Good point lol. A derby well known for fair play and friendship.In an old firm of all games
Good point lol. A derby well known for fair play and friendship.In an old firm of all games
You should perhaps look the rule up…The one where Walker claimed "he's not interfering with play" went just over this head in the middle of the box, in front of the keeper.
How can that be deemed not interfering with play if you are then 5 yards ahead of the back line waiting for a tap in.
I don't think "interfering with play" just means touching the ball.
“interfering with play by playing or touching a ball passed or touched by a team-mate”What’s the definition of interfering with play in the rule book ?
LMAO!Jota and Kyogo better than Kent and Alfie was his cry.
“interfering with play by playing or touching a ball passed or touched by a team-mate”
You can be offside by affecting the sight of the goalkeeper without touching the ball.“interfering with play by playing or touching a ball passed or touched by a team-mate”
So what if the shoe was on the other foot?
Would you still think it was poor sportsmanship and “exploiting” the rule?
Or would you all of a sudden no longer have a problem with it?
I think we all know the answer
Stop looking for reasons to be raging
Exactly any defender worth his salt is going to be alert to someone in their penalty box offside or not .I always refer to Bill Shankly’s view when told a player in an offside position was “not interfering with the play”. “Why is he on the pitch”?
That’s a different definition. “Interfering with an opponent”:So a goal can never be disallowed for a player standing in front of the keeper then?
You’d have to clearly obstruct his line of vision and that’s not interfering with play.You can be offside by affecting the sight of the goalkeeper without touching the ball.
Not following that, so it would or wouldn’t it be offside if a goal is disallowed for blocking the keepers view ,what term is used if it is not interfering with play .You’d have to clearly obstruct his line of vision and that’s not interfering with play.
The problem is that punters (and even Shankly in this example) get themselves hung up on their own definition of words and phrases and forget that it’s irrelevant.Exactly any defender worth his salt is going to be alert to someone in their penalty box offside or not .
See above mate. I’ve literally posted it.Not following that, so it would or wouldn’t it be offside if a goal is disallowed for blocking the keepers view ,what term is used if it is not interfering with play .
Missed that so interfering with an opponent it is called surely that’s what happens if you want to stay offside at free kicks as I said any defender should be alert to this .See above mate. I’ve literally posted it.
No. Read the rule above on what is actually defined as “interfering” in that rule.Missed that so interfering with an opponent it is called surely that’s what happens if you want to stay offside at free kicks as I said any defender should be alert to this .
Goldson does it at virtually EVERY free kick we ever getThis tactic from the scum yesterday was doing my head in.
Furuhashi was standing miles offside, easily several yards offside. They would then try gey a ball over the top for a runner, which meant furihashi had a ridiculous head start on our defenders. He was nearly on the penalty spot on one occasion about 5 yards ahead of our defence, when a cross was put into the baldy guy to try put back across to him. Walker says "he's not interfering with play". Well what the %^*& is he doing loitering around that position and distracting the keeper?
Same thing at the chance he did get called offside for, initially he's standing miles offside.
Blatant manipulation of a rule by the scum. Its not like he's been involved in play and coming back from an offside position, it's deliberately standing in an offside position to gain an advantage. Doing things like this is in very very poor sport, IMO. Not surprising from a low life organisation though
Goldson does it at virtually EVERY free kick we ever get
That chance he did get flagged for would not have been flagged if he scored. That was just the cheating connor rat trying to look like he was doing his job fairly. His flag would not be up if they scored. Check the way his flag was up when we had the chance late on while one on them was playing everyone onside lying in the box. Couldn't get the flag up quick enough to cheat us againThis tactic from the scum yesterday was doing my head in.
Furuhashi was standing miles offside, easily several yards offside. They would then try gey a ball over the top for a runner, which meant furihashi had a ridiculous head start on our defenders. He was nearly on the penalty spot on one occasion about 5 yards ahead of our defence, when a cross was put into the baldy guy to try put back across to him. Walker says "he's not interfering with play". Well what the %^*& is he doing loitering around that position and distracting the keeper?
Same thing at the chance he did get called offside for, initially he's standing miles offside.
Blatant manipulation of a rule by the scum. Its not like he's been involved in play and coming back from an offside position, it's deliberately standing in an offside position to gain an advantage. Doing things like this is in very very poor sport, IMO. Not surprising from a low life organisation though
The problem is that the offside laws, like the handball laws, have flipflopped over the last 10:years and officials and fans are confused as to why one set of referees and assistants will differ from another. There is no consistency. I hate the Kyogo ploy of deliberately standing ten yards and more offside for a ball to be played down the wings for a teammate to run and cross to him with a huge start on defenders. When FIFA/IFAB started messing about with ‘phases of play’ that ploy was outlawed. But then it was changed. I prefer the rugby law. Offside is applied strictly. No arguments.The problem is that punters (and even Shankly in this example) get themselves hung up on their own definition of words and phrases and forget that it’s irrelevant.
