I don't think that's right. The defender was trying to play the ball; a deliberate action which means it's not a deflect, so it would be the same as Duffy making contact: not offside.
Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊
[Albion] Dan Burn Offside
- Thread starter nickjhs
- Start date
I don't think that's right. The defender was trying to play the ball; a deliberate action which means it's not a deflect, so it would be the same as Duffy making contact: not offside.
The defender is where it gets complicated because it is ultimately only offside if one Brighton player plays it to another in an offside position. My point is that in not changing the trajectory of the original ball it doesn't really become a new phase. Burn is still gaining a clear advantage by following the original flight of the ball and being in an offside position. However, if the West Ham player heads it back across goal into Burn's feet, there is clear deviation and the phase of play changes because he wasn't involved in the play when the original ball was played and only becomes active once a new ball has been played.
LamieRobertson
Not awoke
I have to agree, although only half of him was offside. There really is no excuse for standing in an offside position as a free kick is taken; it marred a brilliant performance.
Ironically it was him trying to play the West Ham goalscorer offside that arguably led to their goal.....there was a spot on this and explaining the change in rules resulting in our goal being disallowed on the Goals on Sunday prog yesterday
BensGrandad
New member
Surely irrespective of Duffy or any of our players touching the ball Burn was offside at the time of the kick and as such would still be offside when he collected the ball on the byeline. to put in the cross.
Last edited:
- Thread starter
- #25
Its a damn shame because his getting control of the ball passing it to Trossard and the finish was just brilliant. Surely they work on not being offside all the time.
BensGrandad
New member
As has been said many times the rules need to be changed so that offside is only so if either the feet or head are offside with daylight between that in the defender. There are too many marginal decisions that influence the game to the detriment of the game.
Nottseagull
Well-known member
If they do then it hadn't got through to Andone by the time we played Watford. Had Maupay's goal not been so deadly accurate, his tap-in would have been marginally offside. In fact he only reached the line due to his devastating pace, which in this case would have worked against him!
Again, that's not quite right. The law says:
A player in an offside position receiving the ball from an opponent who deliberately plays the ball (except from a deliberate save by any opponent) is not considered to have gained an advantage.
It is about the deliberate attempt to play the ball, the flight of the ball - or how much it changes - is irrelevant. The offside offence in situations like this is when Burn touches the ball. If the defender deliberately plays the ball before Burn, then Burn can't be offside.
DarrenFreemansPerm
⭐️⭐️⭐️⭐️
I’m still lost as to how Arsenal’s goal (Aubameyang) against us at the Amex was allowed to stand? Lacazette was offside when the ball was played, our defender (Balogun?) sauntered off to collect the ball but once he had it Lacazette closed him down and blocked his clearance, Arsenal gained possession and scored, that can’t be right, can it?
Justice
Dangerous Idiot
Can if your one of the big boys, when we played Chelsea you just know Moss would have pointed to the spot had the situation been reversed. We’ve never seen John Moss at the Amex since we must of put in a scathing report.
seagurn
Well-known member
I thought the offside rule was explained on a 50p bit!
When the free-kick was taken, Burn was standing in an offside position. He runs and ...... gets to the ball first.
How on earth are you trying to convince yourselves that it WASN'T offside?
Sure, that’s what I’m trying to do. That’s why my very first words were “he was offside, fair enough”. It was just a discussion about why it took the VAR so long to make what looked a pretty clear cut decision.
Yes but it is then all about interpretation of what is a deflection and what is a deliberate act.
Using Burn as the example; the deliberate act to play the ball by the defender would be to head forward. The defender wouldn't deliberately get it wrong and glance it over their head to Burn. (Though obviously this is grey as they might be playing for the corner). If this is a deliberate act in your book, then so is every slide tackle/block that then falls to a goal hanger. I very much understand that the change of trajectory is not a written law, but is the clearest indicator of deliberate intent and I was obviously trying to uncomplicate the intricacies for the OP.
No it isn't. The deliberate act is moving his head toward the ball in an attempt to play it. How much contact he makes, how much effect it has becomes irrelevant. It is the intention to play that is important. If you try to kick a ball and screw it wildly in a different direction to that which you were trying to kick it, it doesn't become a deflection. You still tried to kick the ball. The same thing applies with heads. If you deliberately try to head the ball, and you head the ball but it goes in a different direction to what you intended, you still deliberately tried to play the ball.
Looking at the ball and moving towards it is the clearest indication of deliberate intent. I could boot a football at someone's back and it would change direction, doesn't mean they deliberately played it.
There is no difference in the hypothetical of the defender or Duffy heading the ball before Burn collects it. As long as Burn is in an onside position when either of them make contact with it, there's no offside.
Last edited:
Burn was offside (by camera) when the free kick was taken but the defender got in the way before he retrieved the ball. So when Duffy missed it he was onside, so if Duffy or the defender connected he would have been onside.
But Burn was offside when Duffy misses the header. So if Duffy connects he is offside.
[MENTION=12595]Acker79[/MENTION] I bow to your infinite wisdom. After a quick double check, I can happily say I am wrong. But what a stupid rule. Completely non-sensical and confusing to be able to put a defender in a position where they have to play the ball and if they get it wrong at all offside doesn't matter anymore. The below video though, I understand why it is correct, makes little logical sense to me.
So in conclusion [MENTION=12595]Acker79[/MENTION]; if Duffy heads the ball Burn is offside, but if Wet Spam defender heads it he isn't? And the reality is that nobody headed it so it was offside anyway? All correct?
darkwolf666
Well-known member
The way you’re explaining it, which I believe is wrong, Burn could have been standing 15 yards offside, in a clear offside position and gaining an advantage. Defender wins header from ball played forward and deliberately nods it towards his goalie, not seeing Burn, Burn collects in his offside position and scores!
You say goal, I say offside at the point the ball was played forward by Brighton player!
If it’s the former watch out for a spate of goal hangers ala the school playground.
Yup
Glad we got there in the end, apologies if I came off as argumentative. Very nice to be properly proven wrong on here, rather than just told it!
But we see similar. I can't remember who it was against, but I believe it was a home game against a big six side, which was on TV, where we had the ball out on the north east wing (possibly a corner) and the ball was swung in, a defender headed it down toward goal and one of our players connected, swept it in. The lino initially flagged, the ref immediately went over to check with the lino and they allowed the goal to stand.
If people were to goal hang, defenders would stop passing it back, and it would prove fruitless. It also impacts on your attack - your most forward man is offside so if you win the ball you can't play it to him, so you're down a man, and even if you try to play it to someone else, he risks interfering with an opponent.
EDIT: Everton. Corner played in, defender heads it back towards goal to an offside Locardia. Not exactly the same. But there have been instances where what you've said has happened (trying to pass to a player in an offside position, gets taken by a defender and sent in his direction anyway) and the goals stood/not been ruled offside (not necessarily 15 yards, but that's not important, you're onside or offside. 15 yards offside is no more an offence than 15 inches offside.
https://youtu.be/WT0kEYomcX0
Last edited: