The "offside" for the Norwich goal


Laws in this post



See link above as I explained about Hume's left foot position which nobody else has mentioned yet is blatantly obvious.


See link above as seems simple to understand to me. It's just people don't know the intricate bits of various laws so end up thinking it's wrong.


He definitely wasn't interfering, it's just you don't know the full offside law


See the link below that I posted previously as there's a load of examples explained in more detail about what is classes as interfering which is clear that many fans don't know. I'm no ref but I can understand why they do this. It's up to the opposition players to play to the whistle and not switch off like they did as it wasn't just Ekwah who did, O'Nien did too and it was early in the game.



It's obvious that some fans go with the flow of a decision depending on who it favours because if this was in the PL and it was Clarke on the wing and it was Ekwah who scored then we'd have many posts being the opposite viewpoint. It's been a long time since I took of my red n white specs as I spent many times getting frustrated at the match about decisions, only to see upon replay on TV at home it wasn't what I thought. Yet some on here use being at the match as some sort of evidence that something happened but in reality, while this may be the case for some incidents, the human eye can be tricked in moments like this as it simply can't see everything at once.

If you watch the video and how the Norwich player is running, then the fact the Norwich player's left foot is in the air means it will be an illusion that he looks further forward due to the camera viewing angle. Look at Ballard's left foot as it looks level to Ekwah's trailing left foot which is in the air as it's the same illusion which is explained in the next image with pretty colourful lines

Logon or register to see this image


If you can't understand the 'illusion' then think of the line that drops down in VAR as his foot is actually a few inches off the deck. Hoying a few lines on may make it simpler to understand as the green line is the shade of the grass line, the red line is the line that VAR would use and the green line is the 'illusion' line due to the height of the foot. So if anything, the Norwich player is further onside that he looks if you consider his foot isn't planted on the deck.

He's onside all day long but even if he wasn't then he still didn't interfere enough according to the laws of the game as mentioned earlier in this post.

Logon or register to see this image



I will post the link to the offside videos as many still won't allow the linesman to get it right or wrong within a margin of error. Just hoy these on a TV and write down your answers (also if close or obvious) and then see what the actual results are. I bet you will be surprised at some and maybe understand how it's not as easy as you may think to call offside in real-time.

  • interfering with an opponent by:
    • preventing an opponent from playing or being able to play the ball by clearly obstructing the opponent’s line of vision or
    • challenging an opponent for the ball or
    • clearly attempting to play a ball which is close when this action impacts on an opponent or
    • making an obvious action which clearly impacts on the ability of an opponent to play the ball
 
  • interfering with an opponent by:
    • preventing an opponent from playing or being able to play the ball by clearly obstructing the opponent’s line of vision or
    • challenging an opponent for the ball or
    • clearly attempting to play a ball which is close when this action impacts on an opponent or
    • making an obvious action which clearly impacts on the ability of an opponent to play the ball
Look at the link I posted in my post, also below, which you mustn't have read, nor an earlier post of mine I linked to which explained the laws of the game and again had this link below. Like others in this thread it seems you don't understand how interfering is interpreted by the laws of the game. You're just taking it literally whereas some in the thread can see why it wouldn't have been offside even if he was ahead of Hume.

Specifically look at the Everton v Manchester United example on the 5th page

https://thirdblindmouse.files.wordpress.com/2015/07/ifab-law-11-illustrations.pdf


Logon or register to see this image
 
Last edited:
Look at the link I posted in my post, also below, which you mustn't have read, nor an earlier post of mine I linked to which explained the laws of the game and again had this link below. Like others in this thread it seems you don't understand how interfering is interpreted by the laws of the game. You're just taking it literally whereas some in the thread can see why it wouldn't have been offside even if he was ahead of Hume.

Specifically look at the Everton v Manchester United example on the 5th page

https://thirdblindmouse.files.wordpress.com/2015/07/ifab-law-11-illustrations.pdf
 ‘impact’ applies to an opponent’s ability (or potential) to play the ball and will include situations where an
opponent’s movement to play the ball is delayed, hindered or prevented by the offside player...
 
When I first saw it in full speed I thought he was miles off but when you play it back frame by frame he was onside.

