Search results

Agreed. To be honest I don't think the intention of the rules is to allow such a call. It's clearly no advantage. They obviously want the rules to be consistent (easier said than done, but that's the intention), and it clearly isn't consistent to give that offside. If it's a few seconds before...

But the fouled player could have just carried on on his own, without passing, so he has a choice either way. In rugby they pull back play after a long time, obviously in football you can't go that far before advantage is over, but allowing one second for a player to pass the ball to someone...

Ok. Agreed. The way Buzzer described it, Murray was immediately offside, so the player made the pass very close to the time he was tackled (not after a few seconds), so it should have been a free kick. I can't see how that bit would make any difference. Only if the pass was a little while after...

Fair enough. Ah, but I was using a daft patronising tone in reply to your daft effort to patronise, to show just how silly it is. If you have anything useful to say regarding the rules, go ahead, but don't waste your time trying to patronise me or suggesting I play the game (my playing days are...

Go ahead, can you explain the irony of someone making a typo? Are you trying to say that everything you've got wrong in this thread was just a typo? How about you read Buzzer's quote, where the ref says that play should be drought back, and then you give some evidence why that ref was wrong?

"If the only advantage you envisioned in your call was a pass to this offside-positioned player, you would be correct in bringing the play back for the original foul. This might be the case if you didn't see that the player was in an offside position, but your AR did see it." Right, so...

Try reading the thread again, I wasn't rude to you at all. Ah bless, you're having another go at patronising. If at first you don't succeed eh :) Mum must be so proud. Not at all, I don't think your explanation made sense, so I questioned it, that's all. And you come back with nonsense about...

Ah that's nice, you're trying to patronise.

Agreed.

Sorry, I didn't, I said "Advantage: Would the fouled player be better off getting a free kick, or having play continue? Obviously a free kick in this instance" - that's a rhetorical question. Ok, I'm paying attention. Right, but the example Buzzer gave wasn't the 2nd phase of play - the fouled...

I wasn't asking a question :shrug: With the WH game the ref was going to give a free kick, but saw there was an advantage to the team (not the player), so he played advantage. But you said: That's not making sense.

But if player A is fouled, and as he is fouled the ball goes somewhere not good (to the other team, or to a teammate who is offside), then there's no advantage. Advantage: Would the fouled player be better off getting a free kick, or having play continue? Obviously a free kick in this instance...

Anyone got a video of it?

Pedant.

If Murray was immediately offside, then clearly there is no advantage, so no, that doesn't sound right. What? It's not Murray that was fouled, so it's a foul.