Sun Apr 20, 2014 8:02 am
Sun Apr 20, 2014 8:08 am
Sun Apr 20, 2014 8:13 am
Sun Apr 20, 2014 8:40 am
Sun Apr 20, 2014 8:43 am
griff105 wrote:When the shot was taken he was offside. The deflection has nothing to do with it.
Then when the ball comes to him he is interfering with play from when the shot was taken.
Sorry but it was right.
Sun Apr 20, 2014 9:00 am
Sun Apr 20, 2014 9:16 am
bloobird_james wrote:When Suarez scored for Liverpool the other week for his first goal it was very similar but that was allowed..why!!
Sun Apr 20, 2014 9:32 am
griff105 wrote:When the shot was taken he was offside. The deflection has nothing to do with it.
Then when the ball comes to him he is interfering with play from when the shot was taken.
Sorry but it was right.
Sun Apr 20, 2014 9:34 am
Sun Apr 20, 2014 9:56 am
Sun Apr 20, 2014 10:08 am
Sun Apr 20, 2014 10:44 am
Sun Apr 20, 2014 10:58 am
Sun Apr 20, 2014 11:01 am
Valley Lad wrote:Cala was in an offside position when Caulker's shot was deflected by keeper and as he's standing in & around six yard box, he's definitely deemed as offside as he's gained an unfair advantage.
The ball being received after last being touched by a defending player, can cause confusion, but generally if it's a back pass and an attacking player benefits from an offside position he will be ok, but if it's deflected off an intended through ball he will be offside. I think?
Sun Apr 20, 2014 1:04 pm
caerblue wrote:If your a welsh side battling to avoid relegation from the English premier league it's offside,but if you are a English club,or one of the top sides the goal would have stood
Sun Apr 20, 2014 1:18 pm
Sun Apr 20, 2014 1:58 pm
Valley Lad wrote:Cala was in an offside position when Caulker's shot was deflected by keeper and as he's standing in & around six yard box, he's definitely deemed as offside as he's gained an unfair advantage.
The ball being received after last being touched by a defending player, can cause confusion, but generally if it's a back pass and an attacking player benefits from an offside position he will be ok, but if it's deflected off an intended through ball he will be offside. I think?
Sun Apr 20, 2014 2:04 pm
Sun Apr 20, 2014 2:05 pm
JDerrida wrote:Valley Lad wrote:Cala was in an offside position when Caulker's shot was deflected by keeper and as he's standing in & around six yard box, he's definitely deemed as offside as he's gained an unfair advantage.
The ball being received after last being touched by a defending player, can cause confusion, but generally if it's a back pass and an attacking player benefits from an offside position he will be ok, but if it's deflected off an intended through ball he will be offside. I think?
The difference here was that Campbell headed the ball towards the goal and NOT towards Cala.
AT that point Cala was in an offside position but did not appear to interfere with that specific passage of play. He did not obstruct vision or prevent any player from moving towards a better defensive position, so not affecting or interfering with the play from Campbell's header until the split second their keeper touched the ball.
On consideration of whether the keeper deflected the ball.
The ball was headed towards the goal reaching the goalkeeper at below knee level.
The ball was moving away from the goal and above head height by the time it reached Cala.
The opposite direction and opposite angle of ball flight.
That cannot be considered a deflection, more of a rebound.
I'm not going to state I know the exact rules, but the above are the facts of what happened.
Anyone know the exact rule ?
Many thanks
Sun Apr 20, 2014 2:08 pm
Gareth (Wilts) wrote:bloobird_james wrote:When Suarez scored for Liverpool the other week for his first goal it was very similar but that was allowed..why!!
Because it's Liverpool and the fa favour top 6 clubs
Sun Apr 20, 2014 2:17 pm
Gareth (Wilts) wrote:bloobird_james wrote:When Suarez scored for Liverpool the other week for his first goal it was very similar but that was allowed..why!!
Because it's Liverpool and the fa favour top 6 clubs
Sun Apr 20, 2014 2:27 pm
Roath_Magic_ wrote:Sounds offside to me.
Deflections are irrelevant. If you are offside when the ball is struck and you end up scoring from the rebound then you are offside.
Sun Apr 20, 2014 2:29 pm
Gareth (Wilts) wrote:Roath_Magic_ wrote:Sounds offside to me.
Deflections are irrelevant. If you are offside when the ball is struck and you end up scoring from the rebound then you are offside.
It's not always the case though although it should be.
Sun Apr 20, 2014 2:52 pm
Bluebird since 1948 wrote:caerblue wrote:If your a welsh side battling to avoid relegation from the English premier league it's offside,but if you are a English club,or one of the top sides the goal would have stood
Aww just shut the f**k up you absolute clown.
Decision was correct.
Sun Apr 20, 2014 3:21 pm
Gareth (Wilts) wrote:JDerrida wrote:Valley Lad wrote:Cala was in an offside position when Caulker's shot was deflected by keeper and as he's standing in & around six yard box, he's definitely deemed as offside as he's gained an unfair advantage.
The ball being received after last being touched by a defending player, can cause confusion, but generally if it's a back pass and an attacking player benefits from an offside position he will be ok, but if it's deflected off an intended through ball he will be offside. I think?
The difference here was that Campbell headed the ball towards the goal and NOT towards Cala.
AT that point Cala was in an offside position but did not appear to interfere with that specific passage of play. He did not obstruct vision or prevent any player from moving towards a better defensive position, so not affecting or interfering with the play from Campbell's header until the split second their keeper touched the ball.
On consideration of whether the keeper deflected the ball.
The ball was headed towards the goal reaching the goalkeeper at below knee level.
The ball was moving away from the goal and above head height by the time it reached Cala.
The opposite direction and opposite angle of ball flight.
That cannot be considered a deflection, more of a rebound.
I'm not going to state I know the exact rules, but the above are the facts of what happened.
Anyone know the exact rule ?
Many thanks
In fairness if goal had been against us and allowed we'd all be going nuts. FIFA need to clear up the rule and personally I'd like rule made simpler so that it stops controversy
Sun Apr 20, 2014 3:59 pm
Roath_Magic_ wrote:Gareth (Wilts) wrote:Roath_Magic_ wrote:Sounds offside to me.
Deflections are irrelevant. If you are offside when the ball is struck and you end up scoring from the rebound then you are offside.
It's not always the case though although it should be.
Nothing is always the same in football. Which is why im a firm advocate for a video ref with challenges.
Nearly every other sport has been improved by it and its put the game back in the teams hands and not the refs.
Although in this case, the TMO would say "NO GOAL".
Sun Apr 20, 2014 4:59 pm
JDerrida wrote:Gareth (Wilts) wrote:JDerrida wrote:Valley Lad wrote:Cala was in an offside position when Caulker's shot was deflected by keeper and as he's standing in & around six yard box, he's definitely deemed as offside as he's gained an unfair advantage.
The ball being received after last being touched by a defending player, can cause confusion, but generally if it's a back pass and an attacking player benefits from an offside position he will be ok, but if it's deflected off an intended through ball he will be offside. I think?
The difference here was that Campbell headed the ball towards the goal and NOT towards Cala.
AT that point Cala was in an offside position but did not appear to interfere with that specific passage of play. He did not obstruct vision or prevent any player from moving towards a better defensive position, so not affecting or interfering with the play from Campbell's header until the split second their keeper touched the ball.
On consideration of whether the keeper deflected the ball.
The ball was headed towards the goal reaching the goalkeeper at below knee level.
The ball was moving away from the goal and above head height by the time it reached Cala.
The opposite direction and opposite angle of ball flight.
That cannot be considered a deflection, more of a rebound.
I'm not going to state I know the exact rules, but the above are the facts of what happened.
Anyone know the exact rule ?
