A&H

Interfering in play

C

clarkedp

New Member
I’m never one to criticise another official, but this was given as a goal in the Norwich vs West Brom game and I’m really struggling to see how Lee Mason in the middle or the assistant didn’t feel this was interfering with play . A2F59BE6-09FF-453C-A8D6-24FF76AEA8F1.jpeg
 
The Referee Store
Would love to see video and angle straight from the side. Just can't tell where the other defenders are. Based upon the position of two attackers, it looks like there had been some deep penetration probably down the right side just prior to this. Cannot tell if there is a defender deep as well due to the limited field of view. If there were no defenders deep who are not shown in this picture, then I would assume that the AR and CR communicated via headsets on this, AR to say "guy in front of GK was in OP. Can't tell if he blocked the GK view". As these players are moving (looks like the attacker in front of GK was likely moving from R to L as we look at it), the CR would have to spot this at the instant of the strike. His positioning/angle will play a factor. Based upon this pic it could be a miss but just can't say without more info. Would need to see the video and I expect this was difficult to spot at full speed from CR's position. People are human.
 
I wondered this whilst watching the highlights over the weekend

there are zero protests from the keeper or defenders which may lead the officials to conclude the attacker didn't interfere
 
Haha

You may be correct, but 100% of the time, if the defensive team feel wronged (be it through offside or foul play) they'll appeal.

Not saying it's right as it does look like he must be interfering with play.
 
I'm with @es1 on this one. In fact, in the pre match briefing for my Contrib game last weekend, the referee covered exactly this scenario with the advice that "If no one, especially the GK, is appealing, then we can be confident the 'offside' player didn't interfere and therefore we just crack on'
 
Let me put forward this.....

How many players know the LOTG and their interpretations? How many managers/coaches? How many of them THINK they know but are in fact wrong? How many times do players think they were fouled but in fact were not? I'd be curious how many GK's know that someone blocking their line of sight several yards in front of them could be considered offside?

I wouldn't recommend protests or lack thereof be given any weight.
 
  • Like
Reactions: one
Hoosier Ref said:
Let me put forward this.....

How many players know the LOTG and their interpretations? How many managers/coaches? How many of them THINK they know but are in fact wrong? How many times do players think they were fouled but in fact were not? I'd be curious how many GK's know that someone blocking their line of sight several yards in front of them could be considered offside?

I wouldn't recommend protests or lack thereof be given any weight.
Click to expand...

You're right, of course, laws are there to he enforced regardless of player protests (or lack of). That said I'd wager 100% of keepers would know that about an attacker infront of them.
 
Hoosier Ref said:
Let me put forward this.....

How many players know the LOTG and their interpretations? How many managers/coaches? How many of them THINK they know but are in fact wrong? How many times do players think they were fouled but in fact were not? I'd be curious how many GK's know that someone blocking their line of sight several yards in front of them could be considered offside?

I wouldn't recommend protests or lack thereof be given any weight.
Click to expand...
It's all about the balance of probability. Most GK's will appeal for offside in any number of situations. If one makes no complaint in a situation like this then most likely his view was unimpeded. Given that neither referee nor AR will often be well placed to judge exactly the GK's line of sight, you need to use all the other info available to you ....
 
Russell Jones said:
I'm with @es1 on this one. In fact, in the pre match briefing for my Contrib game last weekend, the referee covered exactly this scenario with the advice that "If no one, especially the GK, is appealing, then we can be confident the 'offside' player didn't interfere and therefore we just crack on'
Click to expand...
Have you read the definition of "interfering with an opponent" in the laws of the game? There are a lot more referees who don't understand it than those who do. Expecting a goal keeper to understand it is a bit of a stretch. I would read between the lines when given those instructions ;)
 
one said:
Have you read the definition of "interfering with an opponent" in the laws of the game? There are a lot more referees who don't understand it than those who do. Expecting a goal keeper to understand it is a bit of a stretch. I would read between the lines when given those instructions ;)
Click to expand...
I have :). Now that I'm spending more time on the line than in the middle, I thought I should ;).

That said, if a senior referee bothers to take time in his pre match to outline a specific scenario and how we should react to it, then he's probably given it some thought beforehand. And I'm therefore happy to assist in the way he outlined .... not sure he'd appreciate me flagrantly ignoring a straightforward, specific instruction
 
Russell Jones said:
It's all about the balance of probability. Most GK's will appeal for offside in any number of situations. If one makes no complaint in a situation like this then most likely his view was unimpeded. Given that neither referee nor AR will often be well placed to judge exactly the GK's line of sight, you need to use all the other info available to you ....
Click to expand...



