By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions. We in turn value your personal details in accordance with our Privacy Policy.
Please log in or register. Registered visitors get fewer ads.
There is no difference between Southampton's disallowed goal today and Chelsea's first goal yesterday. Would rather the old rule where any player in offside postion is offside whether your interfering with play or not.
Sorry to be pedantic but it is called the offside law not RULE. It has always stated that a player should only be penalised for being in an offside position if in the opinion of the referee his is interfering with play or an opponent.
Can't see a cup final thread, but what a game. Gutted Saints didn't win, I feel these domestic cups mean nothing to the big teams now, nor their fans, just one of many they have won.
Can't see a cup final thread, but what a game. Gutted Saints didn't win, I feel these domestic cups mean nothing to the big teams now, nor their fans, just one of many they have won.
[Post edited 26 Feb 2017 18:54]
It didn't look like that after the game.
The first ever recipient of a Planet Swans Lifetime Achievement Award.
Yes of course they are happy they won it right now.
But ask Man U fans/board/owners etc would they prefer to win the Europa League or the EFL Cup and we all know which they'd say.
Southampton would have loved to have won the EFL Cup today because then they could have played in the Europa League next year, something Man U don't want to do. In fact they'd rather miss out on it if they can't get in the top 4.
Can't see a cup final thread, but what a game. Gutted Saints didn't win, I feel these domestic cups mean nothing to the big teams now, nor their fans, just one of many they have won.
[Post edited 26 Feb 2017 18:54]
Can't say i was 'Gutted' as quite frankly i couldn't have given a monkeys tit who won. But i do agree about the fans. You only had to look at the two ends too see that. Southampton end all decked out in club colours whilst Utd's looked like some communist eastern block dating back from the 70's/80's.
Sorry to be pedantic but it is called the offside law not RULE. It has always stated that a player should only be penalised for being in an offside position if in the opinion of the referee his is interfering with play or an opponent.
You can call it the offside cum shot if you like, doesn't matter, the cnt was offside.
Nolan sympathiser, clout expert, personal friend of Leigh Dineen, advocate and enforcer of porridge swallows.
The official inventor of the tit w@nk.
Sorry to be pedantic but it is called the offside law not RULE. It has always stated that a player should only be penalised for being in an offside position if in the opinion of the referee his is interfering with play or an opponent.
In the words of Bill Shankley
" If you're not interfering with play, you shouldn't be on the field.
Is the correct answer. A blanket rule which would end confusion and inconsistency caused by allowing the interpretation of rules.
Due to the backpass law, a blanket offside law would completely ruin the game.
It was in place for the first year the backpass law came in and players who had closed down the 'keeper were then constantly getting flagged offside after the keeper cleared the ball and it then was played forward again by the attacking team regardless of if he was anywhere near the ball or not.
Due to the backpass law, a blanket offside law would completely ruin the game.
It was in place for the first year the backpass law came in and players who had closed down the 'keeper were then constantly getting flagged offside after the keeper cleared the ball and it then was played forward again by the attacking team regardless of if he was anywhere near the ball or not.
Ah, the universal law of unintended consequences. It is an unholy mess now though, an exemption for the specific might have been better.
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.