[Albion] Should Murphy's "goal" have stood?

[BensGrandad]

Just watched it on sky he was most definitely offside no question. When he put the ball in the net he was goalside of the keeper so just the one defender out wide between him and the goal.

 

[Everest]

Just watched it on sky he was most definitely offside no question. When he put the ball in the net he was goalside of the keeper so just the one defender out wide between him and the goal.

FFS. It doesn't matter WHEN he put the ball in the net.
If you're going to make (stupid) comments, learn the laws first.

If the Liverpool situation on Saturday could be called onside, then this one most definitely was.

 

[kevo]

According to the following site, this was the first Championship game David Bushell has officiated at this season. All his other matches as a lino (all seven of them) have been in the lower divisions. Despite being a Football League official for seven years, he has never progressed beyond being an assistant referee. All of which implies that he is not very good.

http://www.worldfootball.net/referee_summary/david-bushell/1/2/http://

 

[BensGrandad]

He was in an offside position when the shot was taken had the ball not hit the bar and gone in no problem but as soon as he played it he was offside.

 

[Everest]

He was inline at worst

 

[Brightonfan1983]

I voted 'offside' based on what I saw last night, but having seen the highlights, for my money he's on.

 

[Everest]

I've said onside.... but then did this... [line drawn parallel to the goal line rather than the penalty box]

View attachment 71077


...my line passes through the boot of both players. I don't think this could be closer, but still feel that the goal should have stood.

If the lino isn't sure it was offside the benefit of the doubt should go to the team scoring... Shirley?!

My line is adjusted slightly for the camera angle, because the goal and 6yd lines are not actually parallel.
The Ipswich player's right foot is in the air, and he is leaning toward the bye-line too, making it even more onside

 

[essbee]

Just watched it on sky he was most definitely offside no question. When he put the ball in the net he was goalside of the keeper so just the one defender out wide between him and the goal.

BG - are you saying this for effect? Because you are talking bulls*it.

 

[8ace]

Top work BG

 

[SIMMO SAYS]

Top work BG

View attachment 71080

Has the recent LOVE in for BG ended

Thinking of starting a new thread

 

[perseus]

I've said onside.... but then did this... [line drawn parallel to the goal line rather than the penalty box]

View attachment 71077


...my line passes through the boot of both players. I don't think this could be closer, but still feel that the goal should have stood.

If the lino isn't sure it was offside the benefit of the doubt should go to the team scoring... Shirley?!

It was Murphy that was offside (or level with the left back) not interfering with play until the rebound. I could not see from my angle.

Looked like a reaction save from their keeper out of the ordinary. So the ball was played by the opposition. I would like clarification by the referee's panel.

I would say goal!. If the keeper had not touched the ball, no goal. (I don't like the non-interference rule and it shoudl be changed.) Ipswich got lucky!

 

[Everest]

It was Murphy that was offside (or level with the left back) not interfering with play until the rebound. I could not see from my angle.

Looked like a reaction save from their keeper out of the ordinary. So the ball was played by the opposition. I would like clarification by the referee's panel.

I would say goal!. If the keeper had not touched the ball, no goal. (I don't like the non-interference rule and it shoudl be changed.) Ipswich got lucky!

LAW 11 – OFFSIDE
Definitions
In the context of Law 11 – Offside, the following definitions apply:
• “nearer to his opponents’ goal line” means that any part of a player’s head,
body or feet is nearer to his opponents’ goal line than both the ball and the
second-last opponent. The arms are not included in this definition
• “interfering with play” means playing or touching the ball passed or
touched by a team-mate
• “interfering with an opponent” means preventing an opponent from
playing or being able to play the ball by clearly obstructing the opponent’s
line of vision or challenging an opponent for the ball
• “gaining an advantage by being in that position” means playing a ball
i. that rebounds or is deflected to him off the goalpost, crossbar or an
opponent having been in an offside position
ii. that rebounds, is deflected or is played to him from a deliberate save
by an opponent having been in an offside position
A player in an offside position receiving the ball from an opponent, who
deliberately plays the ball (except from a deliberate save), is not considered
to have gained an advantage.

