|
|
Post by willieeetmiout on Oct 2, 2022 21:06:52 GMT
Just shows what a shit show the offside rule has become.
Sema is 2 years offside when the ball comes back in.
It gets toe poked against Bursik and then of course he gets to the ball first because he's 2 yards in front of everyone else.
The rule is a load of bollocks now.
|
|
|
|
Post by Gods on Oct 2, 2022 22:18:35 GMT
I've never understood the offside rule in any of its many permutations.
Please, someone remind me why we have an offside rule at all?
|
|
|
|
Post by cobhamstokey on Oct 2, 2022 22:27:22 GMT
Just shows what a shit show the offside rule has become. Sema is 2 years offside when the ball comes back in. It gets toe poked against Bursik and then of course he gets to the ball first because he's 2 yards in front of everyone else. The rule is a load of bollocks now. I thought that when I saw it. However much we deserved to lose the first 2 goals we’re both offside. I think VAR would have chalked them both off. |
|
|
|
Post by PotterLog on Oct 3, 2022 2:22:16 GMT
Just shows what a shit show the offside rule has become. Sema is 2 years offside when the ball comes back in. It gets toe poked against Bursik and then of course he gets to the ball first because he's 2 yards in front of everyone else. The rule is a load of bollocks now. He’s not two yards in front when it’s played to him though is he, he’s back in a position which is well onside. Doesn’t really make a difference that he was previously offside.. I’d rather focus on the dozy fucker of ours who wandered away from him when the ball was lobbed back in |
|
|
|
Post by metalhead on Oct 3, 2022 12:06:45 GMT
Just shows what a shit show the offside rule has become. Sema is 2 years offside when the ball comes back in. It gets toe poked against Bursik and then of course he gets to the ball first because he's 2 yards in front of everyone else. The rule is a load of bollocks now. I thought that when I saw it. However much we deserved to lose the first 2 goals we’re both offside. I think VAR would have chalked them both off. First one is very tight:  But I think we need to be realistic. We were garbage. Second to every ball. Horrible game. |
|
|
|
Post by cvillestokie on Oct 3, 2022 12:44:25 GMT
I've never understood the offside rule in any of its many permutations. Please, someone remind me why we have an offside rule at all? To stop goal hanging. I think it should be made far more simple. At the time of the pass, is the receiving player in line or behind two opposition players? Or, was the ball played backwards/square? If the answer 1a or 1b is yes, I’d accept it as onside. I’d also give advantage to the attacker. Rather than being offside if your ass is over that imaginary line, I’d change it to being onside as long as any part of the body was in line. I hate the nonsense about “interfering with play” or “passage of play” etc. It makes the whole thing too subjective, which makes rulings too inconsistent. I’d much rather have a simple, if not that great rule applied consistently, than a cluttered definition interpreted individually each week. |
|
|
|
Post by Gods on Oct 3, 2022 12:52:47 GMT
I've never understood the offside rule in any of its many permutations. Please, someone remind me why we have an offside rule at all? To stop goal hanging. I think it should be made far more simple. At the time of the pass, is the receiving player in line or behind two opposition players? Or, was the ball played backwards/square? If the answer 1a or 1b is yes, I’d accept it as onside. I’d also give advantage to the attacker. Rather than being offside if your ass is over that imaginary line, I’d change it to being onside as long as any part of the body was in line. I hate the nonsense about “interfering with play” or “passage of play” etc. It makes the whole thing too subjective, which makes rulings too inconsistent. I’d much rather have a simple, if not that great rule applied consistently, than a cluttered definition interpreted individually each week. Yeah, it's basically to stop goal hanging. There must be a better way to do that than this pantomime of electronic line drawing we have created! |
|
|
|
Post by Squeekster on Oct 3, 2022 13:10:46 GMT
To stop goal hanging. I think it should be made far more simple. At the time of the pass, is the receiving player in line or behind two opposition players? Or, was the ball played backwards/square? If the answer 1a or 1b is yes, I’d accept it as onside. I’d also give advantage to the attacker. Rather than being offside if your ass is over that imaginary line, I’d change it to being onside as long as any part of the body was in line. I hate the nonsense about “interfering with play” or “passage of play” etc. It makes the whole thing too subjective, which makes rulings too inconsistent. I’d much rather have a simple, if not that great rule applied consistently, than a cluttered definition interpreted individually each week. Yeah, it's basically to stop goal hanging. There must be a better way to do that than this pantomime of electronic line drawing we have created! Just go back to how it was originally where offside is offside and non of this phase one two and three shit! |
|
|
|
Post by dirtygary69 on Oct 3, 2022 14:49:08 GMT
I thought that when I saw it. However much we deserved to lose the first 2 goals we’re both offside. I think VAR would have chalked them both off. First one is very tight: But I think we need to be realistic. We were garbage. Second to every ball. Horrible game. Although it is tight and is offside, Flint is a yard too deep which makes it much tighter than it needs to be. If he's that bit further up, the linesman can't miss it. Although he probably could, because he was fucking terrible. |
|
|
|
Post by pushon on Oct 3, 2022 15:07:51 GMT
I don't see how any official could discern with certainty that the forward is "offside" when the ball is played.
