If so, how the f*ck could anyone possibly claim it was onside when Ramsey clearly made a movement towards the ball before leaving it to Sanchez?
Even at the time it happened I was absolutely furious at Ramsey for not leaving it, as he was clearly offside by a mile and I could see Sanchez steaming through...
My understanding of the offside rule is far from comprehensive. But if it's a question of touching the ball, how can it also be a question of one's *intention to touch the ball? You touch it or you don't. Kind of like you can't be half-pregnant.Quote:
Originally Posted by Monty92
I think by the very simple fact that he turned and moved towards the ball meant he was technically active.Quote:
Originally Posted by Monty92
Let's be honest, between the handball and then this we would be fuming had it gone against us but it didn't so hurrah etc.
Clearly your mum was half pregnant :vsign:Quote:
Originally Posted by eastgermanautos
Blocking the goalies line of sight with a movement towards the ball will usually be called offside
Maybe throwing his arms up n the air claiming no intention to play the ball after a little turn towards it is what the ref saw...either way we got a little lucky there . You need luck to win at times
Oh yeah that. But this was not that thing. Who are you, Patriot fan, to lecture me about the rules. Tuck rule, tuck rule!!Quote:
Originally Posted by bbrian
I was only pointing out that you dont have to touch the ball to be off . He clearly did come back into play when he made a move towards the ball only to feign innocence when Alexis came steaming through . Bit he never impeded anyone or touched the ball and that was enough for the ref . The surprising part for me was that he over turned the lino after speaking with him .Quote:
Originally Posted by eastgermanautos
Linesman/referee consultations seem to go well for us the last week in may :-)
And btw hater , the tuck rule was vigorously defended by the NFL ....and we all know how straight and honest the folks on Park Ave are ega :hehe:
A season of BS decisions evened itself out in that match.
On a side note, I like your avatar. :hehe:Quote:
Originally Posted by bbrian
Quote:
Originally Posted by eastgermanautos
****in' mod interference in my profile ega...disgraceful . Your Trabant has seen better days btw
I think the offside rule, with regards to an inactive player becoming active, is only when they are interfering in play or interfering with the opponent. Or gaining an advantage. Doesn't mention motion towards the ball.Quote:
Originally Posted by Monty92
I accept that Ramsey's movement could be seen as distracting to the goalkeeper, however there wasn't an opponent that was impeded by Ramsey's movement.
wd the ref. and **** Chelsea :cloud9:
She's still got some git up n go. Get her on a straightaway, she'll wax your corolla or chevelle of the same year. : DQuote:
Originally Posted by bbrian