-
Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]
Greetings and welcome to The Football Net. We love talking balls, do you?


You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. Therefore you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, take part in the banter, vote in polls and enjoy fun competitions such as fantasy football and the betting exchange. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free.


Join us today on our football forums to talk balls with us!


If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features:

Username:   Password:
Add Reply
Other Games
Topic Started: Jan 10 2014, 03:13 PM (3,962 Views)
TheReturnOfTheKing
Definitely NOT a Terrorist
If he touches it then he interferes

If he gets in the way of the keeper, he then interferes

Neither if the above happened, sure he moved out of the way but that wad to ensure he did not interfere

He did nothing that benefited Newcastle from that offside position, therefore it should have stood

It seems simple to me tbf

I agree the ref was awful
no
Online Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
FLOPP'D
Member Avatar
The King in the North
UwesGrandad
Jan 12 2014, 08:45 PM
It was mate. How can you have to duck out of the way of the ball a yard from Hart and 4 yards offside and not be interfering with play?

Refs only good decision imo.
If he wasn't there would Hart have saved it? No

If he wasn't there would it have still went in? Yes

If he wasn't there would De Michelis still try to block it? Yes

So if he wasn't there the outcome would not have changed, therefore he's not interfering with play
Posted Image



John Henry April 2011
 
Success is winning championships. It is nothing less than that. And when you win a championship – and we will – success isn't measured or accomplished by winning once
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
InWengerWeTrust
Member Avatar
GOAT.
Pardew called Pellegrini an old goblin :liverpool:
Posted Image
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
InWengerWeTrust
Member Avatar
GOAT.
Posted Image

:liverpool:
Posted Image
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
UwesGrandad
Member Avatar
El Mago
paddypower
Jan 12 2014, 08:49 PM
UwesGrandad
Jan 12 2014, 08:45 PM
It was mate. How can you have to duck out of the way of the ball a yard from Hart and 4 yards offside and not be interfering with play?

Refs only good decision imo.
If he wasn't there would Hart have saved it? No

If he wasn't there would it have still went in? Yes

If he wasn't there would De Michelis still try to block it? Yes

So if he wasn't there the outcome would not have changed, therefore he's not interfering with play
If my Aunt had balls she'd be my uncle. If, if if paddy, but the fact is he was there.

It might be a technicality and perhaps you don't agree but if it had flown past him without him moving then fair enough, but it didn't. He ducked and just avoided the ball. How can that not have put Hart off?
It may have flown in anyway but who's to say had Hart not thought it was going to hit the player he wouldn't have got something on it?

Tbf, goal or not I don't give a fork, just forking ecstatic to wipe the smile of that goblin Pardews face. Total chicken.
Will be keeping Cech in my pocket for the next 3 months. Thanks Pedro :thumb:
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
mcfc1975
Phorum Pimp
i thought it was a shocking decision, if that offside was given against my team i would be fuming tbh

but

Quote:
 
Tbf, goal or not I don't give a fork




Quote:
 
Gallagher says Goal, Halsey says no goal.



2 refs / ex refs

both with different views

i can see why it was given, but it was the wrong decision.

they have tried to make the offside rule in favour of the attacker, not interfering, second phase this, bollocks to this and ignore that. i dont really see how a player can be in the 6 yard box and not be interfering (unless he is soldado!). so many different ways to see each offside decision.

i have also wondered why a defender in the defending half who is lying injured is treated as the last defender for offside, but an attacker lying in the same position would just be ignored.


imo, offside should be offside

Spoiler: click to toggle
Posted ImagePosted ImagePosted Image

#prayforuwe
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
TheReturnOfTheKing
Definitely NOT a Terrorist
UwesGrandad
Jan 12 2014, 09:38 PM
paddypower
Jan 12 2014, 08:49 PM
UwesGrandad
Jan 12 2014, 08:45 PM
It was mate. How can you have to duck out of the way of the ball a yard from Hart and 4 yards offside and not be interfering with play?

Refs only good decision imo.
If he wasn't there would Hart have saved it? No

If he wasn't there would it have still went in? Yes

If he wasn't there would De Michelis still try to block it? Yes

So if he wasn't there the outcome would not have changed, therefore he's not interfering with play
If my Aunt had balls she'd be my uncle. If, if if paddy, but the fact is he was there.