Many thanks
In fairness if goal had been against us and allowed we'd all be going nuts. FIFA need to clear up the rule and personally I'd like rule made simpler so that it stops controversy
I know a lot of fans would be, but if the rule is clear then it's tough no matter who is the beneficiary.
I agree there has to be a simple rule, that is least open to interpretation and uncertainty.
In yesterday's case, Cala was NOT interfering with play and the wasn't 'deflected', it was 'played' by their keeper.
Sun Apr 20, 2014 4:59 pm
PtB wrote:JDerrida wrote:Gareth (Wilts) wrote:JDerrida wrote:Valley Lad wrote:Cala was in an offside position when Caulker's shot was deflected by keeper and as he's standing in & around six yard box, he's definitely deemed as offside as he's gained an unfair advantage.
The ball being received after last being touched by a defending player, can cause confusion, but generally if it's a back pass and an attacking player benefits from an offside position he will be ok, but if it's deflected off an intended through ball he will be offside. I think?
The difference here was that Campbell headed the ball towards the goal and NOT towards Cala.
AT that point Cala was in an offside position but did not appear to interfere with that specific passage of play. He did not obstruct vision or prevent any player from moving towards a better defensive position, so not affecting or interfering with the play from Campbell's header until the split second their keeper touched the ball.
On consideration of whether the keeper deflected the ball.
The ball was headed towards the goal reaching the goalkeeper at below knee level.
The ball was moving away from the goal and above head height by the time it reached Cala.
The opposite direction and opposite angle of ball flight.
That cannot be considered a deflection, more of a rebound.
I'm not going to state I know the exact rules, but the above are the facts of what happened.
Anyone know the exact rule ?
Many thanks
In fairness if goal had been against us and allowed we'd all be going nuts. FIFA need to clear up the rule and personally I'd like rule made simpler so that it stops controversy
I know a lot of fans would be, but if the rule is clear then it's tough no matter who is the beneficiary.
I agree there has to be a simple rule, that is least open to interpretation and uncertainty.
In yesterday's case, Cala was NOT interfering with play and the wasn't 'deflected', it was 'played' by their keeper.
Was it played or saved?
Sun Apr 20, 2014 5:37 pm
Gareth (Wilts) wrote:PtB wrote:JDerrida wrote:Gareth (Wilts) wrote:JDerrida wrote:Valley Lad wrote:Cala was in an offside position when Caulker's shot was deflected by keeper and as he's standing in & around six yard box, he's definitely deemed as offside as he's gained an unfair advantage.
The ball being received after last being touched by a defending player, can cause confusion, but generally if it's a back pass and an attacking player benefits from an offside position he will be ok, but if it's deflected off an intended through ball he will be offside. I think?
The difference here was that Campbell headed the ball towards the goal and NOT towards Cala.
AT that point Cala was in an offside position but did not appear to interfere with that specific passage of play. He did not obstruct vision or prevent any player from moving towards a better defensive position, so not affecting or interfering with the play from Campbell's header until the split second their keeper touched the ball.
On consideration of whether the keeper deflected the ball.
The ball was headed towards the goal reaching the goalkeeper at below knee level.
The ball was moving away from the goal and above head height by the time it reached Cala.
The opposite direction and opposite angle of ball flight.
That cannot be considered a deflection, more of a rebound.
I'm not going to state I know the exact rules, but the above are the facts of what happened.
Anyone know the exact rule ?
Many thanks
In fairness if goal had been against us and allowed we'd all be going nuts. FIFA need to clear up the rule and personally I'd like rule made simpler so that it stops controversy
I know a lot of fans would be, but if the rule is clear then it's tough no matter who is the beneficiary.
I agree there has to be a simple rule, that is least open to interpretation and uncertainty.
In yesterday's case, Cala was NOT interfering with play and the wasn't 'deflected', it was 'played' by their keeper.
Was it played or saved?
Hit the post then hit keeper before bouncing up for Cala to out into net
Sun Apr 20, 2014 7:47 pm