Figures 1-0 Football Posted February 13, 2017 Share Posted February 13, 2017 I still think Lascelles should have been given offside. If Diame's shot misses the defender and the keeper saves it and the ball ends up at Lascelles feet then Lascelles is given offside. Just because it hits the defender doesn't mean he shouldn't be given offside because he's still offside from Diame's shot Yeah it does. The rules state that it's a different phrase of play, and also if it hits off defender then you can't be offside when the last touch was off an opposition player. A player in an offside position at the moment the ball is played or touched by a team-mate is only penalised on becoming involved in active play by: gaining an advantage by playing the ball or interfering with an opponent when it has: - rebounded or been deflected off the goalpost, crossbar or an opponent - been deliberately saved by any opponent To be fair it was deliberately saved by an opponent Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Figures 1-0 Football Posted February 13, 2017 Share Posted February 13, 2017 Lascelles in the GK's view my arse. That would mean the offside would be given no matter what. Football 1 - 0 Figures. http://i.imgur.com/1CA1rfH.png Keep playing the video and watch where Lascelles runs... Yawn. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
joeyt Posted February 13, 2017 Share Posted February 13, 2017 I still think Lascelles should have been given offside. If Diame's shot misses the defender and the keeper saves it and the ball ends up at Lascelles feet then Lascelles is given offside. Just because it hits the defender doesn't mean he shouldn't be given offside because he's still offside from Diame's shot Yeah it does. The rules state that it's a different phrase of play, and also if it hits off defender then you can't be offside when the last touch was off an opposition player. I'm pretty sure that last bit isn't true. If I'm a right winger and crossing the ball to a striker (in an offside position) but the cross takes a slight deflection off an opposition player and the striker scores from the cross then the striker's given offside, despite the ball coming off an opposition player last Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Figures 1-0 Football Posted February 13, 2017 Share Posted February 13, 2017 You could also argue Lascelles is interferring with the player who decides to mark him (rather than Mitro) which leaves Mitro free to tap it in. https://s18.postimg.org/vtxyjsim1/IMG_5517.png Either way, Lascelles was an interference. Not put the image on here due to the shit format. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
LFEE Posted February 13, 2017 Share Posted February 13, 2017 Does the fact it comes off the Wolves player effect anything regarding phase of play? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bimpy474 Posted February 14, 2017 Share Posted February 14, 2017 Does the fact it comes off the Wolves player effect anything regarding phase of play? No that doesn't count as the ball is moving forward from the shot, hitting the Wolves player as it does doesn't mean Lascelles becomes onside, that's not how it works. Lascelles is offside as he comes back from an offside position from the first shot and lays it off for Mitro to score . Couldn't care less to be honest, it counted and we've had our share of shocking decision in the past. Nice for one to go our way like. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stifler Posted February 14, 2017 Share Posted February 14, 2017 The fact that Wolves are arguing more that Metro should have been sent off before the goal instead of the goal being offside speaks volumes. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bimpy474 Posted February 14, 2017 Share Posted February 14, 2017 I still think Lascelles should have been given offside. If Diame's shot misses the defender and the keeper saves it and the ball ends up at Lascelles feet then Lascelles is given offside. Just because it hits the defender doesn't mean he shouldn't be given offside because he's still offside from Diame's shot Yeah it does. The rules state that it's a different phrase of play, and also if it hits off defender then you can't be offside when the last touch was off an opposition player. The ball hitting the Wolves player on it's way toward the goal doesn't make it another phase of play in this instance. It's pretty clear it's offside, otherwise going by what you think players could stand anywhere behind defenders in an offside position (not in the GK eyeline) and hope a deflection from a shot makes them active. That would be ridiculous now wouldn't it. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hanshithispantz Posted February 14, 2017 Share Posted February 14, 2017 Aye surely phases of play only matters for things like obstruction/obstructing the opporsition's view and not when the ball actually falls to the offside payer? In this instance the ball goes (indirectly) from Diame to Lascelles (who was offside), seems a pretty obvious offside. Had the Wolves player been in moderate control of the ball and played it to Lascelles it would be another phase of play. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
xLiaaamx Posted February 14, 2017 Share Posted February 14, 2017 He handballs, falls to Lascelles who isn't flagged and we score. Boohoo. Don't stick your arm out and your keeper saves it. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now