Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊
Offside
- Thread starter Mellotron
- Start date
MattBackHome
Well-known member
- Jul 7, 2003
- 11,722
Not interfering with play (despite charging towards the goal, a millimetre from touching the ball, in the centre of the 6 yard box) innit.
Pogue Mahone
Well-known member
- Apr 30, 2011
- 10,732
He was. And no Albion player would have gone for the ball if he hadn't been there.
wakeytom
New member
Keepers fault there the player was not impeeding
- Thread starter
- #5
Hilarious. How is being IN THE WAY not INTERFERING?
The Legend that IS Lawro
It's 'canard' Del
WAS offside by definition. Would just be papering over the cracks though I fear.
- Thread starter
- #7
2nd goal, not first.
beorhthelm
A. Virgo, Football Genius
- Jul 21, 2003
- 35,295
because the offside rule has been borked up. he's not offside if not interfering in the "first phase of play", but if the ball comes off the post to him, he is. daft. phase of play, its not fecking rugby.
- Thread starter
- #10
A player running on specifically to gobble up a rebound IS interfering with play.
Not true. He's offside in the first phase because he is interfering with an opponent. The lino got it wrong.
wakeytom
New member
Only if there was a rebound as that would be phase 2
colonies man
New member
- Jul 30, 2011
- 488
Ball watching as so many of them are,no tackles
TSB
Captain Hindsight
He's joking. Everyone knows it was offside, except for the linesman. Oh and the commentary team for about ten minutes.
TSB
Captain Hindsight
Wrong. Way wrong.
It's not the offside rule's fault, it's the linesman's fault for not applying it correctly.
It wasn't dunk, you can see him follow in when the ball is bouncing while the defender is still laying on the ground. I believe it was andrews, but not sure. Definitely not Dunk, though.
kevo
Well-known member
- Mar 8, 2008
- 9,092
It was almost as if he was trying to score.
Nothing to do with dunk,it was ward.
Dear me, he should know better.