Match Day Thread Hull City v Boro

10 starts. Four goals and a few assists too. Not bad for a winger, even Jarrod wouldn't be too disappointed with that, esp playing for a team who finally got their first win since he came and have hardly got the ball in oppositions half in those games. Wasn't he massively unfit when he first came? Where would be now without him?
Incidentally, what did we pay for him?

 

Your interpretation of the offside rule would be insane and impossible to govern.

 

Dont know what we paid, but i don't mind him at all.
Was unfit when he arrived but like you said has chipped in with goals and assists, he should have scored more than he actually has.

He's strong and quite direct hence the winning of free kicks, he will only get better.

 

I like him
Brum fans were delighted when he was taken off
Grafts too
I like him

 

I've thought about this and I've realised I'm incorrect. It's not "impossible", it would just require a countdown clock from the last time somebody 'might' have been offside.

"Hey, 20 minutes ago I anticipated a run that didn't come off, ergo, now I'm offside for ****ing ever, even though this particular phase of play did not result in me actually being offside".

If Wilks had headed home from that initial cross, he'd have been offside and the goal would have been correctly chalked off. For offside. Because he would have been offside. Then. At that particular point.

However, you know when Jordy headed that pass down? To Wilks? Wilks wasn't offside. When there were Middlesbrough defenders in between his body and the goal? That's the offside rule. We're not talking armpits here or random handballs. It's really simple.

Wilks was onside. We've had dodgy goals, not ****ing many, we've had dodgy goals against us but this, this is actually a legitimate injury time winning goal. No quibbles. Boom.

 

... and actually until he stepped up in the 92minute, I'd convinced myself I didn't give a **** about City anymore. Its that hope that kills you. He's come to Hull from Baaarnsley and thinks he has the right to disrupt my ever growing terminal football malaise

 

Yep
I couldn’t give a ****
...then suddenly I was on my feet shouting ‘****ing get in. Yes!!!”

I like him

 

I couldn't be bothered with the 'new normal' Man City vs Liverpool last night (or even City games til then). Apart from City games or the occasional top games, I've lost that interest. Millwall vs Charlton tonight though.. great result too

 

Quite a funny tweet from a Boro fan.

 

In the old days, Wilks would have been offside as he was in an offside position when the initial cross was made. That rule was simple and clear. It was that way for decades and 'governed' fine (which is what I alluded to).

The offside rule has then for years been ****ed around with.

Now it is not an offence to be in an offside position. Instead there's a subjective decision to made about whether a player is or is not "involved in active play", "interfering with an opponent (oooh, err) ", or "gaining an advantage" by being in that position.

If someone is for example in the penalty area I can't for the life of me, in the vast majority of situations, see how they are not doing all 3 of the above! At the very least, they are taking the attention of the keeper and some defenders.

I don't suggest a return to the old days rule, but I don't think the current rule is right either. The decision on Wilks was fair enough (ha ha) but some decisions where a player is deemed not to be 'involved / interfering / gaining an advantage' are just plain ridiculous, for example when the player is much closer to the goal.