But all that makes no odds, he was not in an offside position when the original shot was made.
If Gerken had not touched it and it had hit the bar, he should still have been given onside

 

[essbee]

LAW 11 – OFFSIDE
Definitions
In the context of Law 11 – Offside, the following definitions apply:
• “nearer to his opponents’ goal line” means that any part of a player’s head,
body or feet is nearer to his opponents’ goal line than both the ball and the
second-last opponent. The arms are not included in this definition
• “interfering with play” means playing or touching the ball passed or
touched by a team-mate
• “interfering with an opponent” means preventing an opponent from
playing or being able to play the ball by clearly obstructing the opponent’s
line of vision or challenging an opponent for the ball
• “gaining an advantage by being in that position” means playing a ball
i. that rebounds or is deflected to him off the goalpost, crossbar or an
opponent having been in an offside position
ii. that rebounds, is deflected or is played to him from a deliberate save
by an opponent having been in an offside position
A player in an offside position receiving the ball from an opponent, who
deliberately plays the ball (except from a deliberate save), is not considered
to have gained an advantage.

But all that makes no odds, he was not in an offside position when the original shot was made.
If Gerken had not touched it and it had hit the bar, he should still have been given onside

Thanks Everest. I'm no rule-geek, but one or two people on here need to read this and inwardly digest.

 

[BensGrandad]

Everest your interpretration of this rule differs from mine and may I add that of the experts the ref and the linesman or assistant as he is now known. By reading this rule excluding your influencing highlights I would say the ref was correct in his decision, about the only one he made correctly.

 

[Thunder Bolt]

Everest your interpretration of this rule differs from mine and may I add that of the experts the ref and the linesman or assistant as he is now known. By reading this rule excluding your influencing highlights I would say the ref was correct in his decision, about the only one he made correctly.

2/10.

 

[Everest]

Everest your interpretration of this rule differs from mine and may I add that of the experts the ref and the linesman or assistant as he is now known. By reading this rule excluding your influencing highlights I would say the ref was correct in his decision, about the only one he made correctly.

Murphy was inline at worst.
I would say he was slightly behind the defender (further away from the bye-line) so onside anyway.

 

[Bozza]

Everest your interpretration of this rule differs from mine and may I add that of the experts the ref and the linesman or assistant as he is now known. By reading this rule excluding your influencing highlights I would say the ref was correct in his decision, about the only one he made correctly.

Refs don't make decisions on offsides, their assistants do.

(It always grates with me when fellow supporters berate a ref for an offside decision when all he is doing is following the instruction of his assistant)

 

[BensGrandad]

Refs don't make decisions on offsides, their assistants do.

(It always grates with me when fellow supporters berate a ref for an offside decision when all he is doing is following the instruction of his assistant)

But the ref has the final say because can over rule him if he thinks he was wrong and he saw something to put the player on side. Incidentally it is not instructions from his assistant but advice and guidance which he can accept or reject.

 

[essbee]

But the ref has the final say because can over rule him if he thinks he was wrong and he saw something to put the player on side. Incidentally it is not instructions from his assistant but advice and guidance which he can accept or reject.

Hmmm! The chances of a ref being in line with play at the point of an off-side are slim to virtually nothing and so the chances of
an over-rule are minimal to nothing also.

 

[BensGrandad]

Hmmm! The chances of a ref being in line with play at the point of an off-side are slim to virtually nothing and so the chances of
an over-rule are minimal to nothing also.

Unless the ref deemed that the last player to play the ball was adefender which may not be apparent to the lino.. In this case he may have said the keeper didnt touch it in which case it would be a case of the attacker gaining an unfair advantage as per rule 11 (i)