Regardless, Ekwah had to deal with it rather than stood watching their second player run past him and cross the ball in.
 
 ‘impact’ applies to an opponent’s ability (or potential) to play the ball and will include situations where an
opponent’s movement to play the ball is delayed, hindered or prevented by the offside player...
Again you're taking it literally and incorrectly assuming your interpretation of the rules even though I've shown you the expanded version of the laws of the games as per IFAB additional guidance.

See my edit as I've even gone as far as copying page 5 that shows, and explains, the Everton v Man Utd example so that people who don't bother clicking the link will see it's the exact same thing and maybe accept the fact if Norwich player was nearer the goal than Hume, he still didn't break the laws of the game and puts this thread to bed.

Ekwah had plenty of time to get the ball but he decided the Norwich player was offside and didn't play to the whistle and the Norwich player, although at first running towards the ball didn't get near it, nor did he attempt to play the ball. Onside all day long, it's as simple as that unfortunately and the debate is simply down to people not understanding the laws of the game.
 
Last edited:
This should provoke some argument/abuse, it’s about time this interfering with play, phase two bollocks etc was done away with, revert back to offside is offside, as soon as the ball is played forward and a player is in an offside position , flag up , whistle, free kick.
Might encourage players to get back onside a bit quicker.
PS I am in no way referring to anything that happened in our match yesterday.
 
This should provoke some argument/abuse, it’s about time this interfering with play, phase two bollocks etc was done away with, revert back to offside is offside, as soon as the ball is played forward and a player is in an offside position , flag up , whistle, free kick.
Might encourage players to get back onside a bit quicker.
PS I am in no way referring to anything that happened in our match yesterday.

Don't worry, I'm sure they'll revert to that soon when the authorities buckle under the clamour for consistency. We'll have shit rules like 'strict liability' handball, bookings for any communication with the ref and 'contact fouls' to make sure that discretion and interpretation is taken out of every rule, so that people stop crying about lack of consistency.
 
Listening to the WMS podcast, it's by far and away my favourite SAFC pod but fuck me, we've won 3-1, the officials have had an alright game yet all they f***ing do is moan about refs. It's boring as fuck man
 
Look at the link I posted in my post, also below, which you mustn't have read, nor an earlier post of mine I linked to which explained the laws of the game and again had this link below. Like others in this thread it seems you don't understand how interfering is interpreted by the laws of the game. You're just taking it literally whereas some in the thread can see why it wouldn't have been offside even if he was ahead of Hume.

Specifically look at the Everton v Manchester United example on the 5th page

https://thirdblindmouse.files.wordpress.com/2015/07/ifab-law-11-illustrations.pdf


Logon or register to see this image


Last edited: Today at 3:11 PM
Hard to tell what's going on on that still tbh but if the Everton player closest to the ball is moving toward the ball he is 100% affecting the defenders actions and it should be offside. The fact the people who make the laws have this as not offside in the laws is ridiculous tbh and shows they don't understand playing actual football.

There are so many parts of the offside law that are imo not fit for purpose they should scrap it and make far more simple and easier to officiate as these crazy addons to the laws come up every few weeks.
 
Last edited:
Listening to the WMS podcast, it's by far and away my favourite SAFC pod but fuck me, we've won 3-1, the officials have had an alright game yet all they f***ing do is moan about refs. It's boring as fuck man
Must have given Speakman a week off from slating.
 
hopefully we can all agree that Ekwah, and every player always, should stick to the decades old adage of always playing to the whistle, its never been more relevant.
Didn’t work so well for Pritch late in the game, in fact it got him a yellow card.
When I first saw it in full speed I thought he was miles off but when you play it back frame by frame he was onside.

Regardless, Ekwah had to deal with it rather than stood watching their second player run past him and cross the ball in.
It looked as though he was miles off in real time at the game.

Which makes it all the more remarkable that an inept linesman got the call right, given he didn’t see it frame by frame.
 
Last edited:
Didn’t work so well for Pritch late in the game, in fact it got him a yellow card.

It looked as though he was miles off in real time at the game.

Which makes it all the more remarkable that an inept linesman got the call right, given he didn’t see it frame by frame.
So while you thought it was miles offside and the linesman made a spot on decision it’s HIM that’s inept :lol:
 

Back
Top