Bohs offside goal

[bigmac]

No point getting into tit for tat about fouls, but Waterford clearly went out to kick people.

agree to disagree here i think. anyway, nothing we can do about it now.

[BohDiddley]

Agreed.
Clever sig by the way!

[bigmac]

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.

[blue til i die]

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!

[pineapple stu]

Didn't the same thing happen last year at the RSC??

Just about to say that!

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?

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.

[finnpark]

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.

[BohsFans]

2. Blow Wistle, over rule her and give hop ball.

What are you talking about?

A hop ball For what

[pineapple stu]

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.

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.

There was no question of the Bohs player interfering with the ball, in my view.

[aido1895]

2. Blow Wistle, over rule her and give hop ball.

Fook the hop ball, he should have consulted with his umpires and then given a 65

[Aaron]

The lineswoman gave offside because one of the Bohs players that was off side initially went for the ball hence interfereing with play

Dosnt matter if he went for the ball, he wasnt interfering because he didnt touch the ball so it was the correct decision

[pineapple stu]

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.

[finnpark]

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.

[Réiteoir]

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....

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:

• he is nearer to his opponents’ goal line than both the ball and the second last opponent.

A player is not in an offside position if

• 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.

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 ball

[Vitruvian Man]

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.

[finnpark]

So very incorrect....


[/B][/LIST]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 ball

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.

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.

[finnpark]

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.

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.

[BohsPartisan]

The Waterford players were only distracted by their own incompetance. Golden rule:
PLAY THE WHISTLE.

[bambi]

Anyone got the incidents on video/link?

[Réiteoir]

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.

err - you missed one important piece of information from your ill-informed rantings:

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.

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.

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.

[BohsFans]

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.

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.

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!

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.