Liverpool FC Forum

by **Dannyboy** » Tue Apr 18, 2006 10:43 am

i heard Graham Poll on Soccer AM the other week and he said that there is only half the amount of referees going to this world cup than the last one so i would look in to that as they have got rid of the weirdos from uzbekistan and timbucktoo. but cannot confirm that

by **Judge** » Tue Apr 18, 2006 11:15 am

Dannyboy wrote:i heard Graham Poll on Soccer AM the other week and he said that there is only half the amount of referees going to this world cup than the last one so i would look in to that as they have got rid of the weirdos from uzbekistan and timbucktoo.

can you give me the name of the ref from timbucktoo ??

by **The Ace1983** » Tue Apr 18, 2006 12:28 pm

The fact of the matter is that offsides will always cause controversy, but if they didn't, things would get a bit boring. Linesmen up and down the land would be happy, and nobody wants that. And what's the point of amending a rule that no one understands anyway? When you amend something, you just make it more confusing. Why not just change it and make it simpler? Why not just say:

Offside: If there is daylight, and he touches the ball, he's offside.

Simple enough isn't it? There would still be human error, but at least it gives tham a clear idea of what they're looking for.

by **stmichael** » Tue Apr 18, 2006 1:21 pm

I don't think the goal should have stood but who cares? Considering all the dodgy decisions we've had go against us this season, we deserved one to go our way. Hell, last season we conceded a goal at Anfield to Newcastle when Kluivert was fully 20 yards offside, but because he wasn't 'active' the goal was allowed to stand. It happens and sometimes decisions go for you, and sometimes they dont.

Bottom line is, we were the better side and deserved the 3. Onward and upward! :nod

by **taff** » Tue Apr 18, 2006 1:32 pm

Made up with three points but that was a dodgy goal. What is clear mind you concerning the offside rule is that nobody seems to understand it totally.

Regarding the goal on the weekend, Cise pulled his leg back to indicate he wasnt interfering but if I was a defender you would notice his presence and that would stutter your run, If Cisse wasnt there it looks like Robbie would have scored anyway but the defence would obviously argue to the contrary.

A rule has to be clear and leave no grey areas and this one seems to me like its designed to have too many grey areas and that can only be exploited as is natural in sport, cos its about winning.

Inconsistency in decisions is infuriating and ok it benefitted us but what if next time it doesnt. Still we would have won anyway so there :rasp

by **Judge** » Tue Apr 18, 2006 1:54 pm

taff wrote:Made up with three points but that was a dodgy goal.

the goal was good taff, it was the decision to allow it, that was dodgy :rasp

by **ivor_the_injun** » Tue Apr 18, 2006 2:20 pm

The poor decision aside, it was a cracking goal. Fowler's chest control into Morientes' path was absolutely wonderful, and the way he ghosted away into space was first rate.

by **Judge** » Tue Apr 18, 2006 2:40 pm

btw, did anyone notice how S*i*e cisse's finishing was.

all power, no invention, no intelligence to try and bend around, or chip the keeper etc...............................................thats infuriating

by **MilitiaRusher** » Tue Apr 18, 2006 3:09 pm

Here is how I put it:

As long as the player does not make contact with the ball at all, the play is deemed onside. This player can then do whatever he wants, interfere the play in any means apart from making contact with the ball directly or indirectly through rebounds off goalies/posts/players. Although this can be hard on linesmen, I think this can add an extra dimension into attacking play as teams can now deliberately put players offside to distract defenders.

Regarding the goal on the weekend, Cise pulled his leg back to indicate he wasnt interfering but if I was a defender you would notice his presence and that would stutter your run, If Cisse wasnt there it looks like Robbie would have scored anyway but the defence would obviously argue to the contrary.

This is exactly the case. A tactical play by Cisse so to stutter their runs.

by **Ace Ventura** » Tue Apr 18, 2006 3:39 pm

MilitiaRusher wrote:Here is how I put it:

As long as the player does not make contact with the ball at all, the play is deemed onside. This player can then do whatever he wants, interfere the play in any means apart from making contact with the ball directly or indirectly through rebounds off goalies/posts/players. Although this can be hard on linesmen, I think this can add an extra dimension into attacking play as teams can now deliberately put players offside to distract defenders.

Regarding the goal on the weekend, Cise pulled his leg back to indicate he wasnt interfering but if I was a defender you would notice his presence and that would stutter your run, If Cisse wasnt there it looks like Robbie would have scored anyway but the defence would obviously argue to the contrary.

This is exactly the case. A tactical play by Cisse so to stutter their runs.

If thats how you put it mate, then it will f'ck defenders and tactics up BIG TIME.
So an attacking player can stand in an offside position right in the middle of the area and then providing he lets the ball go through his legs he is deemed onside ?
It would mean defenders cant step out at all, and would totally f'ck up the way we defend.
The goal sunday was blatant offside no matter what the new rules are, it went towards a player that was 2 yards off.
I am made up it benefitted us, but if the rule is not sorted then there will be a time it doesn't, and it could be in a major game.

by **MilitiaRusher** » Tue Apr 18, 2006 4:18 pm

Ace Ventura wrote:
MilitiaRusher wrote:Here is how I put it:

As long as the player does not make contact with the ball at all, the play is deemed onside. This player can then do whatever he wants, interfere the play in any means apart from making contact with the ball directly or indirectly through rebounds off goalies/posts/players. Although this can be hard on linesmen, I think this can add an extra dimension into attacking play as teams can now deliberately put players offside to distract defenders.

