Football

[CC 72100]

This is my view also, no goal then Evans was fouling Cisse
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---


If nothing in match report could that also mean he knew nothing of the event, my understanding is if its in his match report thats when the fa cant take action, but if he doesnt report it then fa can take action based on video evidence
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Fair enough, another way (equally valid) of looking at it. Thanks HHF for the explanation.

FA have said that as Cisse did not play the ball that he was not interfering with play - that's fine, but I therefore hope that the same logic is going to be applied to future offside decisions, if what the FA is saying is that the player needs to play the ball to be classed as interfering with play.

I must admit I didn't think that there was a requirement for a player to play the ball for it to be classed as interference, but that's what the FA has come out and said today.

I think it was more waiting on whether Mike Dean made an official complaint about the event in the report. As Fergie was arguing with Dean himself, I'm sure there was no confusion over him knowing about the event! As no complaint by Dean has been made (he could have if he wanted to in order to make an example of unacceptable behaviour) then it goes no further.

Sky article on the above: http://www1.skysports.com/football/...x-Ferguson-over-his-Boxing-Day-touchline-rant
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

If only Blackburn had sacked Steve Kean after ten games

Kevin McDonald, Billy Davies and Shebbi Singh are the favourites amongst bookies, whilst Hughes and Souness are preferred by the fans from various Facebook posts I've read

Poisoned chalice as long as the Venky's are in charge

 

[EM2]

FA have said that as Cisse did not play the ball that he was not interfering with play - that's fine, but I therefore hope that the same logic is going to be applied to future offside decisions, if what the FA is saying is that the player needs to play the ball to be classed as interfering with play.

No two situations are the same, but logically Cissé can't have been interfering, as Evans was still able to play the ball. OK, he played it into his own net, but if it had gone wide, we wouldn't even be having the discussion.

 

[richw]

FA have said that as Cisse did not play the ball that he was not interfering with play - that's fine, but I therefore hope that the same logic is going to be applied to future offside decisions, if what the FA is saying is that the player needs to play the ball to be classed as interfering with play.

I must admit I didn't think that there was a requirement for a player to play the ball for it to be classed as interference, but that's what the FA has come out and said today.

A very dangerous precedent, Team A striker stands offside in front of Team B Goalie, say 6 inches in front of him, Team A other striker fires the ball at goal but B's goalkeeper cant see nothing because A's first striker is blocking his view in an offside position, but its Ok because he has not touched the ball.

 

[CC 72100]

A very dangerous precedent, Team A striker stands offside in front of Team B Goalie, say 6 inches in front of him, Team A other striker fires the ball at goal but B's goalkeeper cant see nothing because A's first striker is blocking his view in an offside position, but its Ok because he has not touched the ball.

Absolutely. Seems inconsistent with what I've seen, and my understanding of the offside rule. I was under the impression (like you were and I'm sure most others) that in the above situation this would be given as offside as it was interfering with play, but it seems the FA want it to be otherwise.

 

[richw]

Absolutely. Seems inconsistent with what I've seen, and my understanding of the offside rule. I was under the impression (like you were and I'm sure most others) that in the above situation this would be given as offside as it was interfering with play, but it seems the FA want it to be otherwise.

My understanding is the situation yesterday was not offiside, but their release today, is pretty much saying its acceptable to stand in front of a goalie as long as you dont touch ball or goalkeeper.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
Just looking at Nottingham Forest tweet, that they were meeting a premier league manager today, assuming its an out of work manager with premier league experience, Other than the previous names the following spring to mind without much thinking:
Steve Keen (although surely nobody would appoint him), Roberto Di Matteo (champions league and FA cup winner, good record in the championship with West Brom), Alan Curbishley (aint heard from him in a while), What is Sven up to these days? Roy Keane? Alex McLeish?
Didnt think I'd come up with so many unemployed experienced managers when I started typing this. And then there is all the less known managers who have done premiership

 

[JoeH]

No other present day manager would have got away with 2 bullying rants in less than a week except Ferguson.
Everybody from referees to the Premiership/F.A. authorities is simply scared to confront him because he is a Sir and has won a few things.
His football record is superb but his personality is totally biased.

An angry Pardew put hands on an official for the second time this season and their assistant manager had to be physically restrained.

If I was going to point out the poor behaviour of a team's management after that game it would be those two.




Regarding the Evans offside the relevant rule surely would be:

11.4 INTERFERING WITH AN OPPONENT
“Interfering with an opponent” means preventing an opponent from playing or being able to play the ball by clearly obstructing the opponent’s line of vision or movements or making a gesture or movement which, in the opinion of the referee, deceives or distracts an opponent.

Isn't Cisse, from an offside position, both obstructing an opponent and making a movement which distracts an opponent?

 

[EM2]

Well, obviously in the opinion of the referee he wasn't preventing an opponent from playing or being able to play the ball, because Evans DID play it!

 

[andrew bell]

Alex McLeish has been appointed Nottingham Forest manager.