I find a gk reaction can be an after thought. When we see top keepers on tv losing a goal, they firstly seem upset with themselves then secondly seem to find a defender to pick on, that they should have cleared it, or tracked the runner, or filled the hole, or any other pundits phrase
I would be wary of waiting to see if goalie doth ptotest too much before considering a potential offside offence.
Unless you are going to apply the same principles for dogso? The striker never slumped to the floor squeeling "last man last man" so you never even thought of a red card?
The total opposite is indeed a keeper/captain who screams for everything even when its clear as day its the other teams throw? Of course that gk is going to clutch at any offside straw. Would or should we take heed?
Imo firmly, no
 
Ciley Myrus said:
I find a gk reaction can be an after thought. When we see top keepers on tv losing a goal, they firstly seem upset with themselves then secondly seem to find a defender to pick on, that they should have cleared it, or tracked the runner, or filled the hole, or any other pundits phrase
I would be wary of waiting to see if goalie doth ptotest too much before considering a potential offside offence.
Unless you are going to apply the same principles for dogso? The striker never slumped to the floor squeeling "last man last man" so you never even thought of a red card?
The total opposite is indeed a keeper/captain who screams for everything even when its clear as day its the other teams throw? Of course that gk is going to clutch at any offside straw. Would or should we take heed?
Imo firmly, no
Click to expand...
I half agree. If I'm in the middle, then if I'm certain that a player impeded the GK's vision, I will consult my AR about whether he was in an offside position and if he was, give the free kick. If I'm not certain and there's no appeals then back to the middle for the kick off we go. In some ways it's a bit like the 'Leave It' old chestnut ... the offense is all about whether the words / action ACTUALLY interfered with an opponent and therefore player reaction is ONE of the factors to consider when reaching your decision

However, if I'm on the line, then there's no way I'm flagging in a situation like this if it directly contravenes the referee's pre match.
 
Ciley Myrus said:
I find a gk reaction can be an after thought. When we see top keepers on tv losing a goal, they firstly seem upset with themselves then secondly seem to find a defender to pick on, that they should have cleared it, or tracked the runner, or filled the hole, or any other pundits phrase
I would be wary of waiting to see if goalie doth ptotest too much before considering a potential offside offence.
Unless you are going to apply the same principles for dogso? The striker never slumped to the floor squeeling "last man last man" so you never even thought of a red card?
The total opposite is indeed a keeper/captain who screams for everything even when its clear as day its the other teams throw? Of course that gk is going to clutch at any offside straw. Would or should we take heed?
Imo firmly, no
Click to expand...
Again, no one is saying that. You've taken a rational point, extended it too far and then cried about how insane that extended version is.

Is it strange if a player is offside and no defender or GK appeals for it? Of course it is. Should we as referees use all possible clues to help us reach the right decision? Of course we should.

Does that means entirely basing a decision (any decision) on the reaction of the players? Of course it doesn't. Be that DOGSO, a throw in, or anything in between.
 
  • Like
Reactions: es1
GraemeS said:
Again, no one is saying that. You've taken a rational point, extended it too far and then cried about how insane that extended version is.

Is it strange if a player is offside and no defender or GK appeals for it? Of course it is. Should we as referees use all possible clues to help us reach the right decision? Of course we should.

Does that means entirely basing a decision (any decision) on the reaction of the players? Of course it doesn't. Be that DOGSO, a throw in, or anything in between.
Click to expand...


You again with the personal references? "You've" and "again" implying that I, me personally am doing something
Cried?
Mate can I suggest you simply block me or simply dont quote my posts, because to me your only motive here is personal
The posts the other day should have leaned you to a, discuss the post, not the poster mentality
It sunk in for me, clearly not for you however.
 
Ciley Myrus said:
You again with the personal references? "You've" and "again" implying that I, me personally am doing something
Cried?
Mate can I suggest you simply block me or simply dont quote my posts, because to me your only motive here is personal
The posts the other day should have leaned you to a, discuss the post, not the poster mentality
It sunk in for me, clearly not for you however.
Click to expand...
I'm not getting riled up or anything here. This is a logical fallacy that YOU keep falling into, it's relevant to point out that you've made the same mistake here with your argument that you've made elsewhere.

And none of this invalidates the point that I've made in a calm and polite manner, so please don't try and pretend that I'm picking a fight where I absolutely haven't.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top