Jump to content

Next Match:

Aberdeen v Rangers

Stand Free!

x


Jagerdeen
 Share

Recommended Posts

1-1 fair result.

 

No team tried to win it in the 2nd half.

 

I'll look forward to tomorrow's papers with the wrongly chalked off goal.

 

:lolabove:

 

MacDonald is useless, even Smith got more stuck in than him.

 

Wright should have came on for MacDonald sooner and we should have went for the points.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Fuck referees getting demoted for getting decisions wrong these muppets on Setanta should be demoted to Camera men for the next game. WHY perpetuate the myth that the goal should have stood? Boyd was four or five yards off-side standing around about the penalty spot, so can only be seen to have been interfering with play. If he wasn't offside I fully expect Jimmy to play Darren Mackie on the oppositions penalty spot for the remainder of the season. He can continue to bea nuisance without the risk of injury.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Fuck referees getting demoted for getting decisions wrong these muppets on Setanta should be demoted to Camera men for the next game. WHY perpetuate the myth that the goal should have stood? Boyd was four or five yards off-side standing around about the penalty spot, so can only be seen to have been interfering with play. If he wasn't offside I fully expect Jimmy to play Darren Mackie on the oppositions penalty spot for the remainder of the season. He can continue to bea nuisance without the risk of injury.

 

I thought it was Boyd that was offside anyway.

 

I was right.

 

:thumbsup:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Fuck referees getting demoted for getting decisions wrong these muppets on Setanta should be demoted to Camera men for the next game. WHY perpetuate the myth that the goal should have stood? Boyd was four or five yards off-side standing around about the penalty spot, so can only be seen to have been interfering with play. If he wasn't offside I fully expect Jimmy to play Darren Mackie on the oppositions penalty spot for the remainder of the season. He can continue to bea nuisance without the risk of injury.

 

Not offside till he touches the ball though?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest swaddon

I've not seen the incident about the chalked off goal, but if the officials said it didn't count, then it didn't count.

 

I always respect the decisions of the officials, they do a fine job and are deserving of their huge wages.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not offside till he touches the ball though?

 

I didn't realise you had to touch the ball to be offside, otherwise at freekicks why not put your tallest player  to stand directly in infront of the keeper, he can unsight the keeper while in an offside position. but as long as he doesn't touch the ball he's fine?

 

IMO you can't, not be interfering with play if your standing in the middle of the 18 yrd box, fair enough if Boyd was out on the opposite touchline or closer to the southstand than Debeasley but in the middle of the area during an attack your interfering with play. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Caroline B

One thing these dummies in the press and tv boxes have overlooked about this incident is that when the linesman flagged sharply, some of Aberdeen's defence stood down. Would the Rangers guy have had time to put the ball in the net otherwise?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I didn't realise you had to touch the ball to be offside, 

 

Technically you do, but I guess it depends on the scenario.  The new offside rule is a farce.  The ball can be played to a player, and he's not offside until he touches it.  If he realises he's off, he can just leave it for another player.

 

Don't even get me started on the phase of play sh*te.

 

otherwise at freekicks why not put your tallest player  to stand directly in infront of the keeper, he can unsight the keeper while in an offside position. but as long as he doesn't touch the ball he's fine?

 

That's a different scenario than the one that took place today.

 

IMO you can't, not be interfering with play if your standing in the middle of the 18 yrd box, fair enough if Boyd was out on the opposite touchline or closer to the southstand than Debeasley but in the middle of the area during an attack your interfering with play. 

 

IMO, if you're on the pitch you're interfering with play.  The offside rule in its current state makes no sense, it's a relatively simple rule but FIFA have f*cked it up.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Technically you do, but I guess it depends on the scenario.  The new offside rule is a farce.  The ball can be played to a player, and he's not offside until he touches it.  If he realises he's off, he can just leave it for another player.

 

Don't even get me started on the phase of play sh*te.

 

That's a different scenario than the one that took place today.

 

IMO, if you're on the pitch you're interfering with play.  The offside rule in its current state makes no sense, it's a relatively simple rule but FIFA have f*cked it up.

 

Of course you don't need to touch the ball to be offside.

 

If a pass is played to someone and they are standing in between the final defender and the goalkeeper he is offside. Full stop.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm sick of the media saying 'Rangers had a completely good goal dissalowed' as some sort of proof that Refs don't favour the Old Firm.

 

If any of these people had watched the game they would have seen the countless freekicks unfairly given to Rangers today.

 

It was the linesman who flagged it offside anyway, not the referee, not sure why they are talking about the referee so much in this.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm sick of the media saying 'Rangers had a completely good goal dissalowed' as some sort of proof that Refs don't favour the Old Firm.

 

If any of these people had watched the game they would have seen the countless freekicks unfairly given to Rangers today.

 

It was the linesman who flagged it offside anyway, not the referee, not sure why they are talking about the referee so much in this.

 

I was thinking the same thing but there is no point getting annoyed cause things will never change and the Old Firm will always be the victims someway or another. The media will be least controversial as possible when talking against the Old firm and vice versa.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

OK, I just saw the highlights on BBC News 24, and under my understanding of the offside rule the decision was correct.

 

Two of the Aberdeen defenders ran towards Boyd rather than Beasley, which I think means he is interfering with play due to him drawing the defenders away from the attacker.

 

I may be wrong however...has been known to happen.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Of course you don't need to touch the ball to be offside.

 

If a pass is played to someone and they are standing in between the final defender and the goalkeeper he is offside. Full stop.

 

I suggest you read the rules.  You'll be surprised at what you find.  Nowadays you DO need to touch the ball to be offside.  Well, that's the rule in theory anyway.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...