Beezerk
Money List Winner
Aaah the old common sense rules, it will never catch on ?
Aaah the old common sense rules, it will never catch on ?
clubchamp98
Journeyman Pro
If Mings had played a pass he’s not offside ,as I understand it.
But I don’t think Mings had full control of the ball when He challenged him and imo He’s offside.
Another stupid rule.
This happens quite a lot where a striker is miles off and the defender not knowing puts it out for a corner and the flag dosnt go up .
But if he challenges the defender he’s offside .
It needs sorting out.
clubchamp98
Journeyman Pro
Your defenders gave him so much time to decide what he wanted to do.
You can’t give a player of his class that much time.
Liverbirdie
Ryder Cup Winner
https://www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/spo...news/liverpool-mane-ronaldo-man-city-19669655
The keeper had it in his hands, which is what I would say would be total control, then he as such has it stolen from him after he has realeased the ball, as such so keane wouldnt be offside, just like if you intercept a backpass.
Look at the C ronaldo one in the attached that was given offside, exactly ths same as last nights. Ronaldo even looks sheepish as he's expecting it to be given.
If Mings controlled it and Rodri was 6-7 yards away, then he closed him down as he dawdled on it would be a different situation, but coming in over the defenders shoulder and being just 1-2 yards away is very different.
Oh look, it was Birmingham.
Offside for me. The Lovren one was also offisde against Kane the other year, as well.
clubchamp98
Journeyman Pro
If the flag dosnt go up when does the phase stop then start again?
I think Mings thought he couldn’t challenge him as he was offside.( wrongly as it turns out) I didn’t know that I must admit.
I wonder if Mings knew that rule, as his manager dosnt obviously.
He never really had control of the ball imo as he was challenged from behind after cheasting the ball down and it got stuck under his legs.
If he turned and played a back pass that’s different.
Rodri is offside and has gained an advantage from it.
Any footy fan in fairness would say that’s offside.
The laws an ass.
D
Deleted member 18588
Guest
https://www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/spo...news/liverpool-mane-ronaldo-man-city-19669655
The keeper had it in his hands, which is what I would say would be total control, then he as such has it stolen from him after he has realeased the ball, as such so keane wouldnt be offside, just like if you intercept a backpass.
Look at the C ronaldo one in the attached that was given offside, exactly ths same as last nights. Ronaldo even looks sheepish as he's expecting it to be given.
If Mings controlled it and Rodri was 6-7 yards away, then he closed him down as he dawdled on it would be a different situation, but coming in over the defenders shoulder and being just 1-2 yards away is very different.
Oh look, it was Birmingham.
Offside for me. The Lovren one was also offisde against Kane the other year, as well.
But Rhodri would have been offside had he intercepted a backpass from Mings as he was already in an offside position before Mings played the ball.
In this case Rhodri played the ball in an onside position having returned from an offside one.
It might be a confusing rule but that doesn't mean that the officials were wrong.
This is why it amuses me when the likes of Alan Brazil etc; suggest that ex-players and managers should be involved with VAR as so many of them clearly don't know the rules.
Orikoru
Tour Winner
Erm no, because they're on different teams? You can't be offside if the opposition passes to you.
I think it's completely plausible that Mings knew Rodri was there, and chose to bring the ball down rather than clear it first time because he's thinking Rodri is offside so no need to worry about him. And I think he's justified to think that. But as you say at the end there Mickie, it was a case of the player not knowing the rule. (But I don't blame him really for not knowing it to that extent.)
D
Deleted member 18588
Guest
The "played on" rule changed.Erm no, because they're on different teams? You can't be offside if the opposition passes to you.
I think it's completely plausible that Mings knew Rodri was there, and chose to bring the ball down rather than clear it first time because he's thinking Rodri is offside so no need to worry about him. And I think he's justified to think that. But as you say at the end there Mickie, it was a case of the player not knowing the rule. (But I don't blame him really for not knowing it to that extent.)
If the player was in an offside position prior to the opposition player playing the ball he remains offside.
D
Deleted member 21784
Guest
Erm no, because they're on different teams? You can't be offside if the opposition passes to you.
I think it's completely plausible that Mings knew Rodri was there, and chose to bring the ball down rather than clear it first time because he's thinking Rodri is offside so no need to worry about him. And I think he's justified to think that. But as you say at the end there Mickie, it was a case of the player not knowing the rule. (But I don't blame him really for not knowing it to that extent.)
