No. This is not an interpretation issue, the law is very specific here. The ruling is correct, the law is dumb.
-
So the defender made a challenge without intending to deliberately play the ball?
Interpretation.
-
It was clearly a deflection and not a pass. I realise that everything in your world has to be an obsessive determination to prove why refs are ruining the game and your four decades captaining the Dog & Duck makes you a superior authority on the game to them, but the fact is that the rule was correctly applied here. It's just a stupid rule - if the defender plays the ball then offside should no longer be a consideration.
-
You will also notice that they drew the offside line as the attacking player played the ball square in his own half. Not as the defender made a play on the ball.
He was onside by the time the ball was deflected. He had moved his leg forward.
Still wrong.
He did not gain an advantage from being offside, as he continued progress to onside before touching the ball. The ball was not played to him by one of his team, when he was in an offside position. Nor played forward. Nor was he gaining an advantage.
It can definitely be interpreted differently under the laws...and it surely is not the intention of the laws to find the player offside in that scenario?
-
Doesn't matter. The rule is that offside is determined by his teammate playing the ball while he is in an offside position; the intent here is to say that incidental contact by an opponent, official or post is effectively ignored. So there's no consideration of the forward's position at the moment the Everton player contacts the ball.
Agreed on all of that. But the rule doesn't allow for that, which is why it's stupid.
-
A player cannot be offside from his teammate playing a square ball.
If the defender had not made a play on the ball, would the player have been offside? No chance.
So the defender made an intentional play on the ball. It just went somewhere that he didn't envisage. And VAR drew the line at the wrong time in the action.
Interpretation, or error, or fuck up in the laws.
Whatever it is, it needs calling out and stopping...because this is not good for the game.
-
By definition it's not a square ball because it went forward.
Again, it is a stupid rule but it has been correctly applied.
-
Watch it again. The only reason the ball went forwards is because the defender played the ball backwards (forwards to the attacker). The attacking player kicked the ball square, the defender nipped in and kicked it away. To the attacker. Who was onside by that time.
-
I am fully aware of that. You appear to be wilfully disregarding the rule itself.
The pass went forward from where it was made. That it started going backwards or that it came off the defender is irrelevant. It is a forward pass and by rule the player is offside. This isn't really debatable.
-
The attacking side did not make a forward pass. The attacker was onside, by the time the ball was played forward by the defender, making a play on the square pass. VAR incorrectly drew the line based on the timing of the initial square pass, that was intercepted. Which is wrong. It was an intentional play on the ball, which is a dodgy interpretation.
There were several errors made in the application and interpretation of the laws as they stand, that led them to the wrong decision. It's you who seems not to wish to evaluate this logically.
Watch it again, and look at what actually happened when the ball was kicked. Not what you assume based on the eventual decision.
-
Yes they did. The forward was ahead of the defender who played the pass. If he had leathered some kind of extreme Roberto Carlos style ball off the outside of his boot that started off traveling backwards and ended up with a player ahead, it was a forward pass. The contact with the Everton player was incidental and therefore did not count.
Here's the full rule. Stop banging on about "interpretation" because it's not about interpretation. The rule is abundantly clear.
www.thefa.com/football-rules-governance/lawsandrules/laws/football-11-11/law-11---offside
-
That is the rule.
The defender intentionally played the ball in attempting to gain possession.
Interpretation.
VAR drew the offside line at the wrong point in the action.
Fact.
-
I'm not sure it's a niche opinion, sounds more like a Sheffield opinion. You are probably submersed in Blades propaganda and it seems to be rubbing off. Shoulda, woulda, coulda's a premier league place do not keep.
-
It's probably true. I used to hate Sheffield United as much as Derby, but I've really cooled that now I've a few mates who are season ticket holders. Beating them in the playoffs, and Forest undeniably being better than them, is also helping. They've also set Jack free.
Still, McBurnie, grade A twat. As are many of their players really. It's just the fans I hate a little less I think.
-
Is your nickname with them Jim Scabby?
-
Agreed:
Sheffield United/Derby - pantomime rivalry with fellow proper legacy fans
Leicester - a cuntbowl full of cunts, clapper sticks and aviation mishaps.McBernie is an outlier, I wish him nothing but ill.
