Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊

[Football] You're the ref - three controversial offside decisions yesterday - we're they right?



Kalimantan Gull

Well-known member
Aug 13, 2003
12,898
Central Borneo / the Lizard
None of these decisions were actually discussed on Match of the Day, which surprised me, especially Gayle's one - but you're the ref, correct decision or not?

1. Glenn Murray against Swansea - Knockaert crosses in, Murray goes for the ball from an offside position, doesn't touch it, ball goes straight in, goal disallowed (probably because they thought he touched it). Was he interfering with play?

can't find a clip of this one

2. Dwight Gayle's first against Bournemouth - Shelvey plays a great through ball to Ritchie who is just onside, takes it down the wing and crosses to an unmarked Gayle who scores on the second attempt. Thing is, Gayle was three yards in front of the defenders in an offside position, when Shelvey's pass was made. So no wonder he was free and unmarked to score. Is this the same phase of play and thus should it have been disallowed?

https://www.footbie.com/video/d-gayle-goal-vs-afc-bournemouth

3. Liverpool's first against West Ham - corner is taken and Can heads into the net. When the header is made Milner is standing directly in front of the goalkeeper Adrian, blocking him off like players do all the time now to limit their movement at corners. He's backing into him, no-one on the line so clearly in an offside position, and though West Ham don't seem to make much fuss, surely interfering with play?

From the beginning here: https://www.footbie.com/video/liverpool-vs-west-ham-4-1-highlights-goals
 


Titanic

Super Moderator
Helpful Moderator
Jul 5, 2003
39,021
West Sussex
Murray was clearly 'interfering with play' although I don't think those are the words that are used now. He was offside.
 




Acker79

Well-known member
NSC Patreon
Nov 15, 2008
31,762
Brighton
1. Right decision. Murray challenged for the ball where the goalkeeper was diving so would be deemed as interfering with an opponent.

2. Right decision from what I can see. Gayle is behind the ball when it is played, so the position of the defenders is irrelevant.

3. Wrong decision. Interferring with an opponent, but too often goalkeepers try to play for that obstruction rather than trying to play the ball, so understand why it wasn't given.
 






Acker79

Well-known member
NSC Patreon
Nov 15, 2008
31,762
Brighton
Not when the ball was passed to Gayle, when it was passed to Ritchie. They freeze frame it at about 28 seconds on that clip

Oh. Well that's not even slightly controversial. It's a text book example of a different phase of play.
 


Kalimantan Gull

Well-known member
Aug 13, 2003
12,898
Central Borneo / the Lizard
Oh. Well that's not even slightly controversial. It's a text book example of a different phase of play.

So there is nothing to stop the striker hanging around the keeper just waiting for a speedy winger to cut down the wing and give it to him? doesn't seem right to me, he's got an advantage on those defenders by hanging offside
 


Yoda

English & European
Rewatched the Can one a couple of times, there's a defender running back around to the near post (from where the corner was taken), that just plays Milner onside when Can heads the ball.
 




Normski1989

Well-known member
Apr 15, 2015
751
Hove
1. Offside. Correct decision. Interfering with play.
2. Onside. Correct decision. Onside when the pass was made towards him.
3. Offside. Wrong decision. Interfering with play. Although Milner may have been onside... Need to see it from a better angle.

Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk
 


Acker79

Well-known member
NSC Patreon
Nov 15, 2008
31,762
Brighton
So there is nothing to stop the striker hanging around the keeper just waiting for a speedy winger to cut down the wing and give it to him? doesn't seem right to me, he's got an advantage on those defenders by hanging offside

I would tend to agree with you. But I also think a team gains an advantage when a player is in an offside position and the defence step up expecting the ball to go to him, but he leaves it and a teammate runs on from an onside position to get behind, but again, according to the laws of the game it's onside.

The laws of the game are very clear on this particular point - the ball isn't played anywhere near Gayle or any defenders he may be near (i.e. he's not stopping an opponent from getting to the ball), so his position is irrelevant at that point. The defenders still have the opportunity to get back and mark him. It is as clear an example of 'different phase of play' (which I think is more of a commentator shorthand rather and actual term in law) as you can get.
 


