The Offside Rule

[lake district canary 4,572]

Don't understand it anymore. Yes, when the player crossed to the ball to him, he was just onside, but he'd been standing in an offside position right up to then. What about "phases of play"? Has that been abandoned?

[mastoola 189]

Just now, lake district canary said:

Don't understand it anymore. Yes, when the player crossed to the ball to him, he was just onside, but he'd been standing in an offside position right up to then. What about "phases of play"? Has that been abandoned?

VAR and he is offside for first phase

[Jim Smith 2,366]

He was offside when it was passed anyway. In front of the ball. 

[vos 156]

Looked onside on TV BUT with VAR would probably been a close call. 

[Branston Pickle 3,751]

4 minutes ago, vos said:

Looked onside on TV BUT with VAR would probably been a close call. 

If ‘whoever’ it was for us that was considered offside for our disallowed goal at Southampton, I can’t for the life of me see how that one isn’t.

[K Lo 235]

Blatantly offside IMO but then, we would still have lost anyway.
Furthermore, Gibson and Sara just jogged towards the Leicester two and watched the cross go in front of them. Neither tried to race and block it.
A frustrating game, less so than the loss against Rotherham and draw against Southampton but still frustrating.
5 points behind the Binners and 6 off the top.
 

[keelansgrandad 6,679]

We don't want VAR when it suits us. I think that moment is overshadowing what went wrong tonight. The officials gave the goal. It wasn't blatant, it was close enough to go either way.

As much as Leicester were good, if we think that is as good as we can play then mid table beckons. We have now played three games where the form has been less than the first four.

If we are relying on decisions by the officials to help us, then we are in for a shock.

[Mason 47 1,437]

With VAR intervention I think he'd have been offside by a toe- at Championship level there's nowhere near enough in it to debate. I'd say the greater shame is that VAR has turned us into the sort of people who care about such marginal calls.

I'm probably in the minority in thinking the ref was generally pretty good. My only query is those saying 'Mavididi played for the penalty, its his right' changing their tune for Giannoulis. Faes went through him to the ball, regardless if 'there was enough in it'. There's also the matter of the Leicester defending elbowing a Duffy header clear.

All in all, though, I believe I'm also in the minority in that I don't believe we did enough to take a point. When Wagnerball works it's brilliant, when it doesn't we are fundamentally toothless- it's up to them to find a way to remedy that.

[By Hook or Ian crook 927]

Bit of a reality check for the side there, we’ve just got beat by their reserve team basically. I feel though the standard of referees in not just this league but football in general is abysmal. It’s hard enough when you’re playing the best side in the league without having to play against the ref too. For the pen 20 seconds before that their player going in with a raised boot with studs showing to win the ball which should be a free kick to us plays on and they get the pen. 
 

I think we miss Sargent a lot. Just not the same side without him sadly. 

[By Hook or Ian crook 927]

3 minutes ago, Mason 47 said:

With VAR intervention I think he'd have been offside by a toe- at Championship level there's nowhere near enough in it to debate. I'd say the greater shame is that VAR has turned us into the sort of people who care about such marginal calls.

I'm probably in the minority in thinking the ref was generally pretty good. My only query is those saying 'Mavididi played for the penalty, its his right' changing their tune for Giannoulis. Faes went through him to the ball, regardless if 'there was enough in it'. There's also the matter of the Leicester defending elbowing a Duffy header clear.

All in all, though, I believe I'm also in the minority in that I don't believe we did enough to take a point. When Wagnerball works it's brilliant, when it doesn't we are fundamentally toothless- it's up to them to find a way to remedy that.

Felt Wagner made the wrong call to go with Gibbs rather than one of the forwards. Both Gibbs and Barnes dropped deep so me never had an out ball and the wingers did not push on to their full backs to allow us to play out down the channels. All in all a frustrating game from my point of view. It felt like we gave them far too much respect and never really pressed high enough or got in their faces enough to warrant much from the game. 

[Jim Smith 2,366]

It was a definite penalty for the challenge on Gianoulis in my view. 

