Thedelldays Posted 26 November, 2012 Share Posted 26 November, 2012 Derry. I think everyone agrees it was onside when the ball was played but you. Matters not as we won but really odd how you seem to be the only one to have not seen it I watched the sky feed and they paused the replay. Put a line across the pitch and he was onside. Either way. We won Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bearsy Posted 26 November, 2012 Share Posted 26 November, 2012 When is MOTD2 on iplayer? They always hold it back a couple of extra days when we win #bbcbias Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rudi-skacel Posted 26 November, 2012 Share Posted 26 November, 2012 the difference in the last 3 games has deffo been the return of jack cork imo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trousers Posted 26 November, 2012 Share Posted 26 November, 2012 (edited) I've seen the replays and there is no way on this earth that those pictures are absolutely conclusive that Rodriguez is onside. Without wishing to drag this out too far, isn't that the crux of the matter though....i.e. it wasn't conclusive either way ergo the officials should give the benefit of the doubt to the attacker? (is that the way its supposed to work these days? I lose track of the tweaks in the rules to be honest). In other words, how could the lino be 100% sure if, as the TV pictures show, it was too close to call (to the human eye)? However, if the offside rules say "give the benefit of the doubt to the defender" then I'll crawl back under my rock Edited 26 November, 2012 by trousers Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Turkish Posted 26 November, 2012 Share Posted 26 November, 2012 I've seen the replays and there is no way on this earth that those pictures are absolutely conclusive that Rodriguez is onside. The linesman had a better view than anyone, he was absolutely level with Rodriguez, who was nearer to him than the defender, so he could conclusively judge his position and he gave him offside. I would have liked a goal but I think the linesman was correct, because of the movement the camera shows it a lot tighter than it looked in real time however the camera wasn't level and the linesman was. I'm not going to moan about any decision I think the officials got right. :lol::lol: Just admit you were wrong FFS!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
derry Posted 26 November, 2012 Share Posted 26 November, 2012 Without wishing to drag this out too far, isn't that the crux of the matter though....i.e. it wasn't conclusive either way ergo the officials should give the benefit of the doubt to the attacker? (is that the way its supposed to work these days? I lose track of the tweaks in the rules to be honest). In other words, how could the lino be 100% sure if, as the TV pictures show, it was too close to call (to the human eye)? However, if the offside rules say "give the benefit of the doubt to the defender" then I'll crawl back under my rock I probably saw the same as the linesman and thought he wasn't wrong. The frozen picture didn't show the defender stopping and turning and Rodriguez still running which was a split second thing. I would go with the linesman because of his position with Rodriguez between him and the defender. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trousers Posted 26 November, 2012 Share Posted 26 November, 2012 I probably saw the same as the linesman and thought he wasn't wrong. The frozen picture didn't show the defender stopping and turning and Rodriguez still running which was a split second thing. I would go with the linesman because of his position with Rodriguez between him and the defender. Fair point. Out of sheer curiosity, do you know whether the lino should give the benefit of the doubt to the attacker or defender these days? Didn't they change it around a while back? I've genuinely no idea. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dig Dig Posted 26 November, 2012 Share Posted 26 November, 2012 I probably saw the same as the linesman and thought he wasn't wrong. The frozen picture didn't show the defender stopping and turning and Rodriguez still running which was a split second thing. I would go with the linesman because of his position with Rodriguez between him and the defender. You choose to ignore all the replays from multiple angles with technology which categorically prove he was onside? All just because you were wrong on your initial assertion? Bizarre Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trousers Posted 26 November, 2012 Share Posted 26 November, 2012 p.s. I assume linos base their decisions on comparing the position of the players when they HEAR the ball kicked rather than SEEING the ball kicked? As such, given sound travels slower than light they would hear the kick a fraction of a second after the ball is kicked by which time the players they are watching for the offside decision will have moved a fraction of a second forward at the moment they make their judgement. Where do I sign up for 'pedant of the year' award? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