Regarding the goal on the weekend, Cise pulled his leg back to indicate he wasnt interfering but if I was a defender you would notice his presence and that would stutter your run, If Cisse wasnt there it looks like Robbie would have scored anyway but the defence would obviously argue to the contrary.

This is exactly the case. A tactical play by Cisse so to stutter their runs.

If thats how you put it mate, then it will f'ck defenders and tactics up BIG TIME.
So an attacking player can stand in an offside position right in the middle of the area and then providing he lets the ball go through his legs he is deemed onside ?
It would mean defenders cant step out at all, and would totally f'ck up the way we defend.
The goal sunday was blatant offside no matter what the new rules are, it went towards a player that was 2 yards off.
I am made up it benefitted us, but if the rule is not sorted then there will be a time it doesn't, and it could be in a major game.

well it DOES still require a perfectly placed pass in order for the onside players to get to it, regardless of whether there is an offside player distracting the defenders or not. I can see this as a legitimate rule.

by **Ace Ventura** » Tue Apr 18, 2006 4:42 pm

MilitiaRusher wrote:well it DOES still require a perfectly placed pass in order for the onside players to get to it, regardless of whether there is an offside player distracting the defenders or not. I can see this as a legitimate rule.

It would totally alter the way defenders had to play the game, at Liverpool they play the offside rule. If as you are saying a player is fine standing in an offside position and all he has to do is not touch it, how would defenders know how and when they can step out ?
Van Horseface has been doing it for ages and it causes so many problems, not just for the defenders also for the officials.
The rule is stupid and full of flaws, i could see the point if it was only outside of the penalty area where a player could be classed as inactive.
But just by standing in a central position the player is confusing the defenders and also possibly impeding the view of the keeper.
Cisse was off side on sunday.

by **anfieldadorer** » Tue Apr 18, 2006 4:52 pm

just found the corresponding articles

International F.A. Board approves goal-line technology experiments - no more "passive" offside
(FIFA.com) 27 Feb 2005
Law 11 - Offside - was also the subject of several proposals, and as a result, by introducing the new International F.A. Board Decision 2 for Law 11, the Board also clarified when a player is to be regarded as "actively involved in play":
" 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 an offside position means playing a ball that rebounds to him off a post or crossbar or playing a ball that rebounds to him off an opponent having been in an offside position.

IFAB clarifies the on-field application of "Law 11-Offside"
(FIFA.com) 18 Aug 2005
"A player in an offside position may be penalised before playing or touching the ball if, in the opinion of the referee, no other team-mate in an onside position has the opportunity to play the ball.

"If an opponent becomes involved in the play and if, in the opinion of the referee, there is potential for physical contact, the player in the offside position shall be penalised for interfering with an opponent."

by **MilitiaRusher** » Tue Apr 18, 2006 4:53 pm

Ace Ventura wrote:It would totally alter the way defenders had to play the game, at Liverpool they play the offside rule. If as you are saying a player is fine standing in an offside position and all he has to do is not touch it, how would defenders know how and when they can step out ?
Van Horseface has been doing it for ages and it causes so many problems, not just for the defenders also for the officials.
The rule is stupid and full of flaws, i could see the point if it was only outside of the penalty area where a player could be classed as inactive.
But just by standing in a central position the player is confusing the defenders and also possibly impeding the view of the keeper.
Cisse was off side on sunday.

As far as I see, I don't think it will affect the way defenders play the offside rule. Defenders will still step out as normal, but still aware of any on running onside players. This, I feel, can add an extra dimension in modern attacking play, where 0-0 draws are occuring in a more frequent basis.

by **Ace Ventura** » Tue Apr 18, 2006 4:57 pm

MilitiaRusher wrote:
Ace Ventura wrote:It would totally alter the way defenders had to play the game, at Liverpool they play the offside rule. If as you are saying a player is fine standing in an offside position and all he has to do is not touch it, how would defenders know how and when they can step out ?
Van Horseface has been doing it for ages and it causes so many problems, not just for the defenders also for the officials.
The rule is stupid and full of flaws, i could see the point if it was only outside of the penalty area where a player could be classed as inactive.
But just by standing in a central position the player is confusing the defenders and also possibly impeding the view of the keeper.
Cisse was off side on sunday.

As far as I see, I don't think it will affect the way defenders play the offside rule. Defenders will still step out as normal, but still aware of any on running onside players. This, I feel, can add an extra dimension in modern attacking play, where 0-0 draws are occuring in a more frequent basis.

Yes they will still be able to step up as normal, BUT defenders will naturally end up playing alot deeper if the current rule is stay, they will have no faith in officials getting it right either.
From what your saying do you not think Cisse was offside on Sunday ?

Liverpool FC Forum

New offside rule - A joke

Who is online