What matters is how the laws of the game define the words. Frankly, most of us punters don’t really understand a lot of the rules properly and use that as an excuse to cry foul of officials every week who are actually just applying the rules as they’re supposed to.
It’s also not relevant whether we like the rules as defined. The referees are there to apply them to the book, not what fans want them to be.
Hating the rules is just a subjective thing. Referees can only apply the rules as written.The problem is that the offside laws, like the handball laws, have flipflopped over the last 10:years and officials and fans are confused as to why one set of referees and assistants will differ from another. There is no consistency. I hate the Kyogo ploy of deliberately standing ten yards and more offside for a ball to be played down the wings for a teammate to run and cross to him with a huge start on defenders. When FIFA/IFAB started messing about with ‘phases of play’ that ploy was outlawed. But then it was changed. I prefer the rugby law. Offside is applied strictly. No arguments.
Is it smart? If it was everyone would do it as apposed to…..nobody.Hardly poor sport. It's smart football.
We've all become very precious.
He doesn’t. That’s a dead ball situation. By the time the ball is kicked the defensive line has moved back and he’s in line. He’s not offside at any point if the ball isn’t in play.Goldson does it at virtually EVERY free kick we ever get
Eh !!!!!!!He is an utter myth.
Some clown on here last week said he was better than Alfie.
If he scored from the cross/within the same phase of play he would be offside.Noticed that aswell, its not initally interfering with play but if he scored from a cross after being 20 yards behind the defence surely that should still be classed as offside
On the highlighted part, Thursday nights goal should not have stood. It's not as black and white and it readsThat’s a different definition. “Interfering with an opponent”:
or
- interfering with an opponent by:
- preventing an opponent from playing or being able to play the ball by clearly obstructing the opponent’s line of vision or
- challenging an opponent for the ball or
- clearly attempting to play a ball which is close when this action impacts on an opponent or
- making an obvious action which clearly impacts on the ability of an opponent to play the ball
- gaining an advantage by playing the ball or interfering with an opponent when it has:
- rebounded or been deflected off the goalpost, crossbar or an opponent
- been deliberately saved by any opponent
Ruud van Nistelroy did this as soon as the rule changed.This tactic from the scum yesterday was doing my head in.
Furuhashi was standing miles offside, easily several yards offside. They would then try gey a ball over the top for a runner, which meant furihashi had a ridiculous head start on our defenders. He was nearly on the penalty spot on one occasion about 5 yards ahead of our defence, when a cross was put into the baldy guy to try put back across to him. Walker says "he's not interfering with play". Well what the %^*& is he doing loitering around that position and distracting the keeper?
Same thing at the chance he did get called offside for, initially he's standing miles offside.
Blatant manipulation of a rule by the scum. Its not like he's been involved in play and coming back from an offside position, it's deliberately standing in an offside position to gain an advantage. Doing things like this is in very very poor sport, IMO. Not surprising from a low life organisation though
The rules aren’t being manipulated though.Sorry, I don't think that manipulating rules to your advantage is "smart". I think it's shite sportsmanship, and would say the same of any team doing it.
It looked like Sakala was trying it yesterday!Plus Roofe does it every attack but not in the way this thread is intended.
Reminds me of Candeias in that respect.Their Japanese players are pish. They run about a lot and look busy but they're pish. Hatate gets caught on the ball every time he has it and he's shit scared of Lundstram. Maeda is sent out to sprint everywhere.
Not, it would appear, according to the VAR operators last Thursday.You can be offside by affecting the sight of the goalkeeper without touching the ball.
That may well be the one I’ve been searching my brain for.Didn’t we lose a goal to Villarreal in similar circumstances
The fact that they were annoyed about this irrited me too much!I was more annoyed at those subhuman rats attempting, twice, to take a free kick awarded against us for offside from our half.
Celtic have always tried nonsense like this - I remember john hartson went thought a phase of standing off the pitch at corner kicks to 'disrupt' the marking.This tactic from the scum yesterday was doing my head in.
Furuhashi was standing miles offside, easily several yards offside. They would then try gey a ball over the top for a runner, which meant furihashi had a ridiculous head start on our defenders. He was nearly on the penalty spot on one occasion about 5 yards ahead of our defence, when a cross was put into the baldy guy to try put back across to him. Walker says "he's not interfering with play". Well what the %^*& is he doing loitering around that position and distracting the keeper?
Same thing at the chance he did get called offside for, initially he's standing miles offside.
Blatant manipulation of a rule by the scum. Its not like he's been involved in play and coming back from an offside position, it's deliberately standing in an offside position to gain an advantage. Doing things like this is in very very poor sport, IMO. Not surprising from a low life organisation though