EPL Matchday 29

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Zidane98

Hall of Famer
Joined
Dec 22, 2009
Posts
34,706
Likes
14,237
Location
South End, AAMI Park
AFL Club
Hawthorn
Other Teams
Socceroos, Liverpool, Victory
If a player is offside they can't win a penalty.. They're not 'in play'. If Mustafi had punched Kane, he could still get a red for violent conduct, but an offside player can't draw a penalty because that's influencing play which results in them being flagged as offside.

I would say it's strange to see Zidane arguing the opposite, but, well..
Utterly incorrect. Law 11 specifically states that the foul is penalised because there is no offside offence until the ball is played.

http://www.theifab.com/laws/offside/chapters/offside-offence

  • a player in an offside position is moving towards the ball with the intention of playing the ball and is fouled before playing or attempting to play the ball, or challenging an opponent for the ball, the foul is penalised as it has occurred before the offside offence

Your claim that a player cannot be fouled in an offside position is blatantly incorrect. They aren't offside until they have played the ball and there is a good reason for this particular rule eg a long ball is played into the box, player a in an offside position doesn't play the ball while player b does, heads it down to player a who then scores. It would be completely unfair if a defender was allowed to take out player a in that scenario because they were in an offside position.


You also go on to say that there would be a foul and a red card awarded if a violent conduct incident occurred. You should also be aware if you are a referee that all violent conducts are penalised with a foul in the location where they occur if the ball is in play. So there absolutely would be a penalty awarded in the scenario you described. There would be no penalty awarded if the violent conduct occurred before the set piece was taken.


Further to this discussion the exact same scenario occurred in the champions league tie between Schalke and Man City. After VAR referral a penalty was correctly awarded because the offside attacker was fouled before he played the ball. See link for further clarificaiton

https://www.uefa.com/insideuefa/about-uefa/news/newsid=2593061.html

You might want to do a refresher course on refereeing btw with your claim that a defender can do what they want to an opponent in an offside position and not be penalised for it. Simply not true.
 

moomba

TheBrownDog
Joined
Oct 3, 2001
Posts
52,386
Likes
15,735
Location
Timperley
AFL Club
North Melbourne
Other Teams
Man City
The applicable law is literally quoted on this page, alongside a recent example of the exact same thing happening and being confirmed to be the correct decision.
And the guidelines given to refs by IFAB are also quoted in this thread.

The recent example was also offside. UEFA justifying the fact that VAR didn't even look at offside when they assessed that particular incident.
 

Magma

Premium Platinum
Joined
Oct 5, 2009
Posts
40,601
Likes
28,961
Location
Adelaide
AFL Club
Adelaide
Other Teams
West Adelaide Bloods, Man City.
all it says to me is that the rule has become way too complicated if it's being debated this heavily, and not just on here. if we're getting to a stage where it's like 'but when does playing the ball become playing the ball' and these many minuscule amounts, then the rule is a mess.
 

Shoei

Norm Smith Medallist
Joined
Sep 26, 2011
Posts
8,314
Likes
6,472
Location
Perth
AFL Club
West Coast
Other Teams
Arsenal
Ref was poor but at the end of the day if Mustafi isn't a clown then there isn't a need for him to make a call.

You can also argue that yeah, Aubameyang's penalty was encroached upon and should have been re-taken, but then it shouldn't have been a penalty in the first place.

Sliding doors, roundabouts and but-fors.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

99 Problems

Senior List
Joined
Aug 4, 2016
Posts
283
Likes
225
AFL Club
Sydney
And the guidelines given to refs by IFAB are also quoted in this thread.

The recent example was also offside. UEFA justifying the fact that VAR didn't even look at offside when they assessed that particular incident.
UEFA justified the decision by quoting the laws of the game. It’s not a conspiracy.

Kane isn’t offside prior to being fouled as he hadn’t impacted the play at that point. He is taken out before anyone plays the ball, and being in an offside position isn’t an offence. If he wasn’t fouled, he should’ve been ruled offside and a free kick awarded instead of a corner, as then he would’ve impacted the play as him challenging for the ball would’ve been responsible for the defensive header by the Arsenal player. It’s actually a clear cut decision by the laws of the game, it’s just that the majority of pundits have no interest in learning the actual laws of the game and consistently sprout false information.
 

moomba

TheBrownDog
Joined
Oct 3, 2001
Posts
52,386
Likes
15,735
Location
Timperley
AFL Club
North Melbourne
Other Teams
Man City
UEFA justified the decision by quoting the laws of the game. It’s not a conspiracy.

