Printable View
Surely even the most diehard of bohs fans must acknowledge that their equiliser went beyond afarce. Lineswoman clearly raises offside flag for all to see, then takes i down after ref awards a goal scored ater blues stopped playing. After all the years watching eL footbal this beggers belief.:mad:
I was sitting at half way and think the flag was taken down before O'Keefe scored. Ref waved play on.
Rule number one - play to the whistle
The silly tart shouldnt have raised her flag in the first place.
Happened to Shelbourne (uh oh, there goes that Dublin ref bias theory some seem to have!) in our 3-3 v Drogheda at Tolka last year. Flag goes up, stays up, Shels players stop, stays up, Drogs keep going forward, stays up, ball goes into goal, goes down.Quote:
Originally Posted by Niall
The referee had it spot on, although at the time I was baffled.
Blame your players for not playing to the whistle. Its what Under 6's teams are taught for Christs sake. There was noone to blame for the goal we conceeded by playing to the flag but our players, and I wouldn't be at all surprised if the blame could be placed on the defending players here.
Was it a Dublin ref?! ;)
Do you know anything about football Niall? McKeown was dead right in his decision to allow the goal to stand. Just to refresh your memory, the ball was played wide right to Kevin Hunt who came down the right wing while your boys were coming out leaving a trailing Bohs player i.e. not interfering with play as defined in the rules.Rhona Daly (wrongly) raises her flag and God forgive me for saying this but Dave McKeown deserves credit for ignoring it!Quote:
Originally Posted by Niall
How in the name of God Rhona Daly considered that Bohs should be given an offside when the ball was played out wide right away from the rest of the players retreating/pushing out? The simple answer to this is that she just does not know the rules of the game and with this in mind, she simply should not be there. So with this I have some sympathy with Waterford.
But bearing in mind that the goal was (rightly) allowed to stand, Waterford have only themselves to blame for not defending it. When I was playing ball as a kid all through the underage setups it was constantly drilled into us to play to the whistle. As a result of her incompetence followed by Waterfords unprofessionalism, you were down to ten men and had conceded a goal in the space of about 60 seconds whereas if you had have played to the whistle you may easily have ended up with three points.
i had to leave at H/T last night, so i didn't see this, but suggesting that Rhona Daly got the decision wrong because of her gender is just silly; linemen and women in this country get these decisions wrong all the time; to my mind, she's better than most, even if, from the sound of it, she did get this one wrong.
Sorry charles, got to disagree with you there. When the ball was being played, one of the Bohs players had strayed offside. I was talking to a Bohs official after the match myself and even he was shocked at the decision himself. Even neutrals who were there couldnt believe what was unfolding before our eyes. McKeown has to be the worst referee ever in the history of the game. 2 goals and 1 sending off in the space of a minute, unbelievable. It was a shocking decision that turned the game on its head, Waterford leading 1-0 in control, this happens and the game takes a turn. This was shocking. If we were beaten fair and square, no complaints but the manner in which we were beaten has left a nasty taste in my mouth.
There is no accountability regarding refs in the eL. I have been saying this for years and tonight was the icing on the cake after my 20 years of watching eL. A good game was ruined by this disastrous decision.
P.S. Mental Man, leave the Rovers lads out of this. This is between us and Bohs. Any chance of Bohemian FC doing something about the thuggish behaviour of your fans.
Were the sending offs not for pushing the ref? You can hardly complain about that.Quote:
Originally Posted by Partizan
1. Ball played out wide, past a player who mad eno attempt to play the ball because he was in an offside positionQuote:
Originally Posted by Partizan
2. Waterford stopped playing despite no whistle. Tough ****.
3. What thuggish behaviour? If you mean the group of little scumbags who were removed from the ground then what more do you want done?
First rule of schoolboy football: play the whistle. While I think the 'not interfering with play' rule is a piece of nonsense, it's there, and the ref was within his rights to allow play to continue.
In any case, he made up for it with his bizarre decision later on to stop play with Stephen Rice on the ball in front of a gaping goal, with the keeper behind him on the ground.
If I were a Waterford fan I'd be more angry with my players, whose simple indiscipline cost them dearly.
Play the 'effing whistle son, play the 'effing whistle !Quote:
Originally Posted by Niall
Take the goggles off. For once, a referee got a decision right, get over it!Quote:
Originally Posted by Partizan
Partizan - I think you're getting mixed up slightly as to where to vent your frustration. I for one think that it was shocking that the linesperson put her flag up for what - in the rulebook - was not an offside. The referee overuled the linesperson and the Waterford team stopped playing.
Also a point of note. The Bohs player hadn't 'strayed' offside as such. He was on his way back from an offside position and never made any attempt to address the ball firstly because if he did he would have been then interfering with play and secondly because the ball never went near him.
To my mind your anger is misplaced. I would be more bothered about my team stopping playing in the middle of an important match because they got mixed up between a visual signal from one of the officials and an audible signal which would indicate that the game must be stopped for an offence. You may remember a similar incident happened last season when Bohs visited Waterford and our team stopped playing without having heard the linesmans whistle (intended error!) and Waterford scored. So what. Build a bridge and get over it.
Sonofstan - I'm assuming you meant that it was I that was suggesting the Rhona Daly should not be officiating because of her gender. If so you're wrong. She shouldn't be officiating because she's crap.
Didn't the same thing happen last year at the RSC??
Just about to say that!Quote:
Originally Posted by superfrank
How ironic! Waterford were patting themselves on the back at the RSC last year over that decision to play on. Now they're the idiots who didn't PLAY THE WHISTLE.
Honestly, did you not learn anything from that night?
No it wasn't you - it was the '...til i die' brothers; Rovers of that ilk putting 'lineswoman' in bold and adding 'nuff said' and BTID with his 'silly tart'Quote:
Originally Posted by CharlesThompson
Exact same thing happened with Wigan's goal yesterday: linesman flagged but the referee didn't blow his whistle and correctly gave the goal because the ball was headed towards Camara by a Watford player.
Have to say, in the cold light of day that the decision was probably the right one. If I were to criticise the ref for anything - and I will - it was that the first yellows handed out to the Waterford players were extremely soft. I thought Bohs got a fair few hometeam decisions the other night - no point getting into a tit for tat argument about fouls, but I didn't think that Waterford were fouling any more or were a dirtier team than Bohs, yet the card count ended up 6 yellow for Waterford and one for Bohs.
On a separate note, I wasn't that impressed with Bohs, they didn't create that many clear cut chances until Utd were down to 9.
BTW, If I was managing Utd I'd be livid with my players for getting sent off. No need to give the ref an excuse like that.
Have you seen our injury list?Quote:
Originally Posted by bigmac
A 16 yr old came on for us in the second half!
Eh, didn't he come on after the two players were sent off? The starting 11 looked pretty strong and experienced to me. We hardly have a squad like Chelsea ourselves!Quote:
Originally Posted by BohsFans
No point getting into tit for tat about fouls, but Waterford clearly went out to kick people. That's what Alan Reynolds is for, and it's noticeable that he singles out young players.Quote:
Originally Posted by bigmac
Times has Cronin venting about the ref. Indo says McCarthy, Cawley are likely to face further punishment for having to be marched off by stewards.
agree to disagree here i think. anyway, nothing we can do about it now.Quote:
Originally Posted by BohDiddley
Agreed.
Clever sig by the way! ;)
Can't take the credit for that one I'm afraid, Sheridan was the person who came up with it here. It's a very true observation though.Quote:
Originally Posted by BohDiddley
it was more the way the goal happened that annoyed everyone. why did the assistant put up her flag if he wasnt interfering with the play, thought they're supposed to wait!! i was there, and that annoyed me more than anything. two players getting sent off didnt help any1, it ruined wat wud of been a gud game! the yellow cards he gave in the first half were shocking, there was much worse tackles goin in and not bein punished!! consistancy is badly needed,soon!
Quote:
Originally Posted by superfrank
Yeah, my view too. Shocking stuff from Waterford - utterly amateur. Shocking decision from the lineswoman too, but still, play the whistle as you're always told. Absolute irony that the same thing happened them against Bohs last season! No complaints from Waterford then.Quote:
Originally Posted by BohsFans
The lineswoman gave offside because one of the Bohs players that was off side initially went for the ball hence interfereing with play.
The referee made the biggest mistake - he should have
1. Accept lineslady decision
OR
2. Blow Wistle, over rule her and give hop ball.
The referee was most to blame.
