When I watched the game I saw Burn offside, but then I assumed Duffy or the defender had touched the ball before Burn got to it and this allowed him to play. I just looked up the replay and clearly Burn was the first to get to it. My question is this, when can a player who was offside when the ball was kicked become part of the play?
Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊
[Albion] Dan Burn Offside
- Thread starter nickjhs
- Start date
When they interfere with the play...
- Thread starter
- #3
So they cannot take part until when? Possession is lost, that could take many minutes?
No. I think you're conflating interfering with play and being offside as the same thing. An offside should only be given if you are directly interfering (involved) in the play and are offside when the ball is played.
Dan Burn is offside because he becomes active when he collects the ball, until Duffy misses his header he is not interfering and therefore until that point it is not offside. He is however, in an offside position and therefore once he becomes active he was offside.
If Burn is onside and Duffy wins the header, it isn't offside as he hasn't interfered with the play until the header from Duffy.
- Thread starter
- #5
Thanks, I understand this, what I am wondering is if Duffy or the defender had made contact with the ball and then Burn became involved would the offside been called?
If Duffy makes contact with the ball and Burn isn't in an offside position then not offside.
If defender makes contact with the ball and it doesn't dramatically change the trajectory he is offside. (you are still offside from a deflection)
- Thread starter
- #7
Ok thanks I think I get it now. Its obvious really. He was offside as he was the first to touch it and had been offside when the ball was kicked. if Duffy had made contact he would still be offside as he was now between the last defender and the keeper when Duffy made contact. So what the heck goes on when there is a goal mouth scramble?
Yes. It does look like Burn is offside when Duffy misses the header.
Same deal for a goal mouth scramble. If you're attempting to play the ball (interfering) and in an offside position, you are offside.
Thanks for this, but could this have been classified as second phase, as effectively the ball was likely to trickle out and Burn from his original position, wasn’t seeking to gain an advantage?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I think he was offside, fair enough. But I did wonder whether the unusually long delay was because they debated whether it should be a new phase as West Ham had time to reorganise. Quite an odd goal.
Is it PotG?
Thrifty non-licker
He was offside, we didn't get a goal. Correct decision, soon be next Saturday.
dejavuatbtn
Well-known member
Yes, it was a strange one and I too wondered where “phases “ came into it. Overall it was a disappointing application of the rules.
AZ Gull
@SeagullsAcademy Threads: @bhafcacademy
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?
Hotchilidog
Well-known member
- Jan 24, 2009
- 8,692
I was convinced Duffy had headed it and hence Burn was onside, the replays showed that Burn was indeed the first player to touch the ball so the decision was harsh but fair. The Lino should have flagged it really.
Not harsh as it wasn’t marginal he was clearly off
Is it PotG?
Thrifty non-licker
We need to get one of these going, Burn was NOT offside, and we want a goal.
Peter Grummit
Well-known member
As an (interesting) aside, if the lino puts their flag up but the ref doesn't blow the whistle, a goal is scored and VAR shows it was onside, the goal will stand. Important for goalie and defenders to keep playing even if they see the flag.
This was discussed on the radio commentary of Chelsea-Leicester yesterday and, I believe, a change since last season now we have VAR. In theory, a ref could previously overrule a lino's flag but in practice never did.
PG
Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk
This was discussed on the radio commentary of Chelsea-Leicester yesterday and, I believe, a change since last season now we have VAR. In theory, a ref could previously overrule a lino's flag but in practice never did.
PG
Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk
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?
We’re not, but the phase of possession as per the recent demo on Sky is also taken into consideration (or is supposed to be).
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Nottseagull
Well-known member
I have to agree, although only half of him was offsideWhen 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?
. There really is no excuse for standing in an offside position as a free kick is taken; it marred a brilliant performance.Machiavelli
Well-known member
I sit more-or-less in line with it, and only celebrated reservedly as I thought Burn was offside. That linesman was extremely poor. He also missed Antonio taking the ball out of play for a goal kick, which was very clear. I'm of the view that if Duffy got his head on it and Burn was active in play, then it would also have been given offside, but am willing to stand corrected on that.