Jurgen Klopp…

comment by Lisandro The King Martinez (U10026)
posted 1 hour, 51 minutes ago
Another stupid one is being offside when the ball is played backwards.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

I literally forget this even was a rule till that Wolves goal. What's the point? I might be missing something, but is it just one of those rules where they think: "You know, it's hardly ever going to come up - but the absolute scenes when it does!!!"

Diafol Coch

I don’t think it’s the letter of the law, I think you could easily apply the law to say he was offside?

comment by There'sOnlyOneRed's (U1721)
posted 35 minutes ago
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 1 hour, 24 minutes ago
comment by The Process (U20671)
posted 3 minutes ago
comment by Lisandro The King Martinez (U10026)
posted 3 minutes ago
The offside rule is daft. Look at that Salah one last week as well.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yes another shocker. It was allowed because the defender touched the ball trying to stop it going to Salah. If he’d left it off it wouldn’t have stood.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Yep.

A decision that highlights how crap the rule is better than most, for me.

What’s the defender supposed to do… leave the ball and hope Salah is offside?

The defender only plays the ball because of where Salah is.

Morons running the game.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Agree, stupid rule.

Also not sure what the former referee(forget his name) on Sky was talking about in regards to a rule change this season when he said the new rule means Rashford isn't counted as offside. I haven't looked it up but if that's correct it's also a stupid rule. He literally made motion towards the ball and then faked a shot which obviously caused the defenders to concentrate on Rashford instead of Fernandes. You could also make a case that the goalkeeper positioned himself for the shot from Rashford rather than Fernandes. For me an offside rule should be centred on whether the player being in an offside position put the opposition at a disadvantage.

Then we had the one today, not that it made any difference, where Trent was called offside when making no movement to obtain the ball, in fact his movement suggested he had no intention of obtaining it since he was jogging towards the line with his hand in the air, calling for a throw-in.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

I love how today this scenario unfolded for Wolves only a week after the Salah goal and guess what?. Nunes was flagged offside You couldn't make it up

comment by Cinciwolf---A Scottish world champion and Mess... (U11551)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by There'sOnlyOneRed's (U1721)
posted 35 minutes ago
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 1 hour, 24 minutes ago
comment by The Process (U20671)
posted 3 minutes ago
comment by Lisandro The King Martinez (U10026)
posted 3 minutes ago
The offside rule is daft. Look at that Salah one last week as well.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yes another shocker. It was allowed because the defender touched the ball trying to stop it going to Salah. If he’d left it off it wouldn’t have stood.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Yep.

A decision that highlights how crap the rule is better than most, for me.

What’s the defender supposed to do… leave the ball and hope Salah is offside?

The defender only plays the ball because of where Salah is.

Morons running the game.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Agree, stupid rule.

Also not sure what the former referee(forget his name) on Sky was talking about in regards to a rule change this season when he said the new rule means Rashford isn't counted as offside. I haven't looked it up but if that's correct it's also a stupid rule. He literally made motion towards the ball and then faked a shot which obviously caused the defenders to concentrate on Rashford instead of Fernandes. You could also make a case that the goalkeeper positioned himself for the shot from Rashford rather than Fernandes. For me an offside rule should be centred on whether the player being in an offside position put the opposition at a disadvantage.

Then we had the one today, not that it made any difference, where Trent was called offside when making no movement to obtain the ball, in fact his movement suggested he had no intention of obtaining it since he was jogging towards the line with his hand in the air, calling for a throw-in.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

I love how today this scenario unfolded for Wolves only a week after the Salah goal and guess what?. Nunes was flagged offsideYou couldn't make it up
----------------------------------------------------------------------
They've added so many exceptions to the offside law that they can't keep it consistent from game to game. It used to be simply interfering with play, which meant they were able to simply use their judgement on whether the offside player was interfering or not. 'Intentionally playing the ball' is stupid also. I understand in terms of actually attempting to play a pass but putting your body in the way of a pass/shot should not exempt the opposition attacker from being offside. What are you supposed to do, allow the pass/shot come in as the attacker is offside? Ridiculous.

comment by There'sOnlyOneRed's (U1721)
posted 6 minutes ago
comment by Cinciwolf---A Scottish world champion and Mess... (U11551)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by There'sOnlyOneRed's (U1721)
posted 35 minutes ago
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 1 hour, 24 minutes ago
comment by The Process (U20671)
posted 3 minutes ago
comment by Lisandro The King Martinez (U10026)
posted 3 minutes ago
The offside rule is daft. Look at that Salah one last week as well.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yes another shocker. It was allowed because the defender touched the ball trying to stop it going to Salah. If he’d left it off it wouldn’t have stood.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Yep.

A decision that highlights how crap the rule is better than most, for me.

What’s the defender supposed to do… leave the ball and hope Salah is offside?

The defender only plays the ball because of where Salah is.

Morons running the game.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Agree, stupid rule.

Also not sure what the former referee(forget his name) on Sky was talking about in regards to a rule change this season when he said the new rule means Rashford isn't counted as offside. I haven't looked it up but if that's correct it's also a stupid rule. He literally made motion towards the ball and then faked a shot which obviously caused the defenders to concentrate on Rashford instead of Fernandes. You could also make a case that the goalkeeper positioned himself for the shot from Rashford rather than Fernandes. For me an offside rule should be centred on whether the player being in an offside position put the opposition at a disadvantage.

Then we had the one today, not that it made any difference, where Trent was called offside when making no movement to obtain the ball, in fact his movement suggested he had no intention of obtaining it since he was jogging towards the line with his hand in the air, calling for a throw-in.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

I love how today this scenario unfolded for Wolves only a week after the Salah goal and guess what?. Nunes was flagged offsideYou couldn't make it up
----------------------------------------------------------------------
They've added so many exceptions to the offside law that they can't keep it consistent from game to game. It used to be simply interfering with play, which meant they were able to simply use their judgement on whether the offside player was interfering or not. 'Intentionally playing the ball' is stupid also. I understand in terms of actually attempting to play a pass but putting your body in the way of a pass/shot should not exempt the opposition attacker from being offside. What are you supposed to do, allow the pass/shot come in as the attacker is offside? Ridiculous.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

I think now it is just big six onside, other fourteen offside.

comment by Clockwork Red: With or Wout You (U4892)
posted 29 minutes ago
comment by Lisandro The King Martinez (U10026)
posted 1 hour, 51 minutes ago
Another stupid one is being offside when the ball is played backwards.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

I literally forget this even was a rule till that Wolves goal. What's the point? I might be missing something, but is it just one of those rules where they think: "You know, it's hardly ever going to come up - but the absolute scenes when it does!!!"
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Not sure what playing the ball backwards has to do with anything. You can still be ahead of the ball when the ball is passed backwards. The rule has always been you can't be offside if you're behind the ball.

comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 40 minutes ago
Diafol Coch

I don’t think it’s the letter of the law, I think you could easily apply the law to say he was offside?
----------------------------------------------------------------------

I thought the same.

interfering with an opponent by:
- preventing an opponent from playing or being able to - play the ball by clearly obstructing the opponent’s line of vision or
- challenging an opponent for the ball or
- clearly attempting to play a ball which is close when this action impacts on an opponent or
- making an obvious action which clearly impacts on the ability of an opponent to play the ball

The first and last of these could surely be applied here. Akanji couldn't make a proper run towards Bruno because a) why would he, when Rashford was the shooting danger? and b) Rashford was kind of in the way.

comment by Clockwork Red: With or Wout You (U4892)
posted 43 minutes ago
comment by Lisandro The King Martinez (U10026)
posted 1 hour, 51 minutes ago
Another stupid one is being offside when the ball is played backwards.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

I literally forget this even was a rule till that Wolves goal. What's the point? I might be missing something, but is it just one of those rules where they think: "You know, it's hardly ever going to come up - but the absolute scenes when it does!!!"
----------------------------------------------------------------------
There’s not really any point to it. It’s just an application of black and white wording regarding playing the ball. It’s stupid that it hasn’t been changed.

comment by Clockwork Red: With or Wout You (U4892)
posted 3 hours, 22 minutes ago
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 40 minutes ago
Diafol Coch

I don’t think it’s the letter of the law, I think you could easily apply the law to say he was offside?
----------------------------------------------------------------------

I thought the same.

interfering with an opponent by:
- preventing an opponent from playing or being able to - play the ball by clearly obstructing the opponent’s line of vision or
- challenging an opponent for the ball or
- clearly attempting to play a ball which is close when this action impacts on an opponent or
- making an obvious action which clearly impacts on the ability of an opponent to play the ball

The first and last of these could surely be applied here. Akanji couldn't make a proper run towards Bruno because a) why would he, when Rashford was the shooting danger? and b) Rashford was kind of in the way.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The officials have interpreted this today in terms of Rashford doing none of the above. In these situations though the eyes should tell you. For me he is interfering but they have used the letter of the law to decide he didn't. Obviously I'm delighted they came to this decision!

https://youtu.be/wUqVNRcUlKI