The Ref Stop

Manchester City vs. Manchester United - Offside or Not?

Offside or Not?


  • Total voters
    59
Status
Not open for further replies.

BAFRA #77

Member
As someone in the main thread asked for one about the offside/no offside goal - here we go.

Based on what is decreed in Law as it stands - Goal or No Goal?
 
The Ref Stop
I see the main thread has been locked.

Pity - this might be relevant! Especially where the "goalkeeper needs to delay his action to wait and see if the attacking player in an offside position touches/plays the ball"...

The iIlustrations are all within the PA but that phrase obviously applies to Ederson on Saturday, and the illustrations for not attempting to play the ball all show players deliberately trying to avoid the ball...

 
I see the main thread has been locked.

Pity - this might be relevant! Especially where the "goalkeeper needs to delay his action to wait and see if the attacking player in an offside position touches/plays the ball"...

The iIlustrations are all within the PA but that phrase obviously applies to Ederson on Saturday, and the illustrations for not attempting to play the ball all show players deliberately trying to avoid the ball...

IFAB advice from 2015(?)
 
Saw an image on social media where they've removed Rashford from the stills and shows how close the defender actually was compared to Fernandes.
Thing is, the defender closest to Rashford slows down. Stupid yes, play to whistle etc, but if Rashford wasn't there I imagine he would've got there first and/or shielded it for Ederson who we know is a sweeper keeper and likely to come out and clear himself. But because Rashford was closer to the ball, Ederson stayed around the penalty spot anticipating Rashford to do something.
Maybe the defender also had it in his head that if he does challenge Rashford (whether known he was off or not) and it goes wrong it is a sending off and doesn't get tangled up.
No one knows what's going through players minds and why they do things or not, but personally, despite me saying good goal as per law, I do think Rashfords positioning and role in the goal does affect how both the defender and Ederson play this out.FB_IMG_1673871136477~2.jpgFB_IMG_1673871136477.jpg
 
Last edited:
IFAB advice from 2015(?)
Circular 3. It was then moved into law in the following iteration 2016-17.

Think it is stretching it to say that it applies to this scenario myself.

And if it is supposed to mean what 29% of people believe then I am sure our friends from Switzerland will clarify for us soon enough
 
IIRC Uefa had been instructing those scenarios Blovee posted were offside but the PGMO were saying there was no interference with the goalkeeper at the time.
 
There was a bit of sarcasm in my post 😅

More to do with the fact we were going around in circles, with tempers seeming to fray so it was stopped before it escalated.

Nothing sinister about it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: one
Circular 3. It was then moved into law in the following iteration 2016-17.
Not quite sure what you're referring to there. There's nothing in IFAB Circular 3 about a goalkeeper needing to delay his action ... etc.

Nor was there anything to that effect in the laws in 2016/17.
 
Last edited:
Not quite sure what you're referring to there. There's nothing in IFAB Circular 3 about "a goalkeeper delaying his action ...."

Nor was there anything to that effect in the laws in 2016/17.
Now does that mean this document is still valid for interpreting how an opponent including GK might be impacted (i.e. does not need to be physically impacted) and for how a player in an offside position should avoid being penalised for interfering with an opponent?
 
Not quite sure what you're referring to there. There's nothing in IFAB Circular 3 about a goalkeeper needing to delay his action ... etc.

Nor was there anything to that effect in the laws in 2016/17.
Screenshot_20230116-135111.png
That's circular 3 released in 2016 (ifab website)
The explanation underlined didn't make it into the big rewrite but the "interfering with an opponent by......" Did, which that language was first circulated in this circular.
Up until 2016/17 we just had "interfering with an opponent"
 
Saw an image on social media where they've removed Rashford from the stills and shows how close the defender actually was compared to Fernandes.
Thing is, the defender closest to Rashford slows down. Stupid yes, play to whistle etc, but if Rashford wasn't there I imagine he would've got there first and/or shielded it for Ederson who we know is a sweeper keeper and likely to come out and clear himself. But because Rashford was closer to the ball, Ederson stayed around the penalty spot anticipating Rashford to do something.
Maybe the defender also had it in his head that if he does challenge Rashford (whether known he was off or not) and it goes wrong it is a sending off and doesn't get tangled up.
No one knows what's going through players minds and why they do things or not, but personally, despite me saying good goal as per law, I do think Rashfords positioning and role in the goal does affect how both the defender and Ederson play this out.View attachment 6313View attachment 6314
This is so misleading though because the ball is moving at speed towards the goalscorer and away from the defender so whilst the defender looks the closest on the still image, there is no gurantee the defender would of still made it to the ball first if Rashford was not there.

Reading some of the pundit views, they are clearly leaning more towards the spirit of the game rather than the letter of the law which suggests this is a legitimate goal.

We also don't know the conversation between Attwell and Cann, it could of been as simple as Cann thought Rashford touched the ball and even though the ref was further away saw and was sure he did not touch the ball.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top