Chances are Ming's is as thick as two short planks
Orikoru
Tour Winner
No he wouldn't be would he, not if the defender took possession and played it. It would be exactly the same as this incident and he'd be onside because the defender deliberately played it.
I've seen him interviewed and didn't get that impression to be honest, he comes across quite well.
D
Deleted member 21784
Guest
Considering how much players will do to con the officials and bend the rules
I find it staggering how many people don't know a simple rule that's been in play years
Orikoru
Tour Winner
It's not a simple rule, I would have assumed the same as Mings, that the player who's 20 yards offside was actually offside. Ultimately better not to take the risk though of course.
sunshine
Well-known member
Erm no, because they're on different teams? You can't be offside if the opposition passes to you.
I think it's completely plausible that Mings knew Rodri was there, and chose to bring the ball down rather than clear it first time because he's thinking Rodri is offside so no need to worry about him. And I think he's justified to think that. But as you say at the end there Mickie, it was a case of the player not knowing the rule. (But I don't blame him really for not knowing it to that extent.)
Mings is a complete embarrassment, premier league player paid millions of pounds a year but doesn't know the rules of the game. This isn't even a new change, it's set out in the laws of the game and every professional should understand them.
This incident was controversial, no doubt. But the controversy is about timing, not position: at what point was Mings in control of the ball? The ref decided that was when he chested it. Did Mings believe he was entitled to bring the ball down and stand there or dribble it without being challenged by Rhodri? Surely he knew at some point the phase is over and Rhodri can challenge him.
Liverbirdie
Ryder Cup Winner
Quite possibly, but not necessarily so. If Mings had time to bring the fall down "unopposed" then, say 2-3 seconds later tried to play a back pass and passed it to Rhodri, I'm not sure what would be the outcome, but as he had time to make his decision unopposed may then be a new phase of play.
I'm also not sure why people are saying the law is wrong, just because IMO one ref got it wrong?????
Can you also explain why the Ronaldo one was given as offside? Correctly so, IMO.
D
Deleted member 21784
Guest
It is really simple though
Being offside itself isn't an offence ..
And soon as Ming's brings ball down that's it rodri can challenge him
sunshine
Well-known member
Yes!
Orikoru
Tour Winner
Yeah - I think if he takes possession of the ball, has it under full control and is then tackled by the player coming back, you'd say fair enough, not offside because he plenty of time to deal with it. But he tried to chest it, made a bit of a bad job, and Rodri was there to nick it practically before the ball hit the ground. That's why it feels harsh on Mings - he never really had it in his control. But the rule says that he intentionally played it.
I think he's only trying to chest it down and then pass it to someone, even if he saw Rodri there he probably felt he would have time to do that with two touches - unfortunately the first touch almost seems like it hit his chin and he messed up his chest control. Remembering that Mings is left-footed, he was almost certainly trying to chest this down to his left side - the opposite side to where Rodri was - so it would have been safe. But he gets it so wrong the ball fell on his other side where Rodri was able to pinch it.
sunshine
Well-known member
It's harsh on Mings, because he didn't even have the ball at his feet, but the decision was consistent with the rules and Mings should have known this and played the ball accordingly.
Dean Smith even bigger embarrassment than Mings.
Dean Smith even bigger embarrassment than Mings.
If this were golf then the player would get hammered for not knowing the rules. If might be a questionable rule but it's there. Players and managers really need to know more.
Orikoru
Tour Winner
It's not simple though. Take the Lovren/Kane example posed earlier which was similar - as I recall Lovren played the ball but made an even worse hash of it than Mings, and the ball came off him and went through to Kane (who was already in an offside position). I don't think it's fair to say oh he tried to kick it therefore it cancels the offside. It doesn't make any sense because if Kane wasn't there in that offside position, there would have been no need for Lovren to try and hash it clear, he could have let it run through, taken his time etc. The presence off the player in the offside position always influences the defender's decision, therefore I think they should be offside. The law is rubbish.
What if, instead of chesting it, the ball was a bit higher and just whiffed off the top of Mings' head and went through to Rodri and he's in on goal. This rule says he'd still be onside then because Mings intentionally played it - which is crazy. What if Mings tried to chest it like he did, but got it so wrong that he misses the ball completely - now Rodri is offside! It's backward.
I'm certain the rule used to be that if an attacker played it, and came off a defender on the way to a player in an offside position, they would still be given offside if they were already in the offside position when their teammate played it. The deflection wouldn't cancel it out. But now it's open to the possibility of any deflection on the pass means he's no longer offside because the defender intentionally blocked it? If you want an offside to be given offside, you're better off doing absolutely nothing at all.