[AJ 1,238]

5 minutes ago, Jim Smith said:

It was a definite penalty for the challenge on Gianoulis in my view. 

100%. On TV they said it wasn't and that there "needed to be significant contact". Apparently going straight through the back of your opponent isn't that then? I think a 1-1 draw from two pens would have been a fairer reflection

[Google Bot 3,397]

7 minutes ago, Mason 47 said:

I'm probably in the minority in thinking the ref was generally pretty good.

I did prefer his approach to keeping the game moving even though I felt a few decisions went unfairly against us.  I didn't see what happened with Idah off the ball but he didn't look happy.

It's the inconsistency that pisses me off, another week we'll have someone who blows for everything and it leaves players unable to know where the lines are.

[chicken 2,696]

14 minutes ago, AJ said:

100%. On TV they said it wasn't and that there "needed to be significant contact". Apparently going straight through the back of your opponent isn't that then? I think a 1-1 draw from two pens would have been a fairer reflection

Yup. It's more TV BS. If it's a foul outside the area, it's a fould inside the area. Tackles from behind are no longer allowed, haven't been for yonks.

Foul. No question.

[hogesar 9,837]

38 minutes ago, keelansgrandad said:

We don't want VAR when it suits us. I think that moment is overshadowing what went wrong tonight. The officials gave the goal. It wasn't blatant, it was close enough to go either way.

As much as Leicester were good, if we think that is as good as we can play then mid table beckons. We have now played three games where the form has been less than the first four.

If we are relying on decisions by the officials to help us, then we are in for a shock.

Nonsense. Leicester had 7 proven prem players on the bench. We were unfortunate to not get a point. 

Nothing about that game points to midtable.

[K Lo 235]

28 minutes ago, chicken said:

Yup. It's more TV BS. If it's a foul outside the area, it's a fould inside the area. Tackles from behind are no longer allowed, haven't been for yonks.

Foul. No question.

of course Leicester are the Championship luvvies on TV this season.

[ron obvious 1,519]

Having seen the Sky highlights I obviously don't understand the offside rule. 

The goal scorer was several feet in front of our 2 central players when the pass was made in front of them. I couldn't see any other Norwich players between the goal scorer & the goal.

Can someone please explain why that is not a blatant offside?

[Duncan Edwards 2,274]

2 hours ago, hogesar said:

Nonsense. Leicester had 7 proven prem players on the bench. We were unfortunate to not get a point. 

Nothing about that game points to midtable.

Agree with this. We dropped last fifteen of the first half and paid for it. Second half, we came out rejuvenated and fought for everything, were unlucky not to get on terms and then took a sucker punch. Had we got level - I know we didn’t - those 8 added minutes would have been huge for us. As it was, pressing for the leveller caught us out in the end.

Leicester are a good side though. Bringing Ndidi, Vardy and KDH off the bench was telling. January is huge for them, keep their best players and it’s difficult to pick even one that will finish above them.

The flip side is injuries. We are already in the FFS Saloon. Sarge, Nunez and now Barnes, with Sainz and Hanley also on the path back, our treatment room is the busiest one at Colney.

At the weekend, our changes made us look worse, tonight we improved. My own take on that is we started with the wrong XI, and that’s why we improved for changes. Rowe wasn’t at the races tonight and the Gibbs selection puzzled me as it clearly doesn’t do much for the confidence of Idah. The fact he’s going to be front and centre in the coming weeks means we all need to get behind him rather than tutting every time his first touch invites a 50/50.

Hwang needs to get up to pace and the quicker we get Sargent back the better. Forshaw has now had a 30 second cameo and Sainz has had a go in the ressies, but it’s going to be a long few weeks to Xmas and beyond. If we can cling on to the coat tails of the top 6 and then push on, who knows?

We are short up top though. Sarge and Barnes sidelined and we are VERY short.

One positive is Placheta who looks a different beast. He won’t get us promoted though. 