derry Posted 26 November, 2012 Share Posted 26 November, 2012 :lol::lol: Just admit you were wrong FFS!! The camera was at an angle, the linesman was level. He gave it offside. That's the end of it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Whitey Grandad Posted 26 November, 2012 Share Posted 26 November, 2012 You choose to ignore all the replays from multiple angles with technology which categorically prove he was onside? All just because you were wrong on your initial assertion? Bizarre They do no such thing. Even with all the technology the evidence is inconclusive. In my opinion you cannot say that the linesman was categorically wrong. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Turkish Posted 26 November, 2012 Share Posted 26 November, 2012 The camera was at an angle, the linesman was level. He gave it offside. That's the end of it. I've just frozen it on the telly. He is clearly ONSIDE. There is a grass cut line on the pitch you can use as a guide, the Newcastle player is a shade closer to that line than Rodriguez. If you are in line with the defender you are ONSIDE and if there any doubt the benefit is given to the attacking team. The linesman was wrong. That is the end of it. It's no embarassment being wrong, i wasn't sure when i was in the ground and it was right in front of me in block 3. It's more embarassing to contiune to insist you are right when you clearly aren't. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trousers Posted 26 November, 2012 Share Posted 26 November, 2012 They do no such thing. Even with all the technology the evidence is inconclusive. In my opinion you cannot say that the linesman was categorically wrong. Indeed. Nor that he was categorically right. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Turkish Posted 26 November, 2012 Share Posted 26 November, 2012 They do no such thing. Even with all the technology the evidence is inconclusive. In my opinion you cannot say that the linesman was categorically wrong. He was. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trousers Posted 26 November, 2012 Share Posted 26 November, 2012 There is a grass cut line on the pitch you can use as a guide Does the groundsman use a laser controlled lawnmower? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Whitey Grandad Posted 26 November, 2012 Share Posted 26 November, 2012 p.s. I assume linos base their decisions on comparing the position of the players when they HEAR the ball kicked rather than SEEING the ball kicked? As such, given sound travels slower than light they would hear the kick a fraction of a second after the ball is kicked by which time the players they are watching for the offside decision will have moved a fraction of a second forward at the moment they make their judgement. Where do I sign up for 'pedant of the year' award? Not usually. You have to watch everything at the same time, which is of course impossible, but you can shift your glance very quickly from the kicker to the receiver. It's also very important to maintain your position level with the second to last defender. As a referee I often had to work without any linesman and have a lot of experience of judging offsides from a central position. I must admit that from my position in the central Kingsland it never occurred to me that Jay was offside but having seen the tv replays I cannot say that the linesman was wrong. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trousers Posted 26 November, 2012 Share Posted 26 November, 2012 Not usually. You have to watch everything at the same time, which is of course impossible, but you can shift your glance very quickly from the kicker to the receiver. It's also very important to maintain your position level with the second to last defender. As a referee I often had to work without any linesman and have a lot of experience of judging offsides from a central position. I must admit that from my position in the central Kingsland it never occurred to me that Jay was offside but having seen the tv replays I cannot say that the linesman was wrong. Cheers WG - useful insight. My one outstanding question....With whom does the benefit of doubt lie? The attacker or defender? i.e. does the lino have to be 100% sure the player is offside or 100% sure he's onside? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SaintWill71 Posted 26 November, 2012 Share Posted 26 November, 2012 Absolutely everyone had a blinder on and off the pitch. Lads gave everything, and the fans were great IMO, start of the second half we started slowly and looked sluggish, but the fans gave them so much support, jeering them on rather than lamenting them, was just delighted, Perfect going into Wednesday night Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Turkish Posted 26 November, 2012 Share Posted 26 November, 2012 Cheers WG - useful insight. My one outstanding question....With whom does the benefit of doubt lie? The attacker or defender? i.e. does the lino have to be 100% sure the player is offside or 100% sure he's onside? I thought they changed the rules a few years ago and the doubt goes with the attacking team. I can see why the linesman gave it by the way, it was a tight call and Rodriguez was in line when the ball was played but the defender stepped up straight way so Rodriguez was in an offisde positon when the ball was travelling to him. He was onside when it was played though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Kraken Posted 26 November, 2012 Share Posted 26 November, 2012 Christ, this one really is simple. 1) Rodriguez was onside according to televisual evidence. 2) According to the rules an attacking player has to be clearly offside to be flagged; the benefit of the doubt goes to the attacker. 3) The linesman simply could not "have got it right" if he thought the attacker was clearly offside (which is what he must have thought to have flagged). According to the replays, it is a debatable issue at best; in most people's eyes it was clearly onside. 4) Given that the player was either onside or it was in doubt, the correct decision by the linesman would have been to give the benefit of the doubt and play on. This didn't happen. Therefore it was the wrong decision. So, unless derry and WG are saying that Rodriguez was clearly, without any doubt at all, offside when the ball was kicked; the linesman made the wrong decision. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LostBoys Posted 26 November, 2012 Share Posted 26 November, 2012 Great team performance. In terms of the lino and the Rodriguez 'offside' if he was right it was the only decision that they got right all night - I scored them 2 out of 10 as I was feeling generous after the win. I only expect them to get the main decisions right. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kingsbridge Saint Posted 26 November, 2012 Share Posted 26 November, 2012 Very pleased with my decision to get up at 1am and go back to bed at 3am to watch that. The season has started. At ****ing last. Always had faith, but was getting a bit jittery. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dig Dig Posted 26 November, 2012 Share Posted 26 November, 2012 Christ, this one really is simple. 1) Rodriguez was onside according to televisual evidence. 2) According to the rules an attacking player has to be clearly offside to be flagged; the benefit of the doubt goes to the attacker. 3) The linesman simply could not "have got it right" if he thought the attacker was clearly offside (which is what he must have thought to have flagged). According to the replays, it is a debatable issue at best; in most people's eyes it was clearly onside. 4) Given that the player was either onside or it was in doubt, the correct decision by the linesman would have been to give the benefit of the doubt and play on. This didn't happen. Therefore it was the wrong decision. So, unless derry and WG are saying that Rodriguez was clearly, without any doubt at all, offside when the ball was kicked; the linesman made the wrong decision. I don't know why they are making out that offside is some kind a complex scientific formula that can't be proven by video replay? He was level, it should have been a goal, the lino got it wrong. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Whitey Grandad Posted 26 November, 2012 Share Posted 26 November, 2012 I don't know why they are making out that offside is some kind a complex scientific formula that can't be proven by video replay? He was level, it should have been a goal, the lino got it wrong. Offside if 'Any part of the player's head, body or feet is nearer to the goal than the second to last defender' http://www.fifa.com/mm/document/worldfootball/clubfootball/01/37/04/27/interpretation%5flaw11%5fen.pdf Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Victor Posted 26 November, 2012 Share Posted 26 November, 2012 I thought they changed the rules a few years ago and the doubt goes with the attacking team. I can see why the linesman gave it by the way, it was a tight call and Rodriguez was in line when the ball was played but the defender stepped up straight way so Rodriguez was in an offisde positon when the ball was travelling to him. He was onside when it was played though. They didn't change the rule but they may have changed the advice to referees on how to interpret it. HTH And I think you mean the benefit of the doubt goes with the attacking team. And to say you see why the linesman gave it because R was in an 'offside position' when the ball was travelling to him is nonsense, or at least irrelevant. Many good goals are scored and correctly allowed to stand when the scorer has received the ball 'in an offside position'; he knows the rule, it was close but he got the decision wrong. End of. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Whitey Grandad Posted 26 November, 2012 Share Posted 26 November, 2012 Christ, this one really is simple. 1) Rodriguez was onside according to televisual evidence. 2) According to the rules an attacking player has to be clearly offside to be flagged; the benefit of the doubt goes to the attacker. 3) The linesman simply could not "have got it right" if he thought the attacker was clearly offside (which is what he must have thought to have flagged). According to the replays, it is a debatable issue at best; in most people's eyes it was clearly onside. 4) Given that the player was either onside or it was in doubt, the correct decision by the linesman would have been to give the benefit of the doubt and play on. This didn't happen. Therefore it was the wrong decision. So, unless derry and WG are saying that Rodriguez was clearly, without any doubt at all, offside when the ball was kicked; the linesman made the wrong decision. Nothing in the Laws about that. Level is onside, that is all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hypochondriac Posted 26 November, 2012 Share Posted 26 November, 2012 I don't know why they are making out that offside is some kind a complex scientific formula that can't be proven by video replay? He was level, it should have been a goal, the lino got it wrong. Exactly. Since when has being at the ground and seeing something in real time trumped seeing it from multiple camera angles and with the benefit of a replay? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Kraken Posted 26 November, 2012 Share Posted 26 November, 2012 Nothing in the Laws about that. Level is onside, that is all. The linesman has to believe that the player is clearly offside to give it; if he is in any doubt at all, then it is not offside and he should not flag. Would you agree with that? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CWD Posted 26 November, 2012 Share Posted 26 November, 2012 When is MOTD2 on iplayer? Due to some obscure contractual reason it can't be made available online until Wednesday I think. Saturday's MOTD doesn't go on iplayer at all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Whitey Grandad Posted 26 November, 2012 Share Posted 26 November, 2012 The linesman has to believe that the player is clearly offside to give it; if he is in any doubt at all, then it is not offside and he should not flag. Would you agree with that? Well perhaps he did? Look again at the part about 'head, body or feet' and see if Jay's head is not nearer the goal than the defender. Arms and the bits on the end of them are ignored. 