Jump to content

Recommended Posts

what's all this benefit of the doubt to the attackers rubbish?

 

It's often cited but isn't the truth at all. And I'm not actually sure they should be given the benefit of the doubt anyway.

Link to post
Share on other sites

it's totally irrelevant when he was clearly offside and even Howard Webb said it was. the linesman knew it was offside so there was no 'benefit of the doubt' to be given to anyone

 

pundits desperate for some controversy

Link to post
Share on other sites

it's totally irrelevant when he was clearly offside and even Howard Webb said it was. the linesman knew it was offside so there was no 'benefit of the doubt' to be given to anyone

 

pundits desperate for some controversy

 

Clearly is pushing it somewhat. From the most commonly used angle I would've be very disappointed if it was our forward that had been ruled offside. It was only when BT found a different angle it was a bit more clearer.

Link to post
Share on other sites

it's totally irrelevant when he was clearly offside and even Howard Webb said it was. the linesman knew it was offside so there was no 'benefit of the doubt' to be given to anyone

 

pundits desperate for some controversy

 

Clearly is pushing it somewhat. From the most commonly used angle I would've be very disappointed if it was our forward that had been ruled offside. It was only when BT found a different angle it was a bit more clearer.

 

Wasn't BT's new angle "virtual", i.e. made up? People have been falling for that for decades. And will no doubt continue to.

Link to post
Share on other sites

it's totally irrelevant when he was clearly offside and even Howard Webb said it was. the linesman knew it was offside so there was no 'benefit of the doubt' to be given to anyone

 

pundits desperate for some controversy

 

Clearly is pushing it somewhat. From the most commonly used angle I would've be very disappointed if it was our forward that had been ruled offside. It was only when BT found a different angle it was a bit more clearer.

 

Wasn't BT's new angle "virtual", i.e. made up? People have been falling for that for decades. And will no doubt continue to.

It was but it uses very sophisticated software, pretty much the same as hawk eye does.

MOTD's last freeze frame showed that Rooney was in an offside position, it just wasn't commented on.

Link to post
Share on other sites

it's totally irrelevant when he was clearly offside and even Howard Webb said it was. the linesman knew it was offside so there was no 'benefit of the doubt' to be given to anyone

 

pundits desperate for some controversy

 

Clearly is pushing it somewhat. From the most commonly used angle I would've be very disappointed if it was our forward that had been ruled offside. It was only when BT found a different angle it was a bit more clearer.

 

Wasn't BT's new angle "virtual", i.e. made up? People have been falling for that for decades. And will no doubt continue to.

It was but it uses very sophisticated software, pretty much the same as hawk eye does.

MOTD's last freeze frame showed that Rooney was in an offside position, it just wasn't commented on.

 

He looked level on MOTD which used the usual angle.

 

The offside rule is a funny one because so many people (me included) have an opinion what is and what isn't offside due to its constant tinkering when it's a rule that shouldn't be a matter of opinion. Mine being that the offside rule was brought in to avoid obvious goal hanging so if you are level or very close to level (the old daylight rule) then you are onside. It wasn't brought in to create offside traps etc but that is how it has played out over the decades so you've a team living and dying by the sword which I have no sympathy for when the game is being played already deep in their own box. The problem now is the benefit of the doubt doesn't go down to the attacker enough due to fear of leading to a goal which is all wrong. To explain this further a linesman should only be found to incorrectly not flag when the attacker was offside. We should never have flags going up when it was proven he was onside as that call was close call with doubt. Just flag when obvious. More goals the merrier. Having said all that it's the hardest rule to officiate :lol:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Courtois; Ivanovic, Zouma, Terry ©, Azpilicueta; Matic, Fabregas; Pedro, Willian, Hazard; Diego Costa.

 

Myhill, Dawson, McAuley, Olsson, Brunt, McManaman, Morrison, Fletcher ©, Yacob, McClean, Rondon.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...