Official FC Dallas @ DC United POST Match Thread [R]

For Gros to have been penalized for offside he would've had to be interfering in the play, interfering with an opponent, or gaining an advantage by being in an offside position at the moment the ball touches or is played by one of his team.

The question isn't wether Gros was offside but was he active in the play? Geiger didn't blow his whistle until the ball was in the net and then he waived off the goal. The linesman didn't raise his flag until Gros struck the ball.

My point is that the Offside rule as quoted above clearly states that a player can only be penalized for offside when the ball is played or touched by one of his team. If Sala misses the ball and Boswell scores the goal would've stood because Gros wasn't gaining advantage or interfering with the play or the keeper.

However, once Salas touches the ball and it deflects to Gros all bets are off. Gros is no longer subject to the offside penalty because no one from his team touched or played the ball. The linesman and Geiger blew the call.

Now if you'd like to explain what you wrote above using the actual language of the Offside Rule I'd love to hear it.

 

Naw, the Dema bit and POTY chants were going before he hit the equalizer.

 

Rules lawyering like this is exactly what has caused the NFL rulebook to become a complete unworkable mess and the reasons things like the "Tuck rule" exist.

The spirit of the rule is that if a player is in an offside position when the ball his struck by a member of his team, and remains in an offisde position until he gains an advantage, then he is offside.

The AR made the correct call. get over it.

 

Please see the example given on page 49 of the LOTG 2005/2006 as well as the definition and illustration in Section 11.3 of the "US Soccer Federation Advice to Referees on the Laws of the Game." Those examples are completely on all fours with Gros's disallowed goal.

http://www.ussoccer.com/laws/index.jsp.html

 

We need the big-ass sign that says, "THIS IS A STANDING SUPPORTERS' SECTION. IF YOU DON'T LIKE IT, PLEASE ASK STADIUM MANAGEMENT TO RESEAT YOU WITH THE REST OF THE SOCCER MOMMIES."

 

That is exactly the thing to do. You should be working for DC United in Customer Service.

 

You hit the interpretation part of the offsides rule. If the ball rebounds off the goalie and you were in an passive offside position when the ball is hit you still can't touch it as you gained an advantage by being offside. If however in the intrepation of the Referree, the goalie flubbed the save (ie should of controlled it but didn't) then the passive offside player can kick the ball.

 

I like souvenirs as much as the next guy, but I can assure you that I am not picking up a jock strap in the parking lot, even if it has Ronaldinho written on it.

 

Wrong. The goal was correctly called back.

 

And this is what I'm trying to say. There is nothing in the rule that says being in an offside position is in and of itself an infraction.

I'm sure y'all remember Moreno stealing the ball from Walker and scoring, right? Well Moreno was in an offside position when the play occured but the goal stood because no one from his team touched the ball or played it at that moment.

Would the goal have counted had Sala not made the save?

 

No, Moreno was NOT offsides, because Walker has possession - if the other team has possession, you can't be offsides. In Gros's case, Sala doesn't have possession, he's blocking a shot by Gros's team.

Try it this way: Players A and B are both trying to beat an offsides trap and show for a through-ball. The pass goes through and both players run into the back. Player A is on-sides and collects the ball, Player B is offsides and does not. B is now "passive" offsides and the play continues. But, if A takes a touch or two and passes the ball to B as they are sprinting on to goal, even if B is now behind the ball, B's previously passive offsides no longer is passive and the flag is raised for the previous (upfield) infraction. You've seen this before, I'm sure? OK, only difference now is, A passed to B by bouncing it off the Goalie's hands. Still offsides.

 

Yes, the flag would have stayed down.

 

I'm a silent observer this season since the evil AndiMead (he's trying to ruin soccer in America) has forced me to "work" games for him again.

So I'm no longer part of the "you guys" equation, at least for home games.

 

I didn't see the match, so here's my analysis:

 

makes about as much sense as half the posts here....the bloke was offside for fcuks sake...

 

This is BigSoccer. If people restricted their analysis & thoughts to what they saw, posts would decrease by 90%. Feel free to post. That's what keeps BigSoccer going

 

I liked the game, nothing about it upsets me, accept maybe the final scoreline, but all in all I thought DC played quite well. Had our defenders stayed on top of Ronnie, it could have been a win. I like how DC has so many attacking options and are using them. I also liked how our back line is covering each other, no one is totally alone. If someone messes up, there seems to be someone there to clean it up.

I would have felt a little better if they connected on the plethora of chances they had but having the chances and flow like they did, I really can't get pissed about the game, in the least.



Shit it was far better than the last time they were here.

 

Thanks for the link. I now see that gaining advantage means recieving the ball from a deflection off the keeper. That was what was bothering me. Rep.

 

AndiMead is a slavedriver!