Interesting fact - Quansah scoring last night means that a player whose surname begins with every single letter of the alphabet has now scored for Liverpool.
because that’s not the rule. The rule is when initial contact is made. hence the thing that went viral few months back where team showed how can beat it. If you flick ball up onto your foot and hold it there, a guy can then run into an ‘offside’ position and then you can release it to them and they are onside
Here you go https://amp.theguardian.com/footbal...ct-ifab-after-finding-loophole-in-offside-law The law states that a decision on whether a player is offside or not is taken at the “first point of contact” of the pass leading to the player, not when the ball leaves the foot of the passer. This is an innovation brought about by the advent of VAR and is of interest to Ringhov; soon enough, he is coaching his players to scoop the ball up with their feet and hold it in mid-air.
We're both wrong actually. I quoted from the link I found about when the ball is last touched by the most recent teammate which appears to have now changed. You said the rule is when initial contact is made and that's wrong too, otherwise you're saying that a player receives the ball, runs with it and then passes it and the VAR lines would be drawn from where the 'initial contact' was before he even started his run. The law says "the moment the ball is played or touched" which is actually contradictory in itself, given that 'played' means passed and touched is very ambiguous.
It’s the first point of contact, so like I said originally need to see a still when he makes initial contact with the ball as that’s when offside is decided, not when the ball leaves is foot which is what the picture shows. However what this does show is that you’ll never get offside spot on because you can’t be that accurate with the cameras provided, and as such it makes a mockery of players being offside by inches because that doesn’t give you an advantage which is what offside was brought in to stop
Nothing ambiuous at all but poorly written. The part that say's "played" is refering to a player passing the ball to an offside player, the cpart "touched" refers to if the offside player touches it.
Spot on, the wording is "seeking to gain unfair advantage". If a player is quicker off the mark than his opponent is that his fault? I am a massive hater of defenders running out from a free kick. Who is seeking an unfair advantage then, the players running away from where they know the ball is going to be played or the players trying to reach that ball.
Yeah, I’m not including Quansah. In terms of Doak I have found him to flatter to deceive. I know he’s young and first team football is different but I think we’d know by now if he was going to end up a regular. I just don’t see it.
Having said yesterday that I'm unimpressed by the youngsters (apart from Quansah), I'd qualify it a bit by saying that they were up against it being all thrown in at once. Perhaps one or two in an otherwise solid first-team set-up would fare better. Perhaps Quansah himself is an example of this as he's had the opportunity to be in amongst the big boys and that experience is invaluable.
I'm not so much arguing with you as trying to understand how it works given that the wording isn't as clear as it was when it said 'last touched by the most recent teammate'. That was the first thing I saw when I looked up as to when offside is precisely calculated. I had no idea it had changed until you posted that link. I haven't seen or read anything about it or heard commentators changing the way they talk about it. I checked the current law which to me isn't clear at all. It says "first point of contact of 'the play' or 'touch'. The words play and touch in parentheses with no explanation as to those words somehow now meaning something else. So I'm thinking what does "first point of contact of the play" actually mean? We talk about phases of play and I know what that means. But if the most recent player to touch the ball before passing it to the eventual scorer (which we're looking to see whether he's offside or not) runs with the ball before passing it, is the first point of contact of the play the moment he gets the ball or is the play the moment he passes it? There should be no room for interpretation. It should be as clear as it used to be. Every image I've ever seen that is used to decide offside has always been as the ball leaves the toe of the player which is why I had no idea about it changing to accommodate VAR.
no end product. doesn't look up. we used to say the same about sterling at about 15 years old. a year later he was much improved. doak is 18 and doesn't look and doesn't pick people out. he need a loan when he's ready for man's football to go learn his trade. probably the same for a lot of these kids.
quansah was always like a big puppy. you know they type like a great dance when you see them they've thrse passive paws but and tiny still. he's grown into a full on beast in 2 years and frankly playing for Barton in league 1 helped him too. none of the rest look anything but children. even Bradley. they all need good laons to grow them up. Chambers for example needs very careful treatment. he's one thst can certainly do something if he develops but he was so far out of his depth Thursday it was unfair. they all then went into themselves and needed a leader to drive them on but had jone back heeling it randomly in his own half putting more panic into them. at this point the fa cup draw now says to me these kids are done for the year so get those loans going. there's no way we can have kids in the last 16 of europa or in qf/sf 9f leavie cup nor in the 3rd round of fa cup away to arsenal.
If only you knew what you were talking about. Do you ever read up on the facts before you comment? Law 11 " The player is in an offside position at the moment the ball is played or touched by a team-mate ....."
I've been saying this from the start. It's not just the fallibility of the officials, it's also a tech that isn't up to the expectations made of it. Like you, I think offside is intended to prevent blatant goal-hanging, so I think these expectations are ridiculous. If it's so tight a lino can't see it, then I don't know how it can be deemed an "unfair advantage".
To be fair to Diego and others - the rules are pretty convoluted and unclear at times. What does "played or touched" even mean? What's the difference? "Touched" presumably refers to an involuntary contact, such an an unwitting deflection, but I don't see anywhere where that is made clear. Then, further down we have: Am I just being a bit thick here - how can an offside offence occur inside your own half?
Because you might be offside when ball is played in oppo half then come backwards into your own half to win the ball. Again I feel that defeats the object of offside. How is it gaining an advantage to be firhh th er away from the ball and come back towards your own goal past other players to get the ball so that they are now goal side of you?
Fair enough on the first bit. On the second, that's something else I've said repeatedly - that if you come back from an offside position to an onside one to pick up the ball - then you haven't gained any advantage.
Well that's a fair opinion but it's not the rules nor the accepted interpretation of the rule. offside is a rule to stop square hanging. the sport evolved from the adoption of the rule for 100? years. the current rules are over complicated by tech and interpretation of it being precise. they clearly do not want to go back to a game where Tony Adams stands with arm in the air for 60mins and arsenal win 1-0. however what I am seeing lately is linesmen are rarely in line any more and they've dropped that effort as they know var will come into play. they don't flag unless the consider any chance of a goal is gone but are happy to let a team who were offside win a corner or throw. playing on seems to be at the heart of the current interpretation
Seems a case of sticking to the letter of the law rather than the spirit in which it was conceived. The law states that if you're in an offside position when the ball is kicked then you're offside, regardless of where you pick it up. Fair enough, but the point still stands that no advantage is gained if you've come back onside so I'm wondering whether a bit of discretion on the part of the ref would make it fairer.
