Electric Avenue Posted January 12, 2014 Share Posted January 12, 2014 Looking at a City Pool double today Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Danishlad Posted January 12, 2014 Share Posted January 12, 2014 What a goal that was by city. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vandaq Posted January 12, 2014 Share Posted January 12, 2014 very interesting goal at st james by tiote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
villa4europe Posted January 12, 2014 Share Posted January 12, 2014 i agree with it you cant be stood 3 yards from goal and not be interfering with play BUT that said i thought valencia's goal last night was offside too its a stupid rule Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LondonLax Posted January 12, 2014 Share Posted January 12, 2014 I think by the letter of the law the goal should have stood but I agree that players messing around in front of the keeper should count as offside. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jimzk5 Posted January 12, 2014 Share Posted January 12, 2014 Anything that annoys Alan pardew im ok with 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vandaq Posted January 12, 2014 Share Posted January 12, 2014 good point Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RunRickyRun Posted January 12, 2014 Share Posted January 12, 2014 By the letter of the law it's not offside. It's explained in the laws of the game - you have to be in the line of sight of a player or preventing a player from playing the ball. In this case neither was true so the lino must have thought he touched the ball. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Milfner Posted January 12, 2014 Share Posted January 12, 2014 (edited) It was offside. If Gouffran hadn't moved the ball would've hit him, and then he would've been offside. He moved out the way, therefore he is active and offside. Edited January 12, 2014 by Milfner Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jimzk5 Posted January 12, 2014 Share Posted January 12, 2014 Pardew stomping around like a baby with a shitty nappy here Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sonic_bouma Posted January 12, 2014 Share Posted January 12, 2014 One of those decisions where I'd be fuming if I was newcastle and it was disallowed and fuming if I was city and it was given as a goal. There are a few scenarios like that that football throws up. Would help if decisions were consistent though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RunRickyRun Posted January 12, 2014 Share Posted January 12, 2014 It was offside. If Gouffran hadn't moved the ball would've hit him, and then he would've been offside. He moved out the way, therefore he is active and offside. Nope. The laws do not use the word 'active' in this context. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
villa4europe Posted January 12, 2014 Share Posted January 12, 2014 he is in harts eye line though hart wouldnt have saved it anyway but gouffran is stood where he will dive Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PaulC Posted January 12, 2014 Share Posted January 12, 2014 Not interfering with play in my view. The ref got it badly wrong! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RunRickyRun Posted January 12, 2014 Share Posted January 12, 2014 he is in harts eye line though hart wouldnt have saved it anyway but gouffran is stood where he will dive He's not obstructing the line of vision of the 'keeper nor is he interfering with him either so he's not offside. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Milfner Posted January 12, 2014 Share Posted January 12, 2014 It was offside. If Gouffran hadn't moved the ball would've hit him, and then he would've been offside. He moved out the way, therefore he is active and offside. Nope. The laws do not use the word 'active' in this context. Interfering then. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
villa4europe Posted January 12, 2014 Share Posted January 12, 2014 he's stood where hart will dive how is that not interfering?! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PaulC Posted January 12, 2014 Share Posted January 12, 2014 Hart had a great view of the strike and his ability to dive wasn't impeded. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Milfner Posted January 12, 2014 Share Posted January 12, 2014 It's not about interfering with Hart, it's about interfering with the ball. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rjw63 Posted January 12, 2014 Share Posted January 12, 2014 Come on Crawley Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts