Random Task
WW Lynchpin
The debate rages on...
You’re on the wind up.Simple question.....yes/no answer
IF Sigurddsson had not been there, would the events still have played out in the same way?
My answer to that question is 'yes' and therefore, as I said earlier, we were lucky that we got away with it on a technicality
Absolutely. It was a mad play by Sig, the lazy plonker.As Keane said on Sky, Ancelotti should be more furious that the guy just sat there in an offside position without a care in the world. It's a definite offside and completely avoidable. I'm only surprised that the officials on the field didn't rule it out before VAR took care of making the right decision.
Yes, I get that.He'd be entitled to claim it sure but without the deflection it would be one of those decisions that could go either way, I think. The referee/VAR might think "well DDG saw the shot the whole way despite Siggy being near him and was always going to have to move away from Siggy to make the save so it didn't have enough of an effect".
It's only with the deflection taking the ball through Siggy that it becomes a complete no-brainer.
Of course he's interfering with the play, if he doesn't move the ball hits him and it's not a goal.IMO he didn’t interfere in the play, he stand still and just moved his feet so he wouldnt touch the ball, if its such a logical play and there’s no controversy we wouldn’t have this thread. So you mas not be as smart as you think. Simple
????????? He had to move to let the ball go in the net.No....I'm saying
a) Sigurddsson didn't impair DDGs view
b) Sigurddsson didn't make a move towards the ball or a sudden move in-front of DDG
c) The shot was going in anyway
On that basis, I think it's fair to say we were 'lucky' that Sigurddsson was deemed as 'interfering' when I personally don't really see who or what he interfered with.
That doesn't matter, the ref can't know definitely whether he can save it or not.It was clearly impossible.
Should resign Ando just to stay in the penalty box and make faces at the goalie and dodge when theres a shot.I don't understand why it's even a debate. If that should be a goal, then what's to stop players standing in offside positions and just dummying any shots that come their way?
Does the wall interfere with play on a direct free kick?IMO he didn’t interfere in the play, he stand still and just moved his feet so he wouldnt touch the ball, if its such a logical play and there’s no controversy we wouldn’t have this thread. So you mas not be as smart as you think. Simple
????????? He had to move to let the ball go in the net.
Had he not moved his legs the ball would have hit him, so he must have interfered with play.I have always thought that the offside rule is of no benefit in the modern game.
It really servers no useful purpose and almost always causes problems.
The game is far too compressed in the midfield and so stretching the play could lead to more open and expansive football.
Football is an entertainment business and it is goals that are the highlight.
Right.Had he not moved his legs the ball would have hit him, so he must have interfered with play.
Imagine two people standing in front of the goalkeeper at all times as the midfielders peppered the goal with shots Wouldn't that be fun?Right.
I am in complete agreement that he was offside.
I just don't see any need for a stupid law like the offside law.
What does it add to the game.
Players can hit a 60m long ball with ease. If the attacker is allowed to stay close to the box without being offside of course he's going to stay there so that as soon as his team mates get possession they'll hit a long one to him and he'd be through. Now that means that the other team needs to keep a man back, preferably two, to mark him. Now what if there are two forwards? 3 men to stay back at all time? Same situation at both ends of the pitch with a gulf of space in the middle between them occupied by fewer players than what were used to.Right.
I am in complete agreement that he was offside.
I just don't see any need for a stupid law like the offside law.
What does it add to the game.
So the current situation is better is it.Players can hit a 60m long ball with ease. If the attacker is allowed to stay close to the box without being offside of course he's going to stay there so that as soon as his team mates get possession they'll hit a long one to him and he'd be through. Now that means that the other team needs to keep a man back, preferably two, to mark him. Now what if there are two forwards? 3 men to stay back at all time? Same situation at both ends of the pitch with a gulf of space in the middle between them occupied by fewer players than what were used to.
The offside rule is about 180 years old for a reason. I don't know how you can watch football and think that it would benefit from having no offsides.
It's because they have to draw a line (literally) somewhere and make it black and white.So the current situation is better is it.
Play is stopped if a player is judged offside a couple of mm inside the opposition half.
A goal is disallowed because a players elbow or backside is a mm beyond the line of the last defender.
In my opinion, because of VAR, far too many goals are disallowed for miniscule infringement of the offside rule, ruining the fans enjoyment for no positive benefit.
My point exactly. Why?It's because they have to draw a line (literally) somewhere and make it black and white.
Now you're talking about how English football treats VAR rather than why we have an offside rule but in short it's absolutely better like it is now. VAR in the PL is shit however, much more so than anywhere else.So the current situation is better is it.
Play is stopped if a player is judged offside a couple of mm inside the opposition half.
A goal is disallowed because a players elbow or backside is a mm beyond the line of the last defender.
In my opinion, because of VAR, far too many goals are disallowed for miniscule infringement of the offside rule, ruining the fans enjoyment for no positive benefit.
So you want to completely destroy the spectacle of football because players can be judged offside by a couple of mm?So the current situation is better is it.
Play is stopped if a player is judged offside a couple of mm inside the opposition half.
A goal is disallowed because a players elbow or backside is a mm beyond the line of the last defender.
In my opinion, because of VAR, far too many goals are disallowed for miniscule infringement of the offside rule, ruining the fans enjoyment for no positive benefit.
Shows how conditioned you can become. My eyes are still recoveringthat you had to explain this to makes my eyes bamboozled