[Jim Smith 2,366]

6 hours ago, ron obvious said:

Having seen the Sky highlights I obviously don't understand the offside rule. 

The goal scorer was several feet in front of our 2 central players when the pass was made in front of them. I couldn't see any other Norwich players between the goal scorer & the goal.

Can someone please explain why that is not a blatant offside?

The key question is whether he was in front of the ball. If he’s behind the ball when it is passed then he’s not offside, regardless of the position of our players. 

[Conrad 179]

37 minutes ago, Jim Smith said:

The key question is whether he was in front of the ball. If he’s behind the ball when it is passed then he’s not offside, regardless of the position of our players. 

Thank God for someone with sense. Even Radio Norfolk, after the event, said that TV replays showed him to be onside. I was at the match so cannot comment.

[Jim Smith 2,366]

Just now, Conrad said:

Thank God for someone with sense. Even Radio Norfolk, after the event, said that TV replays showed him to be onside. I was at the match so cannot comment.

I don’t think he was onside. He was in front of the ball when it was passed in my view and it went forward.

I’m just saying the key point with this incident is not that he was beyond the two defenders. 

 

[Jim Smith 2,366]

Even if he was onside though, another example of how badly we were screwed over by the officials at Southampton as he was certainly offside earlier in the move.

That disallowed goal there and the penalty given for the clear foul on Dimi and we potentially have 3 extra points and things look much healthier. 

[Ulfotto 669]

I am clueless about the offside rule as well. It’s the first phase when the ball is slide through to Dewsbury Hall. Mcateer is miles off his position then definitely is of benefit when the ball is played across to him for a tap in.

[smooth 114]

Yes, 100% agree Barnes goal at Southampton was exactly the same. So one was given and one wasn't.

We were very good in this game, very good.

Fassnacht should have passed to Barnes early in the 1st half for a clean strike on goal and his lapse of concentration gave an opportunity for a penalty when Duffy was in position to potentially block the shot.

But otherwise we gave them plenty of problems, they marked Rowe out of the game, hence his substitution although he had most shots in the 1st half. So shows you can be out of the game but a moment of class could change a game, he has that.

It is good sainz is getting back to fitness, hopefully an upgrade on placheta and onel.

[Feedthewolf 4,948]

I've only seen the limited Sky highlights (as well as being at the match), but as a ref myself I'd say both decisions were probably correct. Leicester penalty was nailed on, clear push from behind.

As for the offside, looking at the distance of the ball and of McAteer from the six-yard line, it's very tight. Advantage should go with the attacking team as per the laws. With VAR, his head might have been offside but I respect the assistant giving the advantage to the attack.

As for our penalty shouts, I didn't see what happened with Idah off the ball in the second half. As for the tackle on Dimi, though, I saw it but couldn't be sure whether or not the Leicester player got the ball.

Edited September 21, 2023 by Feedthewolf

[ron obvious 1,519]

i still don't understand. He's miles offside at every moment from 1.40 onwards

 

[Ulfotto 669]

I do wonder if it would be a tactic to tell your no9 not to move from the opposition penalty area all game. As eventually you will be onside.

[ron obvious 1,519]

 

[ron obvious 1,519]

 

[Jim Smith 2,366]

28 minutes ago, Feedthewolf said:

I've only seen the limited Sky highlights (as well as being at the match), but as a ref myself I'd say both decisions were probably correct. Leicester penalty was nailed on, clear push from behind.

As for the offside, looking at the distance of the ball and of McAteer from the six-yard line, it's very tight. Advantage should go with the attacking team as per the laws. With VAR, his head might have been offside but I respect the assistant giving the advantage to the attack.

As for our penalty shouts, I didn't see what happened with Idah off the ball in the second half. As for the tackle on Dimi, though, I saw it but couldn't be sure whether or not the Leicester player got the ball.

The Dimi one was a definite penalty. Theirs was a penalty. Their goal I think was offside, if you look from the side angle the player is in front of Vardy slightly and ours worth noting he was also coming back from being further in front of him, not running forward