Kane wasn't offside, Lovren touched the ball.
State of the refs in this country
- Thread starter Adisa
- Start date
Logically it should, but under the current rules and how refs interpret them it doesn't count until the player is close enough to the ball. We got screwed by this a few years back when Evans scored an own-goal against Newcastle because there was a player behind him and he tried to deflect the ball anywhere and there's quite a few other examples. I'm not happy about the rule or the interpretation of when a player is interfering but the referee and the linesman were spot on today.
A player gets flagged when he touches the ball for a reason.
All that crying when the linesman waits until the player touches the ball for an obvious decision should tell you why Kane is onside.
People are arguing against the rules with that one, its not really an opinion based decision
All that crying when the linesman waits until the player touches the ball for an obvious decision should tell you why Kane is onside.
People are arguing against the rules with that one, its not really an opinion based decision
Come on. You might be able to say he exaggerated, but he got kicked in the back of the leg by a defender trying to boot the ball up field. Its a foul, and I can see how anyone would go down in that situation. It was reckless by Van Dijk
Incorrect - Kane was played onside as the defender touched the ball. Very good spot by the lines man.
I think that part was the referee. The linesman was telling the ref that it was offside if he didn't touch it but if he did then it was onside and the referee then made the decision to give the penalty.
Referee's clearly need more help. We can go on about how poor the decisions are and swear at the officials, whilst lamenting about the state of refereeing, but the fact of the matter is that these referees are human and will always make mistakes.
Watching the Bundesliga, the 'state' of refereeing is just as poor there and I'm sure viewers of the La Liga and Seria A will lament the same. The fact of the matter is that these errors will continue to happen and effect key moments in games. You can't take human error out of refereeing so you need to give them as much assistance as can be made available to help them do their job better. Many other sports have adopted technology to help the referee/umpire, it shouldn't be any different for football.
Thankfully the Bundesliga has taken a step forward and implemented VAR this season and it has helped referees reverse their decisions, ofcourse it does slow the game down but when you have decisions such as the ones today, which can have so much of a bearing on both team's season, then fairness should be worth the slight delay.
In the end, the 'state' of refereeing is just like it is everywhere, it's just that other countries are doing something about it.
Watching the Bundesliga, the 'state' of refereeing is just as poor there and I'm sure viewers of the La Liga and Seria A will lament the same. The fact of the matter is that these errors will continue to happen and effect key moments in games. You can't take human error out of refereeing so you need to give them as much assistance as can be made available to help them do their job better. Many other sports have adopted technology to help the referee/umpire, it shouldn't be any different for football.
Thankfully the Bundesliga has taken a step forward and implemented VAR this season and it has helped referees reverse their decisions, ofcourse it does slow the game down but when you have decisions such as the ones today, which can have so much of a bearing on both team's season, then fairness should be worth the slight delay.
In the end, the 'state' of refereeing is just like it is everywhere, it's just that other countries are doing something about it.
Last edited:
Both were correct decisions.
It's one of the grey areas of the offside rule. Kane was offside when the first ball was played. Is it considered a new phase of play as soon as Lovren touches it? I think it's fair to say Kane is interfering with play as the defence are reacting to a pass which is going through to an offside player, causing Lovren to try to get a touch on it. To me it should be offside due to that, and a few years ago it probably would be, but the offside rule seems to get amended regularly, and now it isn't, based on what the linesman appears to be saying. Not convinced the actual foul from Karius was a penalty either, but they didn't seem to show many replays of that one during the game.
Not that it really matters as he missed it anyway. The 2nd penalty was a much clearer one and the right decision eventually.
Not that it really matters as he missed it anyway. The 2nd penalty was a much clearer one and the right decision eventually.
It's not a grey area though. Having looked it up I was wrong to say it was the interpretation of the rule, the rule is clear: "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."
First penalty, Kane was offside, how he can have zero influence on Lovren there before he made a mess of clearance!?
Agreed.
A player in an offside position at the moment the ball is played or touched by a team-mate is only penalised on becoming involved in active play by:
- clearly attempting to play a ball which is close to him when this action impacts on an opponent or
- making an obvious action which clearly impacts on the ability of an opponent to play the ball
- gaining an advantage by playing the ball or interfering with an opponent when it has:
- rebounded or been deflected off the goalpost, crossbar or an opponent
- been deliberately saved by any opponent
From what I heard, the linesman wasn't sure, nor was the referee. So the linesman said "if Lovren hasn't touched the ball, then its offside". To which the referee replies "I have no idea if he touched it" and then went ahead and gave the penalty.
The grey area arises from how he was offside when Spurs played the ball, before Lovren did. Lovren is reacting to a ball being played to a player in an offside position. I think it makes it a definite grey area, as Kane is surely interfering with play from an offside position, as he is causing the defence to react. If Kane was onside when Spurs played the ball but then offside as Lovren plays the ball, then he's 100% onside with no grey area, but that's not what happened.
I'm telling you, this kind of decision is gonna happen against us( the non-offside call ) and you guys are all gonna change your tune. It's just far too complicated and open to interpretation. The only way that thing could have not been awarded as an offside decision would have been if a Liverpool player made a backpass. Basically, they're interpreting Lovren's attempted clearance as a backpass, as if he were in control of the ball whilst, in reality, it should have been seen as a deviation.
Both penos were wrong decision.
Bottom line Liverpool cannot win with VAR or No VAR.
Bottom line Liverpool cannot win with VAR or No VAR.
Lamela would surely have to be a psychic to dive there. How would he know VVD was swinging his leg!?
If that is the case, then it's poor from Moss. However I only heard the lino say that. It was a blatant touch from Lovren so I don't see how Moss wouldn't have seen it.