If he's not sure he can't give it.
Saying it's obviously offside is just clutching at straws.
|
|
|
|
Post by cheadlestokie on Oct 3, 2022 15:14:04 GMT
I don't see how any official could discern with certainty that the forward is "offside" when the ball is played. If he's not sure he can't give it. Saying it's obviously offside is just clutching at straws. No, it’s an easy one new for the assistant referee because there is no Stoke player blocking his view at all. It should have been given. That’s not excusing the rubbish that followed but the first goal in these games is always important |
|
|
|
Post by PotterLog on Oct 3, 2022 15:30:33 GMT
I've never understood the offside rule in any of its many permutations. Please, someone remind me why we have an offside rule at all? To stop goal hanging. I think it should be made far more simple. At the time of the pass, is the receiving player in line or behind two opposition players? Or, was the ball played backwards/square? If the answer 1a or 1b is yes, I’d accept it as onside. I’d also give advantage to the attacker. Rather than being offside if your ass is over that imaginary line, I’d change it to being onside as long as any part of the body was in line. I hate the nonsense about “interfering with play” or “passage of play” etc. It makes the whole thing too subjective, which makes rulings too inconsistent. I’d much rather have a simple, if not that great rule applied consistently, than a cluttered definition interpreted individually each week. 1b isn't accurate, to be a bit pedantic. It's about the receiving player's position relative to the ball at the time the ball is played, not the direction the ball is played in. |
|
|
|
Post by PotterLog on Oct 3, 2022 15:36:00 GMT
Yeah, it's basically to stop goal hanging. There must be a better way to do that than this pantomime of electronic line drawing we have created! Just go back to how it was originally where offside is offside and non of this phase one two and three shit! That was awful though. You had good play spoiled and goal opportunities pulled back all the time because a winger on the other side of the pitch was a step closer to the goal. I know the interfering with play thing can cause uncertainty but overall I think it was a good, progressive change. |
|
|
|
Post by dirtygary69 on Oct 3, 2022 15:40:02 GMT
I also thought at the time the second looked miles off. I was at the other end of the stadium but it looked like both their players who tried to score were well off. Was someone really deep?
|
|
|
|
Post by PotterLog on Oct 3, 2022 15:52:08 GMT
I also thought at the time the second looked miles off. I was at the other end of the stadium but it looked like both their players who tried to score were well off. Was someone really deep? The one who challenged Bursik was nowhere near offside, the one who scored was off at the time of the first ball back in but was back onside when it was prodded off Bursik and came to him |
|
|
|
Post by BristolMick on Oct 3, 2022 16:21:08 GMT
I thought that when I saw it. However much we deserved to lose the first 2 goals we’re both offside. I think VAR would have chalked them both off. First one is very tight: But I think we need to be realistic. We were garbage. Second to every ball. Horrible game. It is tight but credit where it’s due because that has to an absolutely fantastic ball in from there to lead to the header for the goal. BM |
|
|
|
Post by boskampsflaps on Oct 3, 2022 17:00:28 GMT
First one is very tight: But I think we need to be realistic. We were garbage. Second to every ball. Horrible game. It is tight but credit where it’s due because that has to an absolutely fantastic ball in from there to lead to the header for the goal. BM It was a good ball, ridiculous no one was closing him down. I'm also a bit peeved that Bursik didn't go through their player ball or no. |
|
|
|
Post by LGH87 on Oct 3, 2022 17:10:41 GMT
Extremely frustrating given the goals we’ve had wrongly disallowed this season
|
|
|
|
Post by Goonie on Oct 3, 2022 17:18:54 GMT
Can't they have sensors in their boots like the ball has? Much cheaper than VAR I imagine
Quick scan before they come on to make sure they're not cheating?
Maybe too convoluted Buck Rodgers bollox which VAR is and ruining the game
How does this translate to grassroots?
It'll make top flight football unrecognisable from Sunday league which has always been it's beauty
|
|
|
|
Post by PotterLog on Oct 3, 2022 17:50:26 GMT
Can't they have sensors in their boots like the ball has? Much cheaper than VAR I imagine Quick scan before they come on to make sure they're not cheating? Maybe too convoluted Buck Rodgers bollox which VAR is and ruining the game How does this translate to grassroots? It'll make top flight football unrecognisable from Sunday league which has always been it's beauty Boots are about 2% of the parts of the body that can be offside though |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 4, 2022 3:37:02 GMT
The NASL used to have a 25 or 30 yard line beyond which you couldn't be offside....was actually a good idea
There was a new type of offside technology tried last week I think it was , no idea how it worked but meant no.line drawing etc.
|
|
|
|
Post by a on Oct 4, 2022 7:06:48 GMT
Some fucking abysmal defending for the first and arguably the other goals too, Laurent very poor, just a shambles of a team performance.
I’d have had them in Monday morning 0700 learning how to defend.
|
|
|
|
Post by thebet365 on Oct 4, 2022 8:36:49 GMT
You'd expect the Liner to give that 1st offside given there was no defender between liner and attacker, There was nothing wrong with the 2nd though, The ball wasn't hit towards him when he was offside and it's not like he stood there offside to gain an advantage he got back onside before the ball came to him.
|
|
