Think uppercut has a crush on the offside rule...
Avatar now by choice. 5-0 in the Ashes and all.
In my first post I wasn't suggesting just being in an offside position itself was an offence, I presumed (wrongly it turns out) anyone with the vaguest interest in the sport would automatically assume I meant when the ball is played by a teammate, but it appears not.
Cricket Web's 2013/14 Premier League Tipping Champion
- As featured in The Independent.
"I don't believe a word of Pietersen's book, but then I don't believe a word anyone else has said either."
- Simon Barnes renders further comment on KP's autobiography superfluous in a sentence
Whilst we're on the topic of off side, would someone like to take this opportunity to outline the off-side rules in relation to the calling of 'shotgun'?
Parmi | #1 draft pick | Jake King is **** | Big Bash League tipping champion of the universeCome and Paint Turtle
It was excruciating,in the lower leagues there were countless teams just trying to do an Arse, including notably Brumbers "other" team.
Comes to something when most of the training is taking up with the practice of this exceedingly negative ploy. Which allegedly it was for many teams.
I just wish they'd take it further, they already have "attackers should get the benefit of the doubt", and it would be good if they really stressed this. Winds me up seeing pundits say how good a linos decision is, when the attackers about 6 inches offside.
Do I contradict myself?
Very well then I contradict myself,
(I am large, I contain multitudes.
Uppercut not doing a good job of explaining it but he is right that direction of the ball played has nothing to do with the law. Of course, mostly it will involve a ball being played backwards but the law states a player cannot be offside if he is behind the ball.
In real life that will mostly mean a cut back or the like but there are times when a forward ball is legitimately played a player in an otherwise offside position.
The law talks about the position of the ball in relation to the receiver rather than the direction it is played.
Last edited by Goughy; 20-06-2010 at 10:36 AM.
If I only just posted the above post, please wait 5 mins before replying as there is bound to be edits
West Robham Rabid Wolves Caedere lemma quod eat lemma
Happy Birthday! (easier than using Birthday threads)
Email and MSN- Goughy at cricketmail dot net
I kinda skimread after a bit because it was a bit like a CC debate. So correct me if I'm wrong, but is this what's happened here:
Brumby has said 'interfering with play' never used to be a consideration
UC took it literally by thinking he meant straying offside used to be an offence
Just to check I'm on the right page here.
Phillip Hughes 1988-2014
RIP Craigos. A true CW legend. You will be missed.
Its pretty much always been there. Just what constitutes it has changed. Anyway, I dont want to get bogged down in the law.
I just wanted to mention the direction of the ball thing as it is common and often not properly understood by a lot of fans and players alike.
Last edited by Goughy; 20-06-2010 at 10:44 AM.
Have to say I don't know if the actual law changed, but sometime around 94 the interpretation seemed to. Before then when the ball was played if a player was offside he was (almost) invariably flagged.
I remember Romario in that year's world cup seemed to be forever wandering back from offisde positions, which was the first time I can recall the distinction between active and passive being a factor.
Yeah, I remember the change in 94 as well, had everyone confused at first
The old man spent plenty of times talking to me about the things that were different in his day as well and your interpretation of offisde is the same as his (he's slightly older than you of coruse ).
Two questions regarding off-sides:
-Is off-sides called when the pass is made or when its received?
-I was watching the USA-Slovenia match and I had a question about the last USA goal that was waived off. In this situation, I noticed the US striker received the pass in the penalty box while ahead of all the defenders. Could that have been called off-sides?
Apologies if the questions seem silly.
Forever 63* at the SCG
It's when the ball's passed.
I'm 99% sure the third US "goal" was (incorrectly, IMHO) ruled out for a striker impeding a defender rather than offside.
&, FYI, we generally call it "offside" rather than "off-sides".
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)