It was only off side if McClean had touched the ball, as then he'd have been active. As it was Brady, coming from an on side position to score, goal was perfectly legitimate and legal. Not off side
I'm not querying the ref's interpretation of the rule yesterday - his decision was justifiable and quite correct within the current guidelines. What did surprise me though was the manager's comment that he was unaware of any such rule. We've seen it applied in virtually every game for several years. Glad it worked out for City though!
Could you not then, stand past the by-line (just off the pitch) near the opposition goal, then when your team clear/pass the ball, run back onto the pitch and collect the ball? You won't have been offside because you weren't technically in play when the pass was played. [I say this as I remember a goal at an international tournament (can't remember who vs who) and a player was adjudged offside on a goal because a defender who was closer to the goal than he, stood off the pitch as the pass was made to the attacker - meaning the defender was taken out of play, surely the attacker can be taken out of play in the same sense.]
I always thought as the rules stand that if a player if offside and then runs to get the ball then he makes himself active and involved in the play. By him doing that the defenders would have stopped knowing he was offside. I would expect the ref to give that decisions as offside 9 times out 10.
He couldn't have interfered with play more if he'd have picked the ball up,punched the keeper in the throat and thrown it into the net. But hey,it's fine by me. Three points
0 - 1 and 3 points to Tigers, the Ref is always correct (unless he gives it to the other side). The rub of the green went our way at last.
You'd get booked for entering the field of play without the permission of the referee. You might also find you got two bookings as leaving the field of play without permission in the first place is also an offence. Unsporting conduct, and probably introduced because of the kind of situation you described. NB: Doing it through momentum or when being tackled is not counted. With McLean's goal the pass was made to him so he was interfering IMO. I'd prefer goals like that not to stand. Under the current guidelines, as known by one of the Reading players on the radio it should stand.
Ask the referee to leave the field to replace your boots or something? I'm pretty sure you only need permission to re-enter after recieving medical treatment? I might be wrong.
I believe that rule which stops players leaving and then re-entering the field of play without the ref's permission is actually down to City. I once read that in the club's early days a player was off the pitch receiving some treatment but jumped back on to follow up an inviting throughball - he scored, the opposition complained and the rules were changed to stop it happening again. Happened around 1906 and might have been against Chelsea but I'm nor sure.
How do you know the pass was made to McClean? Might have been made for Brady rushing onto it, or just into space for anyone running on?
Because it's played straight into the area McLean's is in and into his path. If it was for Brady it was a terrible pass, it should have been a fair bit to the right so that it went nowhere near McLean ensuring offside couldn't be given, and meaning we had Brady to the right of the goal and McLean (onside in the 2nd phase) to the left of the goal advancing on the keeper.