Kane isn’t offside prior to being fouled as he hadn’t impacted the play at that point. He is taken out before anyone plays the ball, and being in an offside position isn’t an offence. If he wasn’t fouled, he should’ve been ruled offside and a free kick awarded instead of a corner, as then he would’ve impacted the play as him challenging for the ball would’ve been responsible for the defensive header by the Arsenal player. It’s actually a clear cut decision by the laws of the game, it’s just that the majority of pundits have no interest in learning the actual laws of the game and consistently sprout false information.
He's offside, and he is influencing the play.

He's probably got two or three defenders drawn to him as soon as the ball is kicked, how can that not be impacting on the other team.

Just from a common sense perspective if that's not offside we need to change the way the game is referred, and how set pieces are defended.

As for UEFA, if you take out your strawman "conspiracy" claim, VAR simply didn't look at offside at the time. They cleared the penalty in around 5 seconds, not nearly enough time to consider whether the two players were offside, active, influencing play and what came first, the foul or the offside. It's was just UEFA justifying a bad call.
 

Doctor Gero

TheBrownDog
Joined
Oct 28, 2012
Posts
73,600
Likes
94,361
AFL Club
Geelong
Other Teams
Tottenham, Bushrangers
all it says to me is that the rule has become way too complicated if it's being debated this heavily, and not just on here. if we're getting to a stage where it's like 'but when does playing the ball become playing the ball' and these many minuscule amounts, then the rule is a mess.
Saw this on reddit.

https://www.mirror.co.uk/sport/football/news/tottenhams-penalty-vs-arsenal-correct-14076946

First comment:

“FA rules state that if "a player in an offside position is moving towards the ball with the intention of playing the ball and is fouled before playing or attempting to play the ball, or challenging an opponent for the ball, the foul is penalised as it has occurred before the offside offence."

Now it seems to me that the line between "moving towards the ball with the intention of playing the ball" and "playing or attempting to play the ball" is vague at the best of times and is especially bad on a set piece. But if the rules state that Kane only becomes offside once he's actually trying to head the ball then is there not at least a debate to be had about whether or not he's tried to head the ball before the shove from Mustafi takes place?

Having said all that I'm pretty sure that the reason the refereeing team gave it was that they didn't realise Kane was in an offside position in the first place.”

Sort of sums it up really. Absolutely no clear cut black and white adjudication, given such can we really even be confident VAR would overturn that?

No one is disputing he was in an offside position. Just when it becomes an offence, and I think this is showing that to be a very grey area.
 

99 Problems

Senior List
Joined
Aug 4, 2016
Posts
283
Likes
225
AFL Club
Sydney
He's offside, and he is influencing the play.

He's probably got two or three defenders drawn to him as soon as the ball is kicked, how can that not be impacting on the other team.

Just from a common sense perspective if that's not offside we need to change the way the game is referred, and how set pieces are defended.
He hasn’t impacted the other team as the ball hasn’t arrived for there to be any impact before Mustafi knocks him over. As I said, if the play unfolded the exact same way and the Arsenal defender heads the ball behind still, but Mustafi doesn’t bundle Kane over just prior, than he would be offside as he would’ve impacted the play, as the defender wouldn’t have played the ball without Kane being there.

I agree with your second part though. The rule should be simplified as much as possible, and I think the majority of fans would agree that they would like incidents like last nights to be ruled offside.

