Basic Geometry question:
in [World Football]
|
Prev: African football
Next: 2nd ROUND preview
From: Mart van de Wege on 20 Jun 2010 17:25 Alessandro Riolo <alessandro.riolo(a)gmail.com> writes: > On 20 June, 22:19, Mart van de Wege <mvdw...(a)mail.com> wrote: >> Was he? > > There was light between Smeltz and Cannavaro when Cannavaro deflected > the ball, but IMVHO it was truly an hard call, I'd not blame the > officials on that. > That was my opinion as well. It was too close to call, therefore advantage to the attacker. Mart -- "We will need a longer wall when the revolution comes." --- AJS, quoting an uncertain source.
From: Mehdi on 20 Jun 2010 17:38 > Subject : Basic Geometry question: Can we please not waste time on something as TRIVAL as a possibly bad offside call? It's not important. Put it to bed, move on. -- http://soccer-europe.com Rss feed : http://soccer-europe.com/RSS/News.xml
From: KaiserD2 on 20 Jun 2010 18:06 On Sun, 20 Jun 2010 23:17:59 +0200, Mart van de Wege <mvdwege(a)mail.com> wrote: >KaiserD2(a)gmail.com writes: > >> On Sun, 20 Jun 2010 10:16:49 -0700 (PDT), "HD(noSpam)Beers(a)gmail.com" >> <hdbeers(a)gmail.com> wrote: >> >>>How can a ball reach an Italian player (not a goalkeeper) before it >>>reaches a Kiwi (read USA's D team) player and be a violation of the >>>offsides rule? >> >> There's nothing wrong with your geometry--the problem is your >> understanding of the rule. Keep in mind that the key moment isn't >> when the player behind the next-to-last defender touches the ball, >> it's the moment when a teammate strikes it towards him. > >According to FIFA's presentation to the referees and assistant referees, >being in an offside position on a rebound off an opposing player also >counts as interfering with play. > >Now, is a ball deflecting forward off a defender still a rebound? And >was Smeltz level with Cannavaro when the ball deflected off him? > >Mart I think you are misunderstanding the rule too. "Being in an offisde position on a rebound off an opposing player" means you were in an offside position when that ball was originally struck by your own player. It's the same as Klinsmann in '94 against Bulgaria when the ball rebounded off the post to him--he was offisde when it was struck. The question of whether Smeltz was level with Cannavaro when the ball defelcted off Cannavaro is irrelevant. DK
From: Alessandro Riolo on 20 Jun 2010 18:07 On 20 June, 22:38, Mehdi <Be...(a)soccer-europe.com> wrote: > Can we please not waste time on something as TRIVAL as a possibly bad > offside call? It's not important. Put it to bed, move on. I sort of agree. The big news of the match was that Italian NT was held to a draw, and could have well been defeated, by a team which would struggle to stay afloat in Serie B and could probably not even get a promotion from Serie C. The beauty of world cups :) -- ale http://ale.riolo.co.uk
From: Jesper Lauridsen on 20 Jun 2010 18:55
On 2010-06-20, Dwight Beers <hdbeers(a)gmail.com> wrote: > On 06/20/2010 02:07 PM, KaiserD2(a)gmail.com wrote: >> On Sun, 20 Jun 2010 10:16:49 -0700 (PDT), "HD(noSpam)Beers(a)gmail.com" >> <hdbeers(a)gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> How can a ball reach an Italian player (not a goalkeeper) before it >>> reaches a Kiwi (read USA's D team) player and be a violation of the >>> offsides rule? >> >> There's nothing wrong with your geometry--the problem is your >> understanding of the rule. Keep in mind that the key moment isn't >> when the player behind the next-to-last defender touches the ball, >> it's the moment when a teammate strikes it towards him. If he's >> behind all the defenders but one (including the goalkeeper) at that >> moment, offside will be signalled when the ball reaches him, whether >> it touched anyone else on the way or not. If he HAS two defenders >> between him and the goal line when the ball is struck, he's free to >> receive it under any circumstances, provided another TEAMMATE doesn't >> touch it when he's in an offside position. Clear? >> >> DK > > It appars that you are still thinking of the endline, whereas I am > talking about the GOAL line!! The defender was always between Smeltz > and that line. There is no such thing as an "endline", so I have no idea what you're trying to say. >> I still haven't seen this infamous goal but one poster suggested that >> indeed the NZ player was completely onside when the free kick was >> taken in which case the goal is perfectly valid. A touch by an >> opponent can't put you offside. The key is that another kiwi, Reid, had his head on the ball. At that moment Smeltz was clearly offside. |