Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊
Offside goals
- Thread starter Giraffe
- Start date
Mancgull
Well-known member
Hemed's was clearly offside. Murphy's was fractional but probably correct. However what has been missed by many was Stockdale's superb fingertip save to divert the Woods shot onto the bar. This won us a point as no way were we looking likely to score yesterday.
Just found this. Sorry, but he looked on-side to me at the time, and I reckon he was.
http://www.skysports.com/watch/vide...ns/championship/10193375/preston-0-0-brighton
I've managed to capture the moment the ball is released by Knockaert here. I reckon Murphy is a foot onside, and even if that isn't the exact time it is released, I can't believe he's offside. Very tight, but ON-side for me:
http://www.skysports.com/watch/vide...ns/championship/10193375/preston-0-0-brighton
I've managed to capture the moment the ball is released by Knockaert here. I reckon Murphy is a foot onside, and even if that isn't the exact time it is released, I can't believe he's offside. Very tight, but ON-side for me:
Paul Reids Sock
Well-known member
Isn't it still based on any part of the body that can legally play the ball?
If so, then that image to me says that his feet may be just onside but his head is off side as he is going toward the goal and the defenders away. Infact on second look, I would say even his right foot is offisde
Really? To me his right foot looks level at worst! Defender is to the left of the D and his left foot is miles further inside the D than Murphy's.
Very harsh decision I think, but an easy one to get wrong in defence of the lino.
Paul Reids Sock
Well-known member
The angle doesn't help to be fair. I guess at the end of the day it won't change anything. Just like Lampard against the Germans.
It's been a great season and we are still well in with a shout of autos, but more likely playoffs unless we implode
Hotchilidog
Well-known member
- Jan 24, 2009
- 8,710
I think we can all agree, we were clearly ROBBED!
Normski1989
Well-known member
That is very tight. Murphy looks more central in the D and his right foot looks closer to the edge of it than the defenders left foot, suggesting he is probably marginally onside. His head also looks roughly in line with his right foot. But with the players moving in opposite directions, you can understand why the linesman could've got it wrong. It was a very tight decision either way.
We can't change it now. Move on and lets get three points on Tuesday!
Is that the view from the POSH SEATS?
Yes, YES it is. Well actually, we were a bit to the RIGHT.
By the way, when our second disallowed goal went in, we all cheered naturally (before it was called offside). Some of the locals were embarrassing. It's one thing seeing stroppy kids in their 20s getting upset at away fans in the home areas, but two in particular stroppy tossers must have been in their SIXTIES.
symyjym
Banned
Isn’t there an unwritten understanding that there has to be daylight between the players?
If there was a video replay for tight decisions the ref would have probably given the goal.
If there was a video replay for tight decisions the ref would have probably given the goal.
Thunder Bolt
Silly old bat
I've only watched the extended highlights on Player, but I can see why that goal was offside. What I don't see is why the Rosenior shot was ruled offside in the second half. Kirkland spilled it, but even before that I can't see who was offside. It's probably the camera angle.
Super Steve Earle
Well-known member
I have long lost track of the offside rule as players seem to still be offside long after they originally strayed past the last man. But that aside, is there still an element of the rule that says the attacking player should receive the benefit of the doubt?
TWOCHOICEStom
Well-known member
*UNLESS the opposition is Brighton & Hove Albion. Accoring to Rule # 127.4 Appendix 3
biddles911
New member
- May 12, 2014
- 348
Yes, I keep hearing that said on TV but, having read the rule, they appear to be talking rubbish (surprise!?).
Did we deserve to win though?! Wasn't there so no idea really but we don't appear to have threatened much anyway so a draw may have been a fair result? Given Preston's recent form a point seems pretty good to me.
Also think we seem to be the only team in the mix not bottling it at present which bodes well. Even Burnley were pretty lucky against Blackburn, I thought, and surely their recent run must come to an end soon.......
The position of his foot is utterly irrelevant in this instance, as his shoulder / chest are further forward.
No, there isn't.
If it were actually onside. Which it probably wasn't. We'll never actually know, of course, unless there is a better camera angle available.
The Rosenior shot (itself) wasn't offiside (and would have counted had it gone in). 3 players were stood offside though, when he hit it, and were considered 'active' at the moment Kirkland spilled it. Kirkland was a lucky man - it was a shocking bit of keeping.
Not in any rule, no.
Its up to the lino to interpret each decision, ultimately, regardless.
Thunder Bolt
Silly old bat
I get the 'interfering with play' rule, so once Kirkland has spilled it, they were 'interfering'?