KAZZAM Posted February 16, 2015 Share Posted February 16, 2015 No way that first goal should've counted, Rooney effectively dummied it into the goal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Davkaus Posted February 16, 2015 Share Posted February 16, 2015 This commentator waxing lyrical about if he doesn't touch the ball, it's not offside. Excuse me sonny boy, but I believe the FA will disagree with you; 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 Immediately thought Rooney was interfering. On 2nd watch, it's probably a good call to let that stand. The lucky lucky lucky gits. I thought the keeper was waiting for a touch from Rooney which obviously never came but still affected his ability to save the shot. He was waiting for a touch from a clearly offside player before attempted to make a save? He should play to the whistle then. I dunno. My opinion is Rooney didn't obstruct the keepers view at any time, he wasn't impeding him at any point. Not an easy call, could definitely see it going the other way. I'm just leaning slightly more towards it being the right call. The rule isn't impeding his sight. It's interfering with play. Rooney has caused that goal to go in. Was he challenging for the ball? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jimzk5 Posted February 16, 2015 Share Posted February 16, 2015 For me he is close enough to the keeper to distract him. The keeper looked as though he thought Rooney would get the ball and would need to save a shot from him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BleedClaretAndBlue Posted February 16, 2015 Share Posted February 16, 2015 PNE have a wiseman too Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PieFacE Posted February 16, 2015 VT Supporter Share Posted February 16, 2015 (edited) The goal shouldn't have stood imo. The rule is just a bit daft. It's open to interpretation too much . Edited February 16, 2015 by PieFacE 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stevo985 Posted February 16, 2015 VT Supporter Share Posted February 16, 2015 This commentator waxing lyrical about if he doesn't touch the ball, it's not offside. Excuse me sonny boy, but I believe the FA will disagree with you;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 orinterfering with an opponent orgaining an advantage by being in that positionImmediately thought Rooney was interfering. On 2nd watch, it's probably a good call to let that stand. The lucky lucky lucky gits.I thought the keeper was waiting for a touch from Rooney which obviously never came but still affected his ability to save the shot.He was waiting for a touch from a clearly offside player before attempted to make a save? He should play to the whistle then. I dunno. My opinion is Rooney didn't obstruct the keepers view at any time, he wasn't impeding him at any point. Not an easy call, could definitely see it going the other way. I'm just leaning slightly more towards it being the right call.The rule isn't impeding his sight. It's interfering with play. Rooney has caused that goal to go in. Was he challenging for the ball? He appeared as if he was going to out the ball in the net before suddenly moving out of the way. Again I'm not sure challenging for the ball has anything to do with it. What he did was enough to distract the keeper. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
villa4europe Posted February 16, 2015 Share Posted February 16, 2015 This commentator waxing lyrical about if he doesn't touch the ball, it's not offside. Excuse me sonny boy, but I believe the FA will disagree with you; 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 Immediately thought Rooney was interfering. On 2nd watch, it's probably a good call to let that stand. The lucky lucky lucky gits. I thought the keeper was waiting for a touch from Rooney which obviously never came but still affected his ability to save the shot. He was waiting for a touch from a clearly offside player before attempted to make a save? He should play to the whistle then. I dunno. My opinion is Rooney didn't obstruct the keepers view at any time, he wasn't impeding him at any point. Not an easy call, could definitely see it going the other way. I'm just leaning slightly more towards it being the right call. The rule isn't impeding his sight. It's interfering with play. Rooney has caused that goal to go in. Was he challenging for the ball? he doesnt have to sure we had a long discussion on this a few years ago when newcastle had a goal disallowed in a game vs man city or chelsea iirc if you are close to the keeper or close to the flight path of the ball and influence his though process then you are interfering with play IMO 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Davkaus Posted February 16, 2015 Share Posted February 16, 2015 It's a really tricky one. I mean, the LAws of the Game give 14 helpful scenarios and explain why they are or aren't examples of offside. And in those 14 examples, they don't really cover this scenario, so it's for the referee to make a near-instant judgement on which of the scenarios it's most like. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PieFacE Posted February 16, 2015 VT Supporter Share Posted February 16, 2015 Didn't even touch him... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
packoman Posted February 16, 2015 Share Posted February 16, 2015 Eh that's a dive Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Davkaus Posted February 16, 2015 Share Posted February 16, 2015 he doesnt have to sure we had a long discussion on this a few years ago when newcastle had a goal disallowed in a game vs man city or chelsea iirc if you are close to the keeper or close to the flight path of the ball and influence his though process then you are interfering with play IMO Not according to the laws of the game, as I read them. “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 challenging an opponent for the ball Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Genie Posted February 16, 2015 Share Posted February 16, 2015 Does he even touch Rooney there? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Rev Posted February 16, 2015 Share Posted February 16, 2015 Dive. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
packoman Posted February 16, 2015 Share Posted February 16, 2015 I even thought the ref was going over to book Rooney. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stevo985 Posted February 16, 2015 VT Supporter Share Posted February 16, 2015 Awful dive. Awful. Shut up Keown you dick. That makes no sense Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sam3773 Posted February 16, 2015 Share Posted February 16, 2015 Rooney swan dive. 9/10 for technique. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BOF Posted February 16, 2015 Moderator Share Posted February 16, 2015 That'll do donkey, that'll do. See what I did there? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
villa4europe Posted February 16, 2015 Share Posted February 16, 2015 It's a really tricky one. I mean, the LAws of the Game give 14 helpful scenarios and explain why they are or aren't examples of offside. And in those 14 examples, they don't really cover this scenario, so it's for the referee to make a near-instant judgement on which of the scenarios it's most like. and it was unusual for dowd to give utd the benefit the doubt Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Genie Posted February 16, 2015 Share Posted February 16, 2015 He dives, the commentators notice and gloss over it. Words removed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CarewsEyebrowDesigner Posted February 16, 2015 Share Posted February 16, 2015 Good dive from Rooney. 7.5/10. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts