Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Sjb

Somone explain how this is offside

Recommended Posts

Posted (edited)
14 minutes ago, Jim Smith said:

Firstly he’s not or certainly nobody can tell if he is. From the picture you can see the keeper can see past. Secondly how is it preventing Schmeical from playing or being able to play the ball?

if a player is lying on the ground and a shot comes in along the ground I can see how it could interfere (most likely physically by preventing a dive) just as I could if the header had been straight at Cantwell and he’d ducked at the last minute taking the keeper by surprise.

 

He's stood a yard in front. Of course he's interfering with Schmeichel's vision and that's the bit you have to bear in mind here. Remember the case again where the injured player lying on the ground was used as an example of a player interfering with an eyeline and interfering with play. That was the same whether the shot was in the air or on the deck.

The referee here has got it spot on. The law needs an overhaul as it's become too complicated - the old offside rule where if you were ahead of the second-last defender you were instantly called offside would be an improvement, otherwise you end up with interpreting errors by fans like this.

Edited by TheGunnShow

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Officials got it right, but really quite a harsh one for us, I celebrated for too long on this occasion. 

But either way I just don’t really understand why Cantwell decided to stand there as it essentially was making any direct shot from the comer null and void.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

In fact, here we go. Page 205 of the PDF of the Laws of Association Football. It's not enough to just recite the Law, but you also need to look at the IFAB section at the back as they help determine interpretations of Law.

Second diagram is the example you need here. They clearly say the referee should give it as offside.


image.thumb.png.6e7be1c35bd71d53b8f8db1522d88ec0.png
 

Edited by TheGunnShow

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Interesting to know if it is a deliberate tactical ploy by Farke to put a man in front of the goaly. Happens at all levels so not unusual

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, TheGunnShow said:

In fact, here we go. Page 205 of the PDF of the Laws of Association Football. It's not enough to just recite the Law, but you also need to look at the IBAF section at the back as they help determine interpretations of Law.

Second diagram is the example you need here. They clearly say the referee should give it as offside.


image.thumb.png.6e7be1c35bd71d53b8f8db1522d88ec0.png
 

Farke’s point was that Cantwell was not obstructing Schmeicel’s vision because Cantwell is much shorter

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Canary Jedi said:

Farke’s point was that Cantwell was not obstructing Schmeicel’s vision because Cantwell is much shorter

Totally irrelevant in Law and indeed as per the IFAB link I put up. He's totally grasping at straws there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, TheGunnShow said:

He's stood a yard in front. Of course he's interfering with Schmeichel's vision and that's the bit you have to bear in mind here. Remember the case again where the injured player lying on the ground was used as an example of a player interfering with an eyeline and interfering with play. That was the same whether the shot was in the air or on the deck.

The referee here has got it spot on. The law needs an overhaul as it's become too complicated - the old offside rule where if you were ahead of the second-last defender you were instantly called offside would be an improvement, otherwise you end up with interpreting errors by fans like this.

You’ve not answered my question (other than in a way that suggests you haven’t read the rule properly). Even if Cantwell is clearly obstructing his line of vision (which i don’t accept) how did it prevent the keeper from playing or being able to play the ball which was heading into the goal about 5/6 yards to the left of them both?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, Ken Hairy said:

 To quote Greavsy (not our one 😄) It's a funny old game..... 

I'm one of your own Ken! 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, TheGunnShow said:

Totally irrelevant in Law and indeed as per the IFAB link I put up. He's totally grasping at straws there.

Course it’s relevant, as is the fact the ball was in the air and this higher than both of them. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
49 minutes ago, TheGunnShow said:

Missed a key bit out - namely being in his line of vision.

They used to illustrate this part of the offside rule in the book with the Laws of Association Football by having an injured player lying down in front of the goalkeeper in an offside position and referees were told that this is still penalised as offside.

Decision is definitely correct. 

(Former referee for ten years speaking).

Not sure how an injured player , laying down, impedes the keepers vision, offside or not! 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Jim Smith said:

You’ve not answered my question (other than in a way that suggests you haven’t read the rule properly). Even if Cantwell is clearly obstructing his line of vision (which i don’t accept) how did it prevent the keeper from playing or being able to play the ball which was heading into the goal about 5/6 yards to the left of them both?

I did answer your question. You don't fully understand the Law and how it is supposed to be applied. So, I have definitely read the Law correctly. You're just unaware of how it is supposed to be interpreted.

The IFAB have made this crystal clear in how the Law should be interpreted, hence the diagram I put up, which really should end the discussion on whether the referee is correct.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Jim Smith said:

Course it’s relevant, as is the fact the ball was in the air and this higher than both of them. 

Incorrect. Not relevant in Law. Here's the IFAB diagram again. No reference to height or anything, or indeed if the ball is in the air. If the player is dead in front of the goalie and is ahead of the second-last defender at the time the ball is played, referees are told to consider it as interfering.

Go down to the PDF file labelled Laws of the Game 2021-2022, page 205. This is diagram 6. There are several others explaining how offsides should and should not be given, indeed two of them are similar but with the goalie in front of the striker.

Law 11 - Offside (thefa.com)

image.thumb.png.1f850030c5c12f0d97033daf496476b2.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It would be interesting to know whether VAR would have disallowed the goal had the assistant not flagged for offside. Was there enough evidence to overrule the on pitch decision?

Personally as much as I hate it, I think it was the correct decision. You can't use height or the fact that Schmeicel wouldn't have saved the goal had Todd not been there as mitigation. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, TheGunnShow said:

Incorrect. Not relevant in Law. Here's the IFAB diagram again. No reference to height or anything, or indeed if the ball is in the air. If the player is dead in front of the goalie and is ahead of the second-last defender at the time the ball is played, referees are told to consider it as interfering.

Go down to the PDF file labelled Laws of the Game 2021-2022, page 205. This is diagram 6. There are several others explaining how offsides should and should not be given, indeed two of them are similar but with the goalie in front of the striker.

Law 11 - Offside (thefa.com)

image.thumb.png.1f850030c5c12f0d97033daf496476b2.png

Clearly that ball is not in the air given the distance it’s coming in from. That’s a long shot, with the ball on the ground with presumably the keeper only able to see the ball at the last minute and this react to a shot they would otherwise have a reasonable chance of saving.

very different to a header, from a height above both players abd which the keeper clearly had no chance of saving. 
 

These diagrams are “guidance” on possible scenarios. They are not the laws of the game. I will ask again, even if one assumes Todd clearly blocked his line of sight to the ball (which I don’t) and that he was in an offside position (which is questionable/marginal in any event given the benefit is supposed to be given to the attacking teams) how did Todd standing a metre in front of him prevent him from being able to play that ball? That’s the question I don’t think has been answered. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Jim Smith said:

Clearly that ball is not in the air given the distance it’s coming in from. That’s a long shot, with the ball on the ground with presumably the keeper only able to see the ball at the last minute and this react to a shot they would otherwise have a reasonable chance of saving.

very different to a header, from a height above both players abd which the keeper clearly had no chance of saving. 
 

These diagrams are “guidance” on possible scenarios. They are not the laws of the game. I will ask again, even if one assumes Todd clearly blocked his line of sight to the ball (which I don’t) and that he was in an offside position (which is questionable/marginal in any event given the benefit is supposed to be given to the attacking teams) how did Todd standing a metre in front of him prevent him from being able to play that ball? That’s the question I don’t think has been answered. 

Now you're adding stuff they didn't put in to twist it to suit a debunked argument. All they are doing is showing positions and when to penalise with offside or not. So, your question is actually a complicating factor that is irrelevant.

Yes, this is guidance. It is guidance on how to apply the Law as the Law currently stands

If you think the Law needs an overhaul, that's fine. However, saying the referee is wrong is demonstrably the wrong call here. He's applied law correctly, as this diagram and as the IFAB board decision make crystal clear.

Incidentally, here's diagram 7 by way of contrast. If Todd hadn't been in the way, it would have been allowed.

image.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My penny's worth is that it was the correct decision and as much as Todd was trying to stay in front of the keeper - which imo he was definitely trying to do, he should also have been aware that he could be offside whilst trying to be a pain to the keeper.  Slight error by Todd, imo.  If the goal area had been full of players, then it would have been harder to have given against him, but it wasn't and he should have been more aware.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, TheGunnShow said:

Now you're adding stuff they didn't put in to twist it to suit a debunked argument. All they are doing is showing positions and when to penalise with offside or not. So, your question is actually a complicating factor that is irrelevant.

Yes, this is guidance. It is guidance on how to apply the Law as the Law currently stands

If you think the Law needs an overhaul, that's fine. However, saying the referee is wrong is demonstrably the wrong call here. He's applied law correctly, as this diagram and as the IFAB board decision make crystal clear.

Incidentally, here's diagram 7 by way of contrast. If Todd hadn't been in the way, it would have been allowed.

image.png

I get that but you still have not answered the question. did Todd’s position prevent the goalkeeper from being able to play the ball and if so how?

The diagram is not the answer to this question. I understand why you are referring to it and perhaps it’s a reason why the officials applied the rule as they did but please tell me how it did?

also of note they did not appear to check the keepers line of vision to where the header came from either 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Thirsty Lizard said:

It would have been good of the Premier League to let us know that Kaspar Schmeichel was today's referee in advance, then at least we would all have known where we stood

I have to admit this one has irked me a lot and I really need to stop thinking about I. It was a great header and a clean goal and absolutely no reason to rule it out. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Jim Smith said:

I get that but you still have not answered the question. did Todd’s position prevent the goalkeeper from being able to play the ball and if so how?

The diagram is not the answer to this question. I understand why you are referring to it and perhaps it’s a reason why the officials applied the rule as they did but please tell me how it did?

also of note they did not appear to check the keepers line of vision to where the header came from either 

The question's not relevant, Jim, which is why it's not been answered. By being stood dead in front of the goalie, it's already considered to be impeding his vision.

The IFAB diagram is the perfect answer to why this was given offside. This is precisely how the Law is supposed to be applied. That is IFAB's job.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, lake district canary said:

My penny's worth is that it was the correct decision and as much as Todd was trying to stay in front of the keeper - which imo he was definitely trying to do, he should also have been aware that he could be offside whilst trying to be a pain to the keeper.  Slight error by Todd, imo.  If the goal area had been full of players, then it would have been harder to have given against him, but it wasn't and he should have been more aware.

Exactly. It was an error by Todd. By all means block the keeper's view, but if their second-last defender starts getting out, you've got to go with him. He was a split-second too late.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

I wasn't actually aware this was a rule before the game yesterday. But it's got me thinking about all the times I've seen opposition players standing on Krul's toes in the past couple of years and it's gone unpunished. 

It seems so harsh to me that Cantwell can be punished for standing near Schmeichal who is basically a foot taller than him but someone like Antonio, Wood or Benteke can challenge our keeper for corners and not get punished for it. Seems like the ref was just well up for showing he can get a difficult obscure decision right at our expense. Somehow I think if that occurred at Stamford Bridge or Old Trafford he wouldn't have given it. 

Edited by Christoph Stiepermann

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
40 minutes ago, Greavsy said:

I'm one of your own Ken! 

Here’s something.  The real Greavsy (unless you really are?) lives just a few doors down from me.  Few years ago he stopped me driving down my road saying I was speeding…..that told me !!!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, TheGunnShow said:

The question's not relevant, Jim, which is why it's not been answered. By being stood dead in front of the goalie, it's already considered to be impeding his vision.

The IFAB diagram is the perfect answer to why this was given offside. This is precisely how the Law is supposed to be applied. That is IFAB's job.

It is relevant. Read the rule. 
 

obstructing their line of vision alone (which he didn’t as you can see Scmeichel looking over his shoulder) is not enough, it has to also prevent him from being able to play the ball 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Christoph Stiepermann said:

I wasn't actually aware this was a rule before the game yesterday. But it's got me thinking about all the times I've seen opposition players standing on Krul's toes in the past couple of years and it's gone unpunished. 

It seems so harsh to me that Cantwell can be punished for standing near Schmeichal who is basically a foot taller than him but someone like Antonio, Wood or Benteke can challenge our keeper for corners and not get punished for it. Seems like the ref was just well up for showing he can get a difficult obscure decision right at our expense. Somehow I think if that occurred at Stamford Bridge or Old Trafford he wouldn't have given it. 

I reckon if you looked at virtually every goal scored from a corner last season there will be a player stood in front of the keeper like Todd was.

Brentford scored from one where their player was physically holding the keeper v Arsenal 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Ken Hairy said:

I'm more chilled and less sweary about it this morning. 😄 Still absolutely adamant it was a very poor decision mind. 

I don't disagree  Hairyo.  I've normally got a decent 'nose ' for good and bad decisions....this was a bad one. Yes he was in an offside  position but had little effect  on Schmeichels ability to stop what was an excellent  header. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

As the diagrams from IFAB make crystal clear, the referee did get this one right.

Anyone arguing otherwise either does not know the Law, does not know how the Law is supposed to be interpreted, or has the green/yellow specs on. Either way, their position is uninformed, unqualified, and therefore irrelevant.

Edited by TheGunnShow

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Danbury Yellow said:

Officials got it right, but really quite a harsh one for us, I celebrated for too long on this occasion. 

But either way I just don’t really understand why Cantwell decided to stand there as it essentially was making any direct shot from the comer null and void.

It's absolutely obvious why Cantwell stands there. The vast majority of teams don't push out when defending a corner the way that Leicester did yesterday. Most teams would stay in and defend - you would see a defender on one or both posts for instance. Gary Lineker often tells the story of how he learned to stand in the 'Cantwell' position at corners and how he scored a number of goals from there in his career when the ball dropped in front of him at a corner. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
8 minutes ago, Jim Smith said:

I reckon if you looked at virtually every goal scored from a corner last season there will be a player stood in front of the keeper like Todd was.

Brentford scored from one where their player was physically holding the keeper v Arsenal 

That doesn't matter. What matters there is the position of the second-last defender. If they're on the posts - or a keeper behind a player stood in his way - they'll play everyone on. And if he's physically holding the keeper then it's a Law 12 matter anyway - you're looking at whether a foul is committed and not an offside.

Standing in front of the goalie is a common trick, but if all the defenders get out except the keeper and the attacker in front doesn't get out in time, he's running the risk of being caught off. That's what happened here. Todd was a split-second too slow getting out, and he's been caught on camera. In fact, the assistant referee caught him straight off as well.

Edited by TheGunnShow

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think you are wrong.  Maybe this was.the case when the corner was taken but at the point McLean heads the ball, Todd is neither blocking his vision nor impeding his ability to play the ball.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...