an advantage:

Offence: gaining an advantage by playing the ball or interfering with an opponent when it has:
rebounded or been deflected off the goalpost, crossbar, match official or an opponent
been deliberately saved by any opponent

Not offside mate. I was issued with the updated law book 3 weeks ago by the FA. You can go view it online: http://www.theifab.com/laws

gph 6:14 Mon Sep 25
Re: Offside - using james first as an example yesterday
Actually, I've overstated that.

Kane would have had most of his advantage had he been in an onside position. He only gained an extra foot or so. But still an advantage.

gph 6:09 Mon Sep 25
Re: Offside - using james first as an example yesterday
In their campaign to remove intent from the rules, FIFA have decided it doesn't matter who the pass was intended for.

Current law:

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 or
• interfering with an opponent or
• gaining an advantage by being in that position

The advantage of having several yards over the defender was gained by Kane being in an offside position. He had that advantage "at the moment when" the ball was played.

This is different from the old law (as I remember it, anyway), where Kane's being offside wouldn't have mattered because the pass wasn't intended for him.

If FIFA want to have written rules that are different from the rules that are actually enforced, they aren't fit for purpose.

Razzle 5:59 Mon Sep 25
Re: Offside - using james first as an example yesterday
Bleating to the ignorant

Northern Sold 5:57 Mon Sep 25
Re: Offside - using james first as an example yesterday
We still all bleating?? Good...

Razzle 5:50 Mon Sep 25
Re: Offside - using james first as an example yesterday
FFS.....

Pass was for ALLI who was onside. Alli goes on a run passes the ball backwards to Kane who is onside.

Likewise if there is a throughball and the furthest forward attacker is in an offside position and another attacker comes from on an onside position to gain possession of the ball the 2nd attacker is not offside.

How many times do you see an attacker standing in an offside position from a free kick.......all the time...

Sniper 5:13 Mon Sep 25
Re: Offside - using james first as an example yesterday
Scorch

I totally agree

Also, if you look at their second goal, Kane again starts off in an offside postponed but jogs back until he isn't before turning to join in the attack.

If the referee is right in his interpretation of the first goal (and in fairness the current laws suggest he is) then the laws are wrong.

Also alli dived for the free kick for the third. And dived about 3 other times in the box as well

DukeofDevo 4:57 Mon Sep 25
Re: Offside - using james first as an example yesterday
Of course Kane has gained an advantage, he's got a two yard start on our CBs The player shouldn't be all owed to get involved until at least the 3rd phase!

gph 4:34 Mon Sep 25
Re: Offside - using james first as an example yesterday
This is the non sequitur - "Kane has not gained an advantage as the ball was not played to him."

Kane did gain an advantage even though the ball was not played to him.

Razzle 4:09 Mon Sep 25
Re: Offside - using james first as an example yesterday
I'll repeat it for the last time.

Ali onside when he receives the ball.

Kane in an offside position - it is not an offence to be in an offside position.
Kane does not interfere play as he does not touch or run to the ball.
Kane does not Interfere with an opponent.
Kane has not gained an advantage as the ball was not played to him.
When he receives the pass he is an onside position.

You can look at the Law 11 for Offside, then in IFAB handbook check other advice section on the offside law and examples..

In my experience on Saturdays and Sundays the vast majority of both players and volunteers who do the line do not have a clue as they listen to the fucking idiot pundits on the TV. The only persons who looks like they have taken an interest in the laws is Sheerer and Keown who has done a referee course.

Brucies_Star_Prize 3:11 Mon Sep 25
Re: Offside - using james first as an example yesterday

El Scorchio 1:58 Mon Sep 25

I've often wondered that. Would be a useful tactic to employ against a high line.

El Scorchio 1:58 Mon Sep 25
Re: Offside - using james first as an example yesterday
I'm inclined to agree the interpretation of the rule as it stood to allow that goal is stupid.

A striker could just stand on the edge of the oppo penalty box all game long, then have a through ball played to a fast winger from deep, in an onside position. All they'd have to do is run with it and provided they outpaced the defenders just square/cut it back to the striker who hasn't moved and at worst has a one on one with the keeper from 18 yards out. Due to interpretation of the rules he'd be onside because he wasn't involved in the pass to the winger, but he'd obviously be massively benefiting from standing miles offside with no intention of getting back.

jack flash 1:43 Mon Sep 25
Re: Offside - using james first as an example yesterday
Razzle ~

I notice you say that "Ali was in an onside position when he receives the pass....."

Possibly he was, but surely being in an offside position when the ball is played forward to him is quite a different thing

To me at least, he appeared to be in an offside position when the ball was played forward, though possibly just onside by the time he received the pass

I was unaware that that part of the rule has been changed, if it has?

Sniper 11:56 Mon Sep 25
Re: Offside - using james first as an example yesterday
I will do sold

I'll pop a fiver in the envelope too as they won't pay attention to anything without money attached

Northern Sold 11:54 Mon Sep 25
Re: Offside - using james first as an example yesterday
Sniper... write to Fifa... and tell them it's wrong.... end of thread

Page 1 - Next




Copyright 2006 WHO.NET | Powered by: