- Aug 27, 2013
- 13,456
- 39,042
Fact.End of.
Fact.End of.
This is how the FA define "gaining an advantage"By the rules he was offside..he was in a position in one phase to gain an advantage..offside..
A defenders touch doesn't nullify an offside, either way not sure why they're complaining, Kane misses the penalty anyway.
I know the rules.. by the law it doesn't become effect until he touches the ball however he was offside in a position that effected the play..offside
Can i just say something about the first penalty decision that i think nobody has really picked up on. Ive looked again and again and i feel sky and most others have potentially missed it.
It is my belief that that the forward pass that alli makes actually takes 2 deflections. Its is hard to pick up on most angles but it first comes off the player that is directly trying to tackle dele. Deles pass is actually to lamela but is deflected into harrys path. Now why are they all talking about lovrens mistake touch as though it is the one that counts? The ball came off the pool player next to alli and then another (lovren) before harry is even in play
they've changed. I thought so too but FIFA changed it not long ago. You arent offside from a deliberate touch by a defender.
Yeah my understanding too, but a question, if that ball went through then to Karious would it have been a passback? I’m pretty sure I’ve seen goals where a free kick has hit the wall only for it to be poached in then the striker given offside.
I also like the fact that they all totally ignore the fact that Salah was offside the first time he received the ball in the lbuild up to his second goal. What was more laughable was Sky focusing on Lamela being 0.001mm offside for our second penalty!
he wasn'tNo because it wasn't an intentional pass. He tried to clear it
Where was Salah offside?
Just been on Twitter, 100s of Liverpool fans who don’t understand the offside rule ....I give it 2 hours before rumours start circulating about a secret memo where a top spook admits the rules were changed to “bring down” Liverpool
he wasn't
Yet you could argue would Lovren have to play the ball if Harry was in the position he was in.. so to me watching it straight off..it was offsside. .not that it mattered with the miss.. but harry was clearly in a position to effect the playThis is how the FA define "gaining an advantage"
“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"
Yet you could argue would Lovren have to play the ball if Harry was in the position he was in.. so to me watching it straight off..it was offsside. .not that it mattered with the miss.. but harry was clearly in a position to effect the play
The fact that they don't leads to the Firmino situation, which could have ended badly, Firmino was clearly running towards the ball having been in an offside position and was affecting the play. Letting him believe he was onside could have led to a nasty collision with Lloris.
I played for years as a CB. I understand what you're saying, and the new interpretation drives me crazy as well. But that's not how the law is written. Interfering with play is only if there is a challenge for the ball or clearly blocking the GK's line of sight. Don't start trying to apply common sense.Yet you could argue would Lovren have to play the ball if Harry was in the position he was in.. so to me watching it straight off..it was offsside. .not that it mattered with the miss.. but harry was clearly in a position to effect the play
Actually a defender's touch does nullify an offside if there is a deliberate attempt to play the ball by the defender. Lovren took a swinging kick at the ball, it wasn't a deflection. Rule 11 from the FA (bolded text):A defenders touch doesn't nullify an offside, either way not sure why they're complaining, Kane misses the penalty anyway.