I should of wrote the winning goal can’t of been the offside goal if there was 2 goals scored, I think that makes more sense.
If we were guaranteed promotion or guaranteed the cup I would still choose promotion, so there would be no slowing down of the juggernaut moving forward.
It might make more sense if you correct all the grammar ... ... but doesn't because I didn't say it was disallowed, just that it looked offside according to some pundits.
Says the person who came on to post this absolute nonsense, "You do realise you can’t have a winning goal if you win two nil." And keeps responding with more nonsense in an attempt to backtrack. Fair enough, I'll leave you to carry on if that's what makes you happy.
Sorry, but that was so pedantic, Smug, and unnecessary when you were having a decent discussion. I'm probably the most pedantic on here, and I feel like correcting everybody's grammar, including yours, but I don't 'cos we need to accept the many faults (not necessarily the same ones) of some posters. It is hard sometimes, but we've all got them
It wasn't 'a decent discussion' at all. He's specifically come on to pull me up, wrongly as it happened, as he often does. His 'contribution' to match threads is usually of the same standard tbh.
I'm guessing this is a joke because surely there's no way anyone can misunderstand the offside rule that badly . But just in case it's serious... 1. That angle is terrible. 2. You can't score with your elbow, that's not where the line should be. 3. Why have you decided to ignore 95% of Burge's body? The rule is any body part that can legally play the ball, which for a goalkeeper means the entire body. In this case, Burge's back is the closest part of him to the goal. "Foot or hand" man, come on! 4. Even from that picture, even with the dodgy line, even with the random foot/hand rule, it's still pretty feckin obvious that he's onside. The red line in your picture is literally in front of every single part of Burge's body... Just for confirmation, here's a better angle, with the correct offside line... He's about 2 yards onside . It was 100% an error by the linesman, the goal should have been allowed. Having said all that, who cares? We've been screwed over by dodgy refs enough times this season, it was about time we got the rub of the green!
One of the big boys at home, get the SoL rocking again, would be a brilliant occasion. I would have said Brentford but they look really decent this year so I don't think there is any "easy" draw to hope for. Mad that the lowest ranked team in the competition in the 1/4 finals is 12th in the Prem... And then there's us
Because the flag didn’t go up immediately, I think it’s given for the earlier offence. Think the linesman asked the ref if the header constituted a second phase or if it’s classed as a deflection. If it’s the latter, he’s offside. If he just got this wrong at that point, chances are the flag goes up immediately with no delay. Only ones who know are the officials. Everyone else is assuming. As has been said though, it’s immaterial.