What are you talking about? :rolleyes:Quote:
Originally Posted by finnpark
A hop ball:eek: For what :confused:
Nonsense. The referee is perfectly entitled to overrule the linesman's decision if he is happy it's wrong. Happens all the time, and correctly so.Quote:
Originally Posted by finnpark
There was no question of the Bohs player interfering with the ball, in my view.
Fook the hop ball, he should have consulted with his umpires and then given a 65 :DQuote:
Originally Posted by finnpark
Dosnt matter if he went for the ball, he wasnt interfering because he didnt touch the ball so it was the correct decisionQuote:
The lineswoman gave offside because one of the Bohs players that was off side initially went for the ball hence interfereing with play
Technically not true - you can be interfering without touching the ball (by, for example, getting in the way of an opposition player).
However, from the video, it looked like, although he was beyond the last man, he was trotting away from the ball when the flag was raised and so clearly not interfering with play.
The guy did intefere with play - he turned around to go for the ball and the lineslady stuck it up (the flag in the air that is).
It was a free out.
So very incorrect....Quote:
Originally Posted by finnpark
So unless he touches the ball or is stood in the eyeline of the goalkeeper then he cannot be penalised for making a movement towards the ballQuote:
Law 11 - Offside
Offside Position
It is not an offence in itself to be in an offside position. A player is in an offside position if:A player is not in an offside position if
- he is nearer to his opponents’ goal line than both the ball and the second last opponent.
- he is in his own half of the field of play or
- he is level with the second last opponent or
- he is level with the last two opponents.
Offence
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.
===============================================
Law 11 – Offside
Decisions of the International F.A. Board
Decision 2
The definitions of elements of involvement in active play are as follows:
- Interfering with play means playing or touching the ball passed or touched by a team-mate.
- Interfering with an opponent means preventing an opponent from playing or being able to play the ball by clearly obstructing the opponent’s line of vision or movements or making a gesture or movement which, in the opinion of the referee, deceives or distracts an opponent.
- Gaining an advantage by being in that position means playing a ball that rebounds to him off a post or the crossbar having been in an offside position or playing a ball that rebounds to him off an opponent having been in an offside position.
I'm not convinced Reiteoir.
Your arguement is a weak one, none of those "rules of the game" have the word FACT at the end of them, so how are we to trust them.
Of course he interfered with play - he went for the ball. You are taking the rules out of contex. The fact of the matter is the lady stuck the flag up because he was offside and went for the ball as can be clearly seen from the replay. The Waterford players all stop, obviously, and Bohs play against no one.Quote:
Originally Posted by Réiteoir
I don't think that is even the point. Regardless of whether he was offside or not the referee should have assesed the situation and used some cop on. It has made a joke of the league again.
According to this rule it was offside. The Bohs player initially went for the ball hence distracting the Waterford players. Therefore the linewoman made the right decision, the referee was incorrect to overrule. He didnt actually touch the ball but initially he went for the ball. In the opinion of the lineswoman he went for the ball which was also obvious from the TV replay. However, the referee decided otherwise, wrongly and made a farce out of the match.Quote:
Interfering with an opponent means preventing an opponent from playing or being able to play the ball by clearly obstructing the opponent’s line of vision or movements or making a gesture or movement which, in the opinion of the referee, deceives or distracts an opponent.
The Waterford players were only distracted by their own incompetance. Golden rule:
PLAY THE WHISTLE.
Anyone got the incidents on video/link?
err - you missed one important piece of information from your ill-informed rantings:Quote:
Originally Posted by finnpark
You see the bit in bold - it isn't up to the Assistant to award the offside - it's for the referee to decide - the AR is there to offer their advice.Quote:
Interfering with an opponent means preventing an opponent from playing or being able to play the ball by clearly obstructing the opponent’s line of vision or movements or making a gesture or movement which, in the opinion of the referee, deceives or distracts an opponent.
Ergo - if the referee decides that it isn't offside - which in that incident the player wasn't offside by a country mile under Law - and therefore a totally correct decision - then it isn't offside - no matter how much you throw a tantrum
Case Closed.
He, she, they blah blah any chance you could name any of the people your talking about? You've just shoot your argument to pieces!Quote:
Originally Posted by finnpark
You go on about the ref assessing the situation, communicating etc, he did. If you look back at it McKeon waves his hand a couple of times to say put your flag down to the assistant.