It might be a technicality and perhaps you don't agree but if it had flown past him without him moving then fair enough, but it didn't. He ducked and just avoided the ball. How can that not have put Hart off?
It may have flown in anyway but who's to say had Hart not thought it was going to hit the player he wouldn't have got something on it?

Tbf, goal or not I don't give a fork, just forking ecstatic to wipe the smile of that goblin Pardews face. Total chicken.
You are missing the point

The fact he was there does not mean he is offside, that's the whole point of the New offside rule!

He was nor in harts eye line so it's not offside either lobbyist ground
no
Online Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
UwesGrandad
Member Avatar
El Mago
LFC6EUROS
Jan 12 2014, 10:08 PM
UwesGrandad
Jan 12 2014, 09:38 PM
paddypower
Jan 12 2014, 08:49 PM
UwesGrandad
Jan 12 2014, 08:45 PM
It was mate. How can you have to duck out of the way of the ball a yard from Hart and 4 yards offside and not be interfering with play?

Refs only good decision imo.
If he wasn't there would Hart have saved it? No

If he wasn't there would it have still went in? Yes

If he wasn't there would De Michelis still try to block it? Yes

So if he wasn't there the outcome would not have changed, therefore he's not interfering with play
If my Aunt had balls she'd be my uncle. If, if if paddy, but the fact is he was there.

It might be a technicality and perhaps you don't agree but if it had flown past him without him moving then fair enough, but it didn't. He ducked and just avoided the ball. How can that not have put Hart off?
It may have flown in anyway but who's to say had Hart not thought it was going to hit the player he wouldn't have got something on it?

Tbf, goal or not I don't give a fork, just forking ecstatic to wipe the smile of that goblin Pardews face. Total chicken.
You are missing the point

The fact he was there does not mean he is offside, that's the whole point of the New offside rule!

He was nor in harts eye line so it's not offside either lobbyist ground
I'm not missing the point mate I just don't agree.

Gouffran ducked out of the way of the ball as it flew past him, had he stood still it would have hit him mid chest. If he is offside and has to move/jump to get out of the way I can't see how this isn't off putting for the keeper therefore interfering?

Like I said I don't care mate, they got what their tactics deserved. They could easily with a decent ref have been down to 8 or even 7 if the ref had booked Williamson for hacking Nasri in the first half.
As good as Cabaye is too he's a dirty goblin. Be interesting too to see what Pardew would have said if Cabaye had his knee done by a City player like Nasri did.
So so so so happy to beat these goblins. Hope they make the Europa and get relegated next year :lol:

Btw, Hart had a great game today. Doing excellent lately.
Will be keeping Cech in my pocket for the next 3 months. Thanks Pedro :thumb:
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
mcfc1975
Phorum Pimp
for everyone that believes that decisions even themselves out (i dont btw)

City had a goal disallowed for offside which was clearly on in the home game against newcastle :thumb:


Quote:
 
Linesman's had a shocker :rofl:


Quote:
 
Negredo wasn't offside.


Quote:
 
i didnt think the offside goal was offside, he seemed to come from deep before scoring.



http://thefootballnet.co.uk/topic/7640880/12/?x=10


so karma and all that :thumb:


Posted ImagePosted ImagePosted Image

#prayforuwe
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
BC1
Member Avatar
Clever Simpleton
Pardiola should be grateful that Mbiwa doesn't have a 3 match ban for violent conduct.

His reactions when his teams score and then get them taken away are priceless.
Posted Image
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
TheReturnOfTheKing
Definitely NOT a Terrorist
The ref has been given the week off
no
Online Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
footyfan000
Member Avatar
Changing my tune since 2008.
Note: Given a week off rather than punished.

It's completely wrong that their 'punishment' is to be given a week off and that they don't have to apologise or confess their mistakes.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Dotty
Member Avatar
Stuck up bastard
Posted Image

There's a match taking place on that :liverpool:
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
UwesGrandad
Member Avatar
El Mago
Forgot there were even games on tonight, bonus.
Will be keeping Cech in my pocket for the next 3 months. Thanks Pedro :thumb:
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Papa_Lazarou
Member Avatar
Randolph
Fulham are battering Norwich.

3-0 now.
Posted Image

Oppa Papa Style
Online Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)
ZetaBoards - Free Forum Hosting
Free Forums. Reliable service with over 8 years of experience.
Learn More · Sign-up Now
Go to Next Page
« Previous Topic · Match Day Café · Next Topic »
Add Reply

-- -