Mexico have had 2 perfectly good goals disallowed . The first one was very tight when viewed live , but the Linos are supposed to be the very best at their job and failed !
Am I the only person to think the lino was right on the second goal? He was definately in an offside position, and even though it came off a defender, it wasn't a backpass. Therefore, goal rightly disallowed. Or have the rules changed again?
Got Mexico in my accumulator. Should be sailing clear by now. Cameroon will deffo win this now just to underline the officials ineptitude.
My Mrs has just informed me that she has drawn Japan & Cameroon in the sweeps on our ship. Never thought I'd be wanting those 2 teams to do well!
No you're wrong. If no one touched it its a goal as it was from a corner. If a mexico player touched it on it was offside. If a Cameroon player touched it its on side.
In the context of Law 11 â Offside, the following defi nitions apply: ⢠ânearer to his opponentsâ goal lineâ means that any part of a playerâs head, body or feet is nearer to his opponentsâ goal line than both the ball and the second-last opponent. The arms are not included in this defi nition ⢠âinterfering with playâ means playing or touching the ball passed or touched by a team-mate ⢠âinterfering with an opponentâ means preventing an opponent from playing or being able to play the ball by clearly obstructing the opponentâs line of vision or challenging an opponent for the ball ⢠âgaining an advantage by being in that positionâ means playing a ball i. that rebounds or is deflected to him off the goalpost, crossbar or an opponent having been in an offside position ii. that rebounds, is deflected or is played to him from a deliberate save by an opponent having been in an offside position A player in an offside position receiving the ball from an opponent, who deliberately plays the ball (except from a deliberate save), is not considered to have gained an advantage. From http://www.thefa.com/football-rules-governance/laws/football-11-11/law-11---offside.aspx I was hoping this would clear things up, but it made it worse! If it was considered a deliberate playing of the ball, he wasn't offside. If it was an accidental touch of the ball, he was. ? **** it, I'm going to stick up for the linesman, just to be controversial.
I was just thinking Mackeroon's No9 looks decent but a bit greedy then saw it was Etoooooo! Case closed!
The ESPN panel all who are former professionals all said it was a goal and the linesman got it wrong. They all said that since it came off the defenders head it was a good goal. I am sure they know the rules having played in the world cup themselves.
Incorrect, If the opponent who does not have the ball under control (i.e., clear possession and the ability to play the ball deliberately to a place to which he wishes it to go) misplays, misdirects, deflects or miskicks the ball, he has not affected the status of the player who was in the offside position when his teammate played the ball. http://www.fifa.com/mm/document/worldfootball/clubfootball/01/37/04/27/interpretation_law11_en.pdf example 12 ^
Then perhaps the header is considered a pass in that situation. The guys on the panel were definite that the ref got it wrong.
I'm fairly sure the rules have changed in recent years so they could have been wrong due to that, but I've just watched the video of the disallowed goal and nobody could claim that the header was intentionally directed to the back post
Link doesn't work for me, but that ^ was my thinking. Usually it's a backpass that an offside player intercepts, but that defender had no idea where that ball was going to go, it was hardly a deliberate placing of the ball. Therefore he was offside and the linesman was correct.