For what it’s worth I think the linesman has stumbled across the technically correct decision, and he just didn’t think Kane was in an offside position in the first place.
 

moomba

TheBrownDog
Joined
Oct 3, 2001
Posts
52,386
Likes
15,735
Location
Timperley
AFL Club
North Melbourne
Other Teams
Man City
This is from IFAB

In situations where:

a player moving from, or standing in, an offside position is in the way of an opponent and interferes with the movement of the opponent towards the ball this is an offside offence if it impacts on the ability of the opponent to play or challenge for the ball; if the player moves into the way of an opponent and impedes the opponent’s progress (e.g. blocks the opponent) the offence should be penalised under Law 12.

a player in an offside position is moving towards the ball with the intention of playing the ball and is fouled before playing or attempting to play the ball, or challenging an opponent for the ball, the foul is penalised as it has occurred before the offside offence

an offence is committed against a player in an offside position who is already playing or attempting to play the ball, or challenging an opponent for the ball, the offside offence is penalised as it has occurred before the foul challenge

Kane was definitely impacting on the ability of an opponent to play the ball when the foul happened. And Kane was definitely attempting to play the ball when the foul happened
 

moomba

TheBrownDog
Joined
Oct 3, 2001
Posts
52,386
Likes
15,735
Location
Timperley
AFL Club
North Melbourne
Other Teams
Man City
He hasn’t impacted the other team as the ball hasn’t arrived for there to be any impact before Mustafi knocks him over.
Mustafi is there because Kane is there. How often do you see defenders criticised for losing their man on a set piece.

The fact that Kane was there caused probably two or three defenders into the positions they were in.
 

Magma

Premium Platinum
Joined
Oct 5, 2009
Posts
40,601
Likes
28,961
Location
Adelaide
AFL Club
Adelaide
Other Teams
West Adelaide Bloods, Man City.
to me, it's complicated to try and apply one interpretation across multiple situations. a ball into the box with 3-4 guys running onto it is different from a player being played in off the shoulder from midfield. is kane interfering if it never goes to him? should offside take precedence to a foul like that, given that the foul happens definitively before the ball reaches him? just what constitutes interfering?
 

Cruyff14

TheBrownDog
Joined
Aug 16, 2011
Posts
51,934
Likes
34,147
Location
Melbourne
AFL Club
Hawthorn
Other Teams
Arsenal
Mustafi is there because Kane is there. How often do you see defenders criticised for losing their man on a set piece.

The fact that Kane was there caused probably two or three defenders into the positions they were in.
The argument back to this will be interesting.
 

Doctor Gero

TheBrownDog
Joined
Oct 28, 2012
Posts
73,600
Likes
94,361
AFL Club
Geelong
Other Teams
Tottenham, Bushrangers
The argument back to this will be interesting.
True.

Gooners used the reverse argument when Wimmer own goaled at the Emirates two seasons ago affected by offside players behind him. Even down to the point where it was argued he played the ball (into his own net) because he had Arsenal players around him (offside).

I suspect all of us do not know what the correct adjudication should be, you can make an argument either way because the law is open to interpretation as to when a player is “playing the ball”.
 

99 Problems

Senior List
Joined
Aug 4, 2016
Posts
283
Likes
225
AFL Club
Sydney
Mustafi is there because Kane is there. How often do you see defenders criticised for losing their man on a set piece.

The fact that Kane was there caused probably two or three defenders into the positions they were in.
Under a common sense law that would be right, and there are plenty of other examples of players gaining an advantage by being in an offside position that are not technically offside though. You see it pretty often when a ball is played to a clearly offside player so the defense switches off and the game basically stops, only for an onside player to take advantage and sprint past. IMO that should also be ruled offside.

But under the current laws last night isn’t considered to be impacting the play because being in an offside position itself isn’t an offence, even if 3 players decide to mark him, and he was fouled before he made himself offside by playing the ball.

Think of it this way, if instead of chipping the free kick across the goal to Kane, it was chipped to the near post and Sanchez headed it in instead (from a hypothetical onside position). Kane would’ve still been standing in an offside position, and he still would’ve had the same defenders marking him, but there would be no suggestion that him being in an offside position impacted the play. That’s why simply being marked by a defender isn’t considered enough to be impacting the play (though it probably should be).
 

Magma

Premium Platinum
Joined
Oct 5, 2009
Posts
40,601
Likes
28,961
Location
Adelaide
AFL Club
Adelaide
Other Teams
West Adelaide Bloods, Man City.
Who gives a ****, a goal is a goal and when it’s that marginal it can happen. The ref tried to even it out anyway and they screwed it up so no shits are given by me
well we gotta discuss something until the big one tonight, the west london derby
 
Top Bottom