Kalimantan Gull

Well-known member
Aug 13, 2003
12,898
Central Borneo / the Lizard
I would tend to agree with you. But I also think a team gains an advantage when a player is in an offside position and the defence step up expecting the ball to go to him, but he leaves it and a teammate runs on from an onside position to get behind, but again, according to the laws of the game it's onside.

The laws of the game are very clear on this particular point - the ball isn't played anywhere near Gayle or any defenders he may be near (i.e. he's not stopping an opponent from getting to the ball), so his position is irrelevant at that point. The defenders still have the opportunity to get back and mark him. It is as clear an example of 'different phase of play' (which I think is more of a commentator shorthand rather and actual term in law) as you can get.

What is the 'different phase of play' law? Gayle doesn't break stride from being in an offside position to taking his first shot, the only opportunity defenders have to get back is to be quicker than him. Ritchie touches the ball once, and that's his pass to Gayle. Feels like the same phase of play to me, at least in terms of language, but what is the rule?
 




miffy6

Well-known member
Mar 7, 2009
838
muz_2.gif
 








Bodian

Well-known member
May 3, 2012
11,595
Cumbria
What's the definition of 'interfering with play'?

"Interfering with play" is defined in the laws as playing or touching a ball passed or touched by a team-mate

But I suspect Murray's offence was 'interfering with an opponent' which is defined as:

interfering with an opponent by:
- 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 or
- clearly attempting to play a ball which is close to him when this action impacts on an opponent or
- making an obvious action which clearly impacts on the ability of an opponent to play the ball

Basically, he put the keeper off, so the keeper had to contend with trying to save the ball, and watching Murray in case he touched it. If Murray hadn't gone for it, then the keeper would have had only one thing to concentrate on, and so might have reached the ball.
 


Machiavelli

Well-known member
Oct 11, 2013
16,542
Fiveways
So there is nothing to stop the striker hanging around the keeper just waiting for a speedy winger to cut down the wing and give it to him? doesn't seem right to me, he's got an advantage on those defenders by hanging offside

There isn't. But I'm not sure there's an advantage there. The striker won't be contributing to play and therefore the team will be a player short.
 




smartferndale

Active member
Mar 21, 2013
110
Danny Blanchflower I think and was and still is correct. Even if the attacking player is 10 or more yards away he or she is a distraction.
 




PILTDOWN MAN

Well-known member
NSC Patreon
Sep 15, 2004
18,606
Hurst Green
All correct decisions

They only become controversial when discussed by people who don't understand the laws properly, by this I mean most players and ex-players sat in studios
 


Acker79

Well-known member
NSC Patreon
Nov 15, 2008
31,762
Brighton
What is the 'different phase of play' law? Gayle doesn't break stride from being in an offside position to taking his first shot, the only opportunity defenders have to get back is to be quicker than him. Ritchie touches the ball once, and that's his pass to Gayle. Feels like the same phase of play to me, at least in terms of language, but what is the rule?

It isn't in law. The law simply talks about how you can be in an offside position, that in itself isn't an offence. It becomes and offence when you interfere with with play, interfere with an opponent, or gain an advantage (which is specifically defined as gaining an advantage by playing the ball or interfering with an opponent when it has: rebounded or been deflected off the goalpost, crossbar or an opponent or been deliberately saved by any opponent - yes, I know Gayle had a head start, but as you can see that isn't considered an advantage in the offside law).

It is implied that each time the ball is played is a 'new phase'. Shelvey's pass was one phase. When he played the ball, Gayle was in an offside position but he didn't interfere with play, didn't interfere with an opponent, and didn't gain an advantage from being in that position (using the definition of 'advantage' above). No offence occurred and the game continued. Ritchie then played the ball and at the point that Ritchie played the ball, Gayle was in an onside position by virtue of being behind the ball.
 



Paying the bills

Latest Discussions

Paying the bills

Paying the bills

Paying the bills

Albion and Premier League latest from Sky Sports


Top
Link Here