Offside law

[Fozzyonthefence]

Just now, Bad Religion said:

Explain how it’s possible to be offside directly from a corner. 

It should be technically possible in the sense that you can play the ball forward from a corner  (like inches or whatever the width of the corner thingy is) but the rules say you can’t be offside directly from it.  Saves checking if a player is an inch offside I suppose.

[Boyces beard]

Just now, Fozzyonthefence said:

You’re absolutely clueless or simply trolling!  Nobody can be this stupid surely?

It has to be trolling, surely!

[tiger Rudi]

I thought the pundits all called it wrong. The player was standing directly in front of the keeper, within touching distance. How was he not interfering with play? How was he not in his line of vision? 

Line of vision doesn't just relate to the ball.... Or does it? 

I think I'm right in saying that any player is in an offside position "when standing in the keeper's line of vision or is preventing the keeper from moving towards the ball".

 

In this instance the keeper could have dived to either side but had no way of moving towards the ball to make the save. 

 

 

[ArcticJambo]

1 hour ago, ArcticJambo said:

A player is entitled to their space on the pitch, that player if he stands in front of the keeper at the corner is not offside until another player touches the ball. Both the player judged to be offside and the keeper were going the same way until the ball was headed. What Wright says is correct, the keeper had no obligation to follow the 'offside' player, he gambled and got it wrong. It's a nonsense decision.

 

Was it actually deemed offside by way of the lines? I ask because I didn't see the game, nor did I see any reference to them, or was it on any highlights I saw?  I assume so as there's absolutely no other way he can be called off in that situation, there really isn't. Surely? Anybody?

 

Here's my original post on the subject.  Milky cleared it up while a few others wanted to act the big hard *****!  Sad.

[Fozzyonthefence]

1 minute ago, ArcticJambo said:

 

Here's my original post on the subject.  Milky cleared it up while a few others wanted to act the big hard *****!  Sad.

But, but, but did they draw lines or what?!

[ArcticJambo]

Are you a child!

[Percival King]

1 hour ago, Fozzyonthefence said:

You wouldn’t remain a ref for long if you just decided to disregard the laws of the game!  Under the current laws it was offside all day long.  Harsh but them’s the rules.  Similar to the Shankland one but probably even more similar to the McTominay free kick v Spain in the sense that the offside player was very close to the player.  The keeper on all 3 occasions was never saving any of them but that’s irrelevant and it astonishes me how so called expert pundits can be so ignorant of the laws of the game at times.  
 

For O’Neil to say that’s the worst decision he has ever seen was ridiculous and he should get punished by the authorities.  I’m also sure when they do that ref watch thing the ex ref will confirm it was the correct decision.

Referees disregard certain laws at times in most games e.g. keeper holding the ball. How often do we see fouls inside the box that aren't given but would be given outside the box or second bookings that aren't given but everybody agrees would be if they were the first booking. Probably nobody expects (or wants) the laws of the game to be rigidly applied 100% of the time ("referee needs to show some common sense, let the game breath") and I'm not advocating that, but some laws being applied only in certain circumstances helps breed criticism and claims of unfairness and obviously inconsistency.

Beaton has just chosen not to book Carter-Vickers for kicking the ball away at free-kick. I thought that was a booking, it has been a booking in the past and it will be a booking in this same game if it happens in 85th minute so why has Beaton not booked him? Maybe because of the particular game it is or because it's only after 10 minutes. Like most people, including a lot of players, I can't claim to know rules inside out but I didn't think there was a law which says an offence committed can be a booking in the 85th minute but not if the same offence is committed in the 5th minute.

[Tommy Brown]

4 minutes ago, ArcticJambo said:

 

Here's my original post on the subject.  Milky cleared it up while a few others wanted to act the big hard *****!  Sad.

**** all being hard.

Did it not occur to you that everyone was in agreement that he was in an offside position, no debate about that.

 

But for reason, you said the thread was mental.

Sounds like you were being keyboard hard man. 

 

[Geoff Kilpatrick]

Offside used to be simple. Maybe going back to players being in an offside position and making a decision might just be better, rather than "being active" and "phases of play" and other such pish.

 

Football was much better when the same laws governed it from pub league to the World Cup. Sigh.

[Tommy Brown]

Just now, Geoff Kilpatrick said:

Offside used to be simple. Maybe going back to players being in an offside position and making a decision might just be better, rather than "being active" and "phases of play" and other such pish.

 

Football was much better when the same laws governed it from pub league to the World Cup. Sigh.

Take this as an example.

Had the Wolves player been a yard left.

Today's laws would make it a goal.

Old laws would be offside.

I prefer today's.

[ArcticJambo]

Wow, take the loss Tommy, you doubled down time and again. You didn't understand the original question I asked (or didn't read it). I'm not going back to read your original thread starter but why bother in the first place if it was that obvious.

 

Or did you just post to show up the MotD team about your superior knowledge of football.

[Geoff Kilpatrick]

2 minutes ago, Tommy Brown said:

Take this as an example.

Had the Wolves player been a yard left.

Today's laws would make it a goal.

Old laws would be offside.

I prefer today's.

That's where we disagree. It has basically given licence to goal poaching.

[Tommy Brown]

8 minutes ago, ArcticJambo said:

Wow, take the loss Tommy, you doubled down time and again. You didn't understand the original question I asked (or didn't read it). I'm not going back to read your original thread starter but why bother in the first place if it was that obvious.

 

Or did you just post to show up the MotD team about your superior knowledge of football.

Come to me when in doubt of the offside laws. I will come to you when I need a seal clubbed.👍

[John Findlay]

1 hour ago, Bad Religion said:

Explain how it’s possible to be offside directly from a corner. 

If the ball is placed at the lower right of the arc, and the attacking player is on the goal line and is the next player to touch the ball then he would be offside as he is ahead of the ball when it is kicked.

[Bad Religion]

13 minutes ago, John Findlay said:

If the ball is placed at the lower right of the arc, and the attacking player is on the goal line and is the next player to touch the ball then he would be offside as he is ahead of the ball when it is kicked.

Haha, good try. No. 

[Bad Religion]

1 hour ago, Fozzyonthefence said:

It should be technically possible in the sense that you can play the ball forward from a corner  (like inches or whatever the width of the corner thingy is) but the rules say you can’t be offside directly from it.  Saves checking if a player is an inch offside I suppose.

Yes, exactly.