HomerJay Posted June 10, 2008 Posted June 10, 2008 http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/e...008/7445476.stm Dutch striker Ruud van Nistelrooy's opening goal in the win over Italy was legitimate, says Premier League referees' chief Keith Hackett. Van Nistelrooy looked yards offside when he prodded home from close range. But it appears he was played onside by defender Christian Panucci, who was lying off the pitch at the time. "The fact is the assistant was correct; the defender who slid off the field is still regarded as active," Hackett told BBC Sport. "Christian Panucci went off through contact with his own goalkeeper (Gianluigi) Buffon. He is still considered part of the game." Uefa general secretary David Taylor said the officials had made the right decision. since when was 'off the pitch' defined as active!?? what a load of crap. nistlerooy was offside, end of story.
no balls Posted June 10, 2008 Posted June 10, 2008 "According to Hackett". They're like the OB them lot. All stick together & back the other up. Anyway, I'm boycotting EURO 2008! Carry on!
Carlos Posted June 10, 2008 Posted June 10, 2008 http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/e...008/7445476.stmsince when was 'off the pitch' defined as active!?? what a load of crap. nistlerooy was offside, end of story. I guess you haven't seen the Euro 2008 forum then.
Rembrandt Posted June 10, 2008 Posted June 10, 2008 I'm with you, Homer. If he's lying off the pitch injured he can't be interfering with play in any meaningful way - regardless of who he collided with or how he left the field of play (unless he did that deliberately). What if it had been the next Dutch attack, while the Italian was receiving treatment behind the goal-line - would he still be a 'live' player as far as the rules are concerned ? According to Hackett's interpretation, yes ! Basically it's just covering up for an official.
enzo gambaro Posted June 10, 2008 Posted June 10, 2008 (edited) Basically it's just covering up for an official. Basically, it's just the laws of the game. Edited June 10, 2008 by enzo gambaro
eaststandlower Posted June 10, 2008 Posted June 10, 2008 (edited) What a load of crap, for once I have to say the officials where right. So according to some of you if a corner comes in and all the defending team stands off the pitch that then makes all the attacking team off side?? That sounds like a cock up to me. What if it had been the next Dutch attack, while the Italian was receiving treatment behind the goal-line - would he still be a 'live' player as far as the rules are concerned ? According to Hackett's interpretation, yes ! This would have been the next passage of play and therefore the player receiving treatment would have been classed as injured and recieving treatment IMO, the situation in which the Italian’s conceded was different because the play wasn't stopped to allow him to receive treatment, the player took himself off the field and could have rejoined the play at any time. Edited June 10, 2008 by eaststandlower
no balls Posted June 10, 2008 Posted June 10, 2008 It happened to the Itie's so f?ck em. Valid point!
mannyroad58 Posted June 10, 2008 Posted June 10, 2008 The word deliberate should be included in the rule and then i would accept horse head was on side but fcuk me he had just been flattened by his own player and was actually injured, i bet he still had to ask the refs if he could get back onto the pitch after his treatment, it's just a fcuking joke. Having said that, Smiffs has a very good point
Smiley Posted June 10, 2008 Posted June 10, 2008 happened again tonight. Fabregas was offside in the build-up to the 4th Spanish goal. he gained an advantage being off-side and ahead of the defence, but because he wasn't interfering in the first passage of play - he was onside - but then in the 2nd passage of play he was miles ahead of the nearest defender. stoooooopid!
mannyroad58 Posted June 10, 2008 Posted June 10, 2008 happened again tonight. Fabregas was offside in the build-up to the 4th Spanish goal. he gained an advantage being off-side and ahead of the defence, but because he wasn't interfering in the first passage of play - he was onside - but then in the 2nd passage of play he was miles ahead of the nearest defender. stoooooopid! I saw that as well and as far as i'm concerned it was still the same passage of play, the rule is fcuked up completely
Big_Girl_Oral_Explosion Posted June 11, 2008 Posted June 11, 2008 The word deliberate should be included in the rule and then i would accept horse head was on side but fcuk me he had just been flattened by his own player and was actually injured, i bet he still had to ask the refs if he could get back onto the pitch after his treatment, it's just a fcuking joke.Having said that, Smiffs has a very good point He was feigning injury, after the goal stood he was up on his feet like a spring chicken. The offside rule is still the bane of football worldwide. This rule more than others is the cause of more sterile games than any other.
enzo gambaro Posted June 11, 2008 Posted June 11, 2008 happened again tonight. Fabregas was offside in the build-up to the 4th Spanish goal. he gained an advantage being off-side and ahead of the defence, but because he wasn't interfering in the first passage of play - he was onside - but then in the 2nd passage of play he was miles ahead of the nearest defender. stoooooopid! Fabregas should have been given offside. The linesman was at fault there, not the offside law.
Recommended Posts