I asked this in the Klopp thread, but does anyone have an idea of how much refs and linesmen get paid?
Why does it have to be a back pass? When he fecks up the clearance it's a new passage of play. If he leaves it, Kane is offside.
Who told you that?
I'm pretty impressed by the whole thing. Good teamwork, 2 correct decisions under ferocious pressure.
Watched that Dermot Gallagher clip there. . . Willing to retract the first one. . . That was a penalty.
The second . . . I'm always wary of dives in the penalty area with seconds left. I still don't think it was but it is understandable why the linesman came to that decision with the referee.
Also very nice of Firmino to cover up the glare of his teeth when he went over to talk to the linesman......Very considerate.
The second . . . I'm always wary of dives in the penalty area with seconds left. I still don't think it was but it is understandable why the linesman came to that decision with the referee.
Also very nice of Firmino to cover up the glare of his teeth when he went over to talk to the linesman......Very considerate.
On review both decisions were correct then. Fair play to the refs, I didn't see the contact from Van dijk to Lamela's leg live.
On the first goal though, Lovren clearly makes his own bed by miscontrolling the clearance but the law is unfair to defenders. If Lovren misses the ball or doesn't clear it, Kane is offside but defenders should probably always at least attempt to deal with everything given the change in the offside law. You almost have to be a cyborg to be a decent defender these days.
On the first goal though, Lovren clearly makes his own bed by miscontrolling the clearance but the law is unfair to defenders. If Lovren misses the ball or doesn't clear it, Kane is offside but defenders should probably always at least attempt to deal with everything given the change in the offside law. You almost have to be a cyborg to be a decent defender these days.
Page 5, the gif that @GifLord posted. Can hear the conversation between ref and linesman
I think I read it's at the level of worth doing but not totally silly - 2k a game or something (ballpark) & might be ore now.
It's a deflection, not a new passage of play. He had no control over the ball.
That was what they'd get about 20 years ago. They're on more, considerably more.
I remember reading Howard Webb was on £80k per year at the end of his career. Don't know if that was just from the FA/Premier League or if it also included international and European matches too.
Excellent refereeing today in Liverpool-Spurs game tbh.
Not a deflection, it's a messed up clearance.
The first goal is questionable to me. If a defender is influenced by another player who is offside, the offside has to be called. As shown with a nice graphic here.
The defender in this case was clearly influenced by Kane. He would not have tried to make a last ditch attempt to play the ball if Kane wasn't there. So for me the referee should have given the offside.
On second thought. Its Liverpool so feck em.
The defender in this case was clearly influenced by Kane. He would not have tried to make a last ditch attempt to play the ball if Kane wasn't there. So for me the referee should have given the offside.
On second thought. Its Liverpool so feck em.
Doesn't matter.
It's not a particularly difficult decision with the technology and I'm surprised people still don't get it.
Lovren playing the ball starts a new passage of play. It doesn't matter that he's too shit to clear it properly; he made a deliberate attempt to play the ball as per law 11 (emphasis mine).
At that point Kane can only be flagged if him being in an offside position is deemed to be influencing Lovren's ability to play the ball. That is defined as:
In other words simply being in an offside position in and of itself is not deemed to be interfering.
The only way you can argue that its offside is by arguing that Kane's movement impacted Lovren's ability to play the ball. But Kane's movement is away from the ball rather than to it, and can not have influenced Lovren any more than the simple fact of his presence would have, which, as we can see, is not an offence.
All things considered I think the offside decision is an excellent one. The actual penalty decision that follows it is, to me, far more questionable.
Two correct decisions for me
It is a stupid law but it is the law and Kane became onside the moment Lovren touched the ball. Anyway he missed it and so did not effect the result of the game. The second penalty was as clear as it is. VVD kicked him up his ass or his calf. It was a stupid thing to do. For sure there was a fairly strong connection.
But the referee in the Newcastle CP game was way beyond terrible.
But the referee in the Newcastle CP game was way beyond terrible.
As far as I’m aware Kane is an offside position as the ball is played forward to him by a team mate, Lovrens touch is irrelevant.
Edit: I should probably mention that I deem him as active, since the ball is being played to him, though I would think that was obvious anyway.
Obviously there will be people saying watch the analysis video to explain why I’m wrong. I have watched it, and all I can say is the rules need reviewing if that’s not offside, far too open to interpretation at the moment.
@NinjaFletch i understand it, I just really don’t agree with it.
Edit: I should probably mention that I deem him as active, since the ball is being played to him, though I would think that was obvious anyway.
Obviously there will be people saying watch the analysis video to explain why I’m wrong. I have watched it, and all I can say is the rules need reviewing if that’s not offside, far too open to interpretation at the moment.
@NinjaFletch i understand it, I just really don’t agree with it.
Last edited:
It shouldn't matter. If the ball is played towards Kane in an offside position he either a) distracts Lovren into making a poor clearance (see below)
or b) has the ball deflected onto him
... both of which are offside offences. It doesn't say "passed to him". It says "rebounds off an opponent", and it doesn't go into whether the rebound comes from a deliberate or accidental block.
The linesman has got it wrong IMO, because he's saying that "it's a deliberate action", but surely there's a difference between being forced into a snatched clearance / blocking a shot and a fecking back pass, which is what the "deliberate action" is supposed to prevent.
I mean, if Lovren's clearance had fallen to Karius and Karius had picked it up, would the referee had deemed it a back pass? That's the key for me, and no ref would ever give that as a back pass.
---
With all that said, it shouldn't really matter anyway, because at no point in that action is Kane onside. Kane is offside when the ball is played from Alli, and at no point in which it could be deemed a "new situation" is he in an onside position, so for me it's nonsense.