"Alex took Birmingham to promotion," said Forest chairman Fawaz Al Hasawi.

He also forgot to mention that he also took them down and struggled last season at Aston Villa. A bad decision by the Forest board to sack Sean O'Driscoll yesterday

 

[hairyhandedfool]

....Regarding the Evans offside the relevant rule surely would be:

11.4 INTERFERING WITH AN OPPONENT
“Interfering with an opponent” means preventing an opponent from playing or being able to play the ball by clearly obstructing the opponent’s line of vision or movements or making a gesture or movement which, in the opinion of the referee, deceives or distracts an opponent.

Isn't Cisse, from an offside position, both obstructing an opponent and making a movement which distracts an opponent?

Cisse was held by Evans, not the other way round, so Cisse did not impede anyone.

From the perspective of the ball, Cisse was, at worst, level with Evans, so not impeding Evans line of sight, he could not have been impeding the keepers line of sight either.

I personally don't believe Cisse made a movement or gesture which deceived or distracted Evans, they were both moving towards goal when the ball was played.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RSbscHjbh3U (pardon the French)

 

[balne-wonderer]

I just wonder how key the van persie signing will be come the end of the season. fergie paid top dollar for a player with just 12 months left on his contract but he's got him at the peak of his form. at the moment it's proving to be the right decision.

 

[SS4]

11.4 INTERFERING WITH AN OPPONENT
“Interfering with an opponent” means preventing an opponent from playing or being able to play the ball by clearly obstructing the opponent’s line of vision or movements or making a gesture or movement which, in the opinion of the referee, deceives or distracts an opponent.

Isn't Cisse, from an offside position, both obstructing an opponent and making a movement which distracts an opponent?

I didn't watch the highlights so no comment (for once ) on that incident but surely the offside rule would be that much better and more effective without this interfering garbage. Anyone in the six or eighteen yard box is interfering because a goalkeeper or defender must always be aware of them.

Alex McLeish has been appointed Nottingham Forest manager.

"Alex took Birmingham to promotion," said Forest chairman Fawaz Al Hasawi.

He also forgot to mention that he also took them down and struggled last season at Aston Villa. A bad decision by the Forest board to sack Sean O'Driscoll yesterday

You'll have to try better than that for us to believe you

 

[EM2]

I didn't watch the highlights so no comment (for once ) on that incident but surely the offside rule would be that much better and more effective without this interfering garbage. Anyone in the six or eighteen yard box is interfering because a goalkeeper or defender must always be aware of them.

So a winger jinks past the full-back into the box, gets to the byline, cuts the ball back for the centre-forward on the penalty spot, who buries it in the bottom corner. With your argument, it'd be disallowed as the winger is offside.

 

[SS4]

So a winger jinks past the full-back into the box, gets to the byline, cuts the ball back for the centre-forward on the penalty spot, who buries it in the bottom corner. With your argument, it'd be disallowed as the winger is offside.

It would be lowest priority though and IIRC cutting it back into the box is not offside (or am I thinking of corners?)

Imagine the same situation but there is a second attacker at the edge of the six yard box between the byline and the penalty spot. The winger cuts the ball back along this path and the first striker ignores it for the centre-forward to score. I would class that first player as interfering because he is in a position to score.

Granted, this would require some proper thought and may not even be necessary but I get perplexed when players in the box aren't interfering.

 

[EM2]

With no 'interfering' qualifier, the winger would be offside when the centre-forward shoots, as he is in his opponent's half, ahead of the ball and does not have two opposing players between him and the goal.
With your example, if the defenders are playing him into an offside position and he doesn't touch the ball, it's down to the referee's opinion. If he deliberately dummies it for example, I would say he's active. If he simply stands still and lets it go past, he's not.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

Looking upon the dissection of the niceties of the offside rule that has been just played out on this thread, I am mindful as to similar quotations of relevant railway byelaws on another sub-forum of this website on certain past discussions, where different interpretations of these have been a source of much disquiet.

In football. the Laws of the Game should be one of clarity that enables only one decision to be reached, but all on this forum should remember which organization it is that is responsible for the formulation and adherence to these rules...and no other party.

I have noticed comment made that some forum members had made assumptions as to the meaning of these rules, but to that end of the debate, I would add that whilst discussion may well ensue on the interpretation of these rules, that discussion can only be what it is and nothing else.

 

[SS4]

Looks like Ferguson is up to his old tricks again
http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/2012/dec/28/sir-alex-ferguson-alan-pardew?CMP=twt_gu

He forgets the help I gave him, by the way

Because Pardew would be bollocks without your help wouldn't he Messiah Ferguson?
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
Now that's a good candidate to have his knighthood removed (assuming it was granted for contribution to sport) as he's bringing football into disrepute more and more often, coincidentally as Manchester United don't seem to be doing quite so well on the pitch (this is going back some months before anyone quotes me a moment in time)

 

[balne-wonderer]

Looks like Ferguson is up to his old tricks again
http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/2012/dec/28/sir-alex-ferguson-alan-pardew?CMP=twt_gu


Because Pardew would be bollocks without your help wouldn't he Messiah Ferguson?
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
Now that's a good candidate to have his knighthood removed (assuming it was granted for contribution to sport) as he's bringing football into disrepute more and more often, coincidentally as Manchester United don't seem to be doing quite so well on the pitch (this is going back some months before anyone quotes me a moment in time)

how dare you question sir Alex. seriously, he needs taking to task big time. everyone else suffers while he does as he pleases.

 

[MidnightFlyer]

He also called NUFC a 'wee club in the North East'. I think we all know that's actually Aberdeen!

 

[Ferret]

how dare you question sir Alex. seriously, he needs taking to task big time. everyone else suffers while he does as he pleases.

The bloke is a disgrace, and partly why I detest the football club he works for. Quite why he was knighted in the first place is beyond me! All he's done is make a career out of tapping his watch at referees. Odious man. Oh, and advice for life - chew with your mouth shut - we really don't wish to see your chewing gum.

 

[JoeH]

Why exactly is Ferguson being criticised when Pardew has twice put hands on officials this season (including in the United game) and in the same game the Newcastle assistant manager had to be physically restrained from going after the referee?

Pardew is very much a hypocrite for suggesting Ferguson should have been punished considering what he and his assistant did.

 

[Oswyntail]

Why exactly is Ferguson being criticised when Pardew has twice put hands on officials this season ....

Because "two wrongs don't make a right"?

 

[JoeH]

Because "two wrongs don't make a right"?

My question wasn't directed at Alan Pardew himself, as far as I am aware he doesn't post on the forum here.

 

[valenta]

My question wasn't directed at Alan Pardew himself, as far as I am aware he doesn't post on the forum here.

Pardew has shown an opinion of what action should be taken, but has not openly criticised him, unlike Alex Ferguson "Alan Pardew has come out and criticised me," he said. "He is the worst at haranguing referees. He shoves them and makes a joke of it. How he can criticise me is unbelievable. He forgets the help I gave him, by the way."

In my opinion action should be taken against Alan Pardew, if what you say is correct (though I have not seen the incident) and Alex Ferguson - he has to realise that talking aggressively right in the face of the referee is unnacceptable, they don't deserve treatment like this. Being "demonstrative" is not the same as being blatantly aggressive. I am not criticising Alex Ferguson simply because of who he is, I would criticise any manager who had done this.

 

[Johnuk123]

Why exactly is Ferguson being criticised when Pardew has twice put hands on officials this season (including in the United game) and in the same game the Newcastle assistant manager had to be physically restrained from going after the referee?

Pardew is very much a hypocrite for suggesting Ferguson should have been punished considering what he and his assistant did.

What Pardew did was wrong but was isolated, the difference being he doesn't have a massive back-catalogue of abuse and bullying like Ferguson does.

 

[balne-wonderer]

I am yet to see this attack that fergie and Joe speak of. it obvious that fergie is above criticism to some on here which is fine but that also seemed to be case for the refs that he intimidates and the fa. that leaves me cold.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
what's more sickening than anything is that fergie is claiming that the media have "overplayed" the incident. incredible coming from a man that said just last week that Ashley Williams tried to kill robin van persie. madness.

his comment about Newcastle being a wee club from the north or whatever is not only embarrassingly disrespectful it also stinks of arrogance. the game will be far better off when he gives it up. fairer for all.

 

[MidnightFlyer]

Somewhat different to what we usually discuss here, but does anyone know the closest Metrolink station to Oldham Athletic's Boundary Park?
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
Ah, 1.3 miles from Freehold.

 

[valenta]

The comments about Newcastle being a "wee club" are extremely disrespectful and I personally find it very offensive. Not only is it arrogant, it also shows a lack of knowledge about football in general, a small club does not attract 50000 a week to their match.

 

[MidnightFlyer]

The comments about Newcastle being a "wee club" are extremely disrespectful and I personally find it very offensive. Not only is it arrogant, it also shows a lack of knowledge about football in general, a small club does not attract 50000 a week to their match.

I believe Newcastle also pride themselves on the majority of their fanbase being 'Geordie' (that's a serious comment BTW - don't the majority of their 50,000 come from within 10 miles?).

 

[valenta]

I believe Newcastle also pride themselves on the majority of their fanbase being 'Geordie' (that's a serious comment BTW - don't the majority of their 50,000 come from within 10 miles?).

Though I can't confirm this, I assume Newcastle would have a higher percentage of local support at matches than Manchester United, considering that Man United claim that 10 percent of the world support them.

 

[VTPreston_Tez]

Somewhat different to what we usually discuss here, but does anyone know the closest Metrolink station to Oldham Athletic's Boundary Park?
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
Ah, 1.3 miles from Freehold.

For the Crewe game? I take it you're a fan then?
I could rant for ages on how I hate both of them...