Netherlands vs Italy - Monday 9th June [r]

[ManiacalClown]

nope that goal would not stand in the epl, like many of fifa's rules they are quickly ignored by many nations

so apologise this:cool:

Well, The FA does have a history of ignoring FIFA directives. Like when being passively offside was made to no longer be an offense, but England decided to keep playing it the old way until like 2003. And then had the gall to blame things on "FIFA's new rule" when people got confused.

[Clan]

See what happens when you don't have Robben and Van Persie stinking up the wings, refusing to pass and constantly going on hero runs... That 45 minutes was infinitely better in terms of attacking play then the entirety of your World Cup last time around. More passing, more movement and more chances. Long may it continue. I'm glad their respective injuries forced Van Basten down this route. Pity he will probably be unfairly hailed for it.

Scarey...I was thinking as much...which means I agree with you....:eek:

[ManiacalClown]

After hearing some posters I am now going to change my tune about weather it was offside or not. I always heard that if a player removed himself prior to a goal then he would still count as the last player, but I also heard if the player was out of the play injured or held out he would not count.

Here I was thinking because he was down well before the pass do to a collision he would be counted as an injured player or at least not one purposely trying to put a player offside by leaving the field.

Buffon collided with him and no Dutch player was involved and if the rules state that the player can only be removed from the play by the ref then I would agree it was a legit goal.

I posted about this over on the referee forum. Basically, the referee could acknowledge that a player has left the field and can receive treatment and at that point he would no longer be considered in the offside decisions, but there was no time to communicate this properly.

[code1390]

LOL at commentator thinking FIFA is going to get on the ref. Hey, they made the correct call!

[sendorange]

The Dutch do seem to have a better mix than usual of hardworkers and style players. Will have to see whether Van Basten sticks with it though.

[Crimen y Castigo]

Zambrotta! would have been one for the ages.

[Hungry Dave]

That was a good piece of skill from Zambrotta. Too bad he didn't pass it in the end though.

[!Bob]

Dont worry ITV are lambasting the offside as well

i'd like to give props to BigSoccer for having a smarter discussion here than the commentators on espn.

Someone should actually email these people to at least tell them there is a possibility they are wrong! 5 people on ITV (3 in studio and 2 commentators) have been lambasting the refree and saying how it is all down to luck that the Dutch are ahead; and even whether that 2nd goal would have been scored...

[Crimen y Castigo]

grosso!

[Perugina]

54'Italian change. Materazzi is coming off and Fabio Grosso is coming on.

One ex perugini for another :p

[Gandalf The Red]

Well, The FA does have a history of ignoring FIFA directives. Like when being passively offside was made to no longer be an offense, but England decided to keep playing it the old way until like 2003. And then had the gall to blame things on "FIFA's new rule" when people got confused.

because most fifa rules are invented off the cuff a week before a big tourney.

and most are a fudge rather then a fix:rolleyes:

[sendorange]

The Grosso change looks a good tactical move but Toni still needs more support.

[ManiacalClown]

because most fifa rules are invented off the cuff a week before a big tourney.

and most are a fudge rather then a fix:rolleyes:

Well, in this case it was more along the lines of a change in the yearly release of the LotG, and England was like naaaah we'll keep doing it our way thanks.

[Hungry Dave]

Del Pierro's coming on for Di Natale

[Andy Bennett]

I believe an apology is in order? Clearly a legit goal by the rules of the game.
Not really!

I'll bet if you had that same position with 90 top flight refs out of 100 it would be called offside. These things are matters of judgment. If the defender had lost a leg, to give a ludicrous example, do you think it wouldn't be offside? How could the ref or AR be sure he wasn't badly injured and in no position to get back on the field.

[footyfan1]

Not really!

I'll bet if you had that same position with 90 top flight refs out of 100 it would be called offside. These things are matters of judgment. If the defender had lost a leg, to give a ludicrous example, do you think it wouldn't be offside? How could the ref or AR be sure he wasn't badly injured and in no position to get back on the field.

Was he so injured?

No.

You keep on with this "what if" crap. They got it right.

Get over it man.

[REALFOREVER]

I agree with the call on the 1st goal.

At first I thought it was offside because I didn't notice the Italian player off the field.

To me its very clear it was the right call.

[ManiacalClown]

Not really!

I'll bet if you had that same position with 90 top flight refs out of 100 it would be called offside. These things are matters of judgment. If the defender had lost a leg, to give a ludicrous example, do you think it wouldn't be offside? How could the ref or AR be sure he wasn't badly injured and in no position to get back on the field.

If the referee thought there was a serious injury (such as the losing a leg example), he would be required to stop play immediately, and thus this entire discussion would be moot.

[sendorange]

The Dutch could maybe do with a sub now, Kuyt has done a lot of work but looking a bit tired.

[!Bob]

Not really!

I'll bet if you had that same position with 90 top flight refs out of 100 it would be called offside. These things are matters of judgment. If the defender had lost a leg, to give a ludicrous example, do you think it wouldn't be offside? How could the ref or AR be sure he wasn't badly injured and in no position to get back on the field.

What if he lost a leg and fell on the line? Same example but do you think it should be determinitive as to the extent of the injury? It is a simple matter of whether the ref gave him permission to go off the field. In this case no, hence he would be considered as still on the pitch.