'Clearly offside' doesn't come into it, he's either offside or he isn't. I will admit that my view when running the line was that if you had to think too long about it then don't do anything, a bit like pulling out from a side road. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Turkish Posted 26 November, 2012 Share Posted 26 November, 2012 They didn't change the rule but they may have changed the advice to referees on how to interpret it. HTH And I think you mean the benefit of the doubt goes with the attacking team. And to say you see why the linesman gave it because R was in an 'offside position' when the ball was travelling to him is nonsense, or at least irrelevant. Many good goals are scored and correctly allowed to stand when the scorer has received the ball 'in an offside position'; he knows the rule, it was close but he got the decision wrong. End of. I did mean the benefit of doubt goes with the attacking team. Err, i'm not quite sure you why you are arguing with me, i said above he made the wrong decision and Rodriguez was onside, but i also said i can see why he was given offside. It was right in front of me in block 3 and i wasn't sure if he was on or off, I can understand why in real time, Rodreiguez was onside when the ball was played, but the centre back stepped forward as soon as the pass was made so JR was in an offside postion from about 1/10th of a second after the pass was made so he might well have appeared offisde when you have less than one second to make the decision. Either way though, it was the wrong decision, which i was quite clear to state earlier. End of. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Whitey Grandad Posted 26 November, 2012 Share Posted 26 November, 2012 Exactly. Since when has being at the ground and seeing something in real time trumped seeing it from multiple camera angles and with the benefit of a replay? Because that's what the bloke with the flag does and nobody else matters. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Whitey Grandad Posted 26 November, 2012 Share Posted 26 November, 2012 I did mean the benefit of doubt goes with the attacking team. Err, i'm not quite sure you why you are arguing with me, i said above he made the wrong decision and Rodriguez was onside, but i also said i can see why he was given offside. It was right in front of me in block 3 and i wasn't sure if he was on or off, I can understand why in real time, Rodreiguez was onside when the ball was played, but the centre back stepped forward as soon as the pass was made so JR was in an offside postion from about 1/10th of a second after the pass was made so he might well have appeared offisde when you have less than one second to make the decision. Either way though, it was the wrong decision, which i was quite clear to state earlier. End of. I come back to my earlier perhaps philosophical point that the game is not played with technology but human beings. The flag went up, end of. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Kraken Posted 26 November, 2012 Share Posted 26 November, 2012 Well perhaps he did? Look again at the part about 'head, body or feet' and see if Jay's head is not nearer the goal than the defender. Arms and the bits on the end of them are ignored. 'Clearly offside' doesn't come into it, he's either offside or he isn't. I will admit that my view when running the line was that if you had to think too long about it then don't do anything, a bit like pulling out from a side road. If the linesman thought he was clearly offside, he was wrong. Replays proved this. The linesman may have thought he was right to flag; he wasn't. There is no situation you can say that Rodriguez was without doubt offside. Therefore the benefit of doubt should have gone to the attacking player. The linesman got it wrong, plain and simple. i admire your dedication to refuse to accept that though, its quite impressive. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Turkish Posted 26 November, 2012 Share Posted 26 November, 2012 I come back to my earlier perhaps philosophical point that the game is not played with technology but human beings. The flag went up, end of. it was the wrong decision. Technology proves this. End of. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bearsy Posted 26 November, 2012 Share Posted 26 November, 2012 Because that's what the bloke with the flag does and nobody else matters. Ain't we allowed to b!tch and moan and consider ourselves cheated no more then? Criticising the ref is lifeblood of football! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Turkish Posted 26 November, 2012 Share Posted 26 November, 2012 Because that's what the bloke with the flag does and nobody else matters. So you are saying the fact that he made the decision, regardless of if he was right or wrong, means it was the right decision? It appears so. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hypochondriac Posted 26 November, 2012 Share Posted 26 November, 2012 Because that's what the bloke with the flag does and nobody else matters. I wouldn't expect a fan in the stand to make the correct decision but as I already said the linesman is closer to the action and it is also his job. He is a professional who gets paid to make these calls so I would expect him to be better at it than you or me or amazingly even derry for that matter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Whitey Grandad Posted 26 November, 2012 Share Posted 26 November, 2012 If the linesman thought he was clearly offside, he was wrong. Replays proved this. The linesman may have thought he was right to flag; he wasn't. There is no situation you can say that Rodriguez was without doubt offside. Therefore the benefit of doubt should have gone to the attacking player. The linesman got it wrong, plain and simple. i admire your dedication to refuse to accept that though, its quite impressive. Nor without doubt onside. If Jay's nose is one inch nearer to the goal then he is offside. There is no mention of 'benefit of doubt' anywhere that I can find. it was the wrong decision. Technology proves this. End of. But as I said above, technology has no place in football. So you are saying the fact that he made the decision, regardless of if he was right or wrong, means it was the right decision? It appears so. My comment was in reply to 'being at the ground trumping replays'. If you want a decision then have an independent body train and appoint an official to run up and down the line with a flag. I still maintain that the replays do not show him to be onside. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JackFrost Posted 26 November, 2012 Share Posted 26 November, 2012 Rodriguez was offside because the referee/linesman said he was. Hence why the goal was disallowed. HTH Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wes Tender Posted 26 November, 2012 Share Posted 26 November, 2012 I will gladly be proven wrong. But if we don't stay up. Can I say I told you so? Or is that not allowed? Posters can crow if their predictions either way this early on in the season prove to be correct. Some might have to eat humble pie, while others can gloat. But in reality, nobody can predict how the season will pan out this early on, so those with more sense realise that and don't indulge in knee-jerk reactions when either things go wrong, or when there is an upturn, because they might look stupid at the end of the season as a result. Even if you are proved right and wish to gloat about it, then your predictions will owe much more to luck than intelligent prescience. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Kraken Posted 26 November, 2012 Share Posted 26 November, 2012 "Benefit of the doubt" is the direction that assistant referees and referees have been given when it comes to flagging for offences. This is absolutely daft. I'm fairly sure you know yourself that it wasnt a clear cut offside and therefore shouldn't have been given. even if you don't you're welcome to carry on with your silly charade. It wasn't offside, it was proved by replays, and the lino was incorrect to flag. Any denial of that is churlish. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Kraken Posted 26 November, 2012 Share Posted 26 November, 2012 Rodriguez was offside because the referee/linesman said he was. Hence why the goal was disallowed. HTH Wow; thanks for clarifying that. Colour me shocked at such a revelation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Turkish Posted 26 November, 2012 Share Posted 26 November, 2012 Nor without doubt onside. If Jay's nose is one inch nearer to the goal then he is offside. There is no mention of 'benefit of doubt' anywhere that I can find. But as I said above, technology has no place in football. My comment was in reply to 'being at the ground trumping replays'. If you want a decision then have an independent body train and appoint an official to run up and down the line with a flag. I still maintain that the replays do not show him to be onside. Do the replays show him to be conclusively offside? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thedelldays Posted 26 November, 2012 Share Posted 26 November, 2012 Posters can crow if their predictions either way this early on in the season prove to be correct. Some might have to eat humble pie, while others can gloat. But in reality, nobody can predict how the season will pan out this early on, so those with more sense realise that and don't indulge in knee-jerk reactions when either things go wrong, or when there is an upturn, because they might look stupid at the end of the season as a result. Even if you are proved right and wish to gloat about it, then your predictions will owe much more to luck than intelligent prescience. Does that mean, if we stay up. Your predictions are also lucky? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Turkish Posted 26 November, 2012 Share Posted 26 November, 2012 Does that mean, if we stay up. Your predictions are also lucky? Les is clearly worried about looking stupid on an anoynmous internet forum, so i expect he has far more pressing personal issues to deal with than lucky or intelligent predictons. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SuperMikey Posted 26 November, 2012 Share Posted 26 November, 2012 Do the replays show him to be conclusively offside? He was level but he was closer to being definitely offside than being definitely onside. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Turkish Posted 26 November, 2012 Share Posted 26 November, 2012 He was level but he was closer to being definitely offside than being definitely onside. Level is onside, yes? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Kraken Posted 26 November, 2012 Share Posted 26 November, 2012 He was level but he was closer to being definitely offside than being definitely onside. What difference does that make? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wes Tender Posted 26 November, 2012 Share Posted 26 November, 2012 Does that mean, if we stay up. Your predictions are also lucky? Yes, of course it does. I've predicted before the first ball was kicked this season that we will finish in 10th. That was just a gut-reaction, a bit of fun, the equivalent of placing a bet at the bookies. But I've not been revising my prediction because of a few reverses against the division's top teams. And I haven't been calling for the manager's head or predicting relegation on the strength of results obtained after just a third of the season. That really would be ridiculous, wouldn't it? As ridiculous as writing off Mo Farah in the 10,000 metres at the 3,000 metre mark on the basis that he's at the back of the field. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now