Well this has already been posted in the post-match thread, but the ref chief is saying that the AR screwed up. He also pretty much explicitly states that it was Henry that was flagged based on the perception that he was no longer passive....but goes on to say that this was an incorrect call. Obviously, it doesn't matter as far as the result goes. I wonder if it will matter to the FA with regard to the heftiness of the fine they decide to levy...........assuming of course that David Dein doesn't use his divine power over the FA and not only bar any fines but award us 15 points in the league for our troubles.
Well, this is a tough slope to navigate, for sure. There are at least four beautiful goals I can recall from Euro 2004 that were disallowed because of offside confusion, which is why IFAB decided the rule needed revision in the first place. FIFA's mandate to all referees is "to encourage attacking soccer" and by disallowing goals on these sorts of offside calls, referees are not following the basic principle of the mandate. What we have now (as of July 2005) is: a) "gaining an advantage" from an offside position means ONLY receiving the ball directly from a rebound off the woodwork or the goalkeeper; b) "interfering with play" means ONLY touching the ball; which leaves the problem area, "interfering with an opponent." If Henry obstructs Cech, or decides to stand in front of someone trying to clear the ball, then this is the correct call. If he makes contact with an opponent, sure, offside should be given. However, if there's no contact with the ball, and he simply flails at the ball--tough on the defense. Goal. There is a rule of thumb US refs use. Remove the presence of the offside player, and then judge the play. If the play would be unaffected, then no offside given. In this case, I truly think if you take Henry out of the play, the ball still goes in the net. It's even more obviously NOT involvement when Henry holds his run for Van Persie to shoot. I am sure the referee chief realized this, hence his judgment that the AR was incorrect. There is really only one excuse for a quick offside flag, and that's when an attacker is about to plough into a goalkeeper. If the AR would have waited an extra blink of the eye, there is no problem. When he's already that close to goal, why not wait? It's not like he has much of a sprint to recover his position if the ball goes in. But chalk it up to more Arsenal hard luck.
Sounds like a sensible way to decide calls. It was nice that the boss ref publicly acknowledged the error. (Can't rep you twice...)