RunRickyRun Posted January 12, 2014 Share Posted January 12, 2014 (edited) Gouffran is ducking to avoid the ball. Certainly can see why they'd think he was active. Nothing in the rules about being 'active' The rules in this case are pretty clear cut. They're explained in detail in the appendix to the laws of the game. I guess pundits don't read the rules and people listen to them. The only possible grey area with the decision is whether Goufran impeded Hart's attempt or possible attempt to get the ball. In this case he was nowhere near him. Edited January 12, 2014 by RunRickyRun Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Steve Posted January 12, 2014 Share Posted January 12, 2014 Gouffran is ducking to avoid the ball. Certainly can see why they'd think he was active. Nothing in the rules about being 'active' The rules in this case are pretty clear cut. They're explained in detailin the appendix to the laws of the game. I guess pundits don't read the rules and people listen to them. The only possible grey area with the decision is whether Goufran impeded Hart's attempt or possible attempt to get the ball. In this case he was nowhere near him. As I explained in the post afterwards, Hart takes a split second to see where Gouffran is standing, it clearly impacted on his decision not to dive. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RunRickyRun Posted January 12, 2014 Share Posted January 12, 2014 Gouffran is ducking to avoid the ball. Certainly can see why they'd think he was active. Nothing in the rules about being 'active' The rules in this case are pretty clear cut. They're explained in detailin the appendix to the laws of the game. I guess pundits don't read the rules and people listen to them. The only possible grey area with the decision is whether Goufran impeded Hart's attempt or possible attempt to get the ball. In this case he was nowhere near him. As I explained in the post afterwards, Hart takes a split second to see where Gouffran is standing, it clearly impacted on his decision not to dive. Again, that's not in the laws of the game. Being in the corner of a player's eye does not make a player offside, The player has to be "obstructing the line of vision" of a defender/goalkeeper to count as being offside. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LondonLax Posted January 12, 2014 Share Posted January 12, 2014 2-2 and both were good goals for Stoke Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr_Dogg Posted January 12, 2014 Share Posted January 12, 2014 Shawcross and Adam are having shockers here. Lovely goal by Adam there! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chappy Posted January 12, 2014 Share Posted January 12, 2014 If that was us I would be absolutely furious it had been disallowed. However as it was Newcastle I find it quite amusing. And also my scenario would never happen because WDFAFC. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
villa4europe Posted January 12, 2014 Share Posted January 12, 2014 Gouffran is ducking to avoid the ball. Certainly can see why they'd think he was active. Nothing in the rules about being 'active' The rules in this case are pretty clear cut. They're explained in detailin the appendix to the laws of the game. I guess pundits don't read the rules and people listen to them. The only possible grey area with the decision is whether Goufran impeded Hart's attempt or possible attempt to get the ball. In this case he was nowhere near him. As I explained in the post afterwards, Hart takes a split second to see where Gouffran is standing, it clearly impacted on his decision not to dive. Again, that's not in the laws of the game. Being in the corner of a player's eye does not make a player offside, The player has to be "obstructing the line of vision" of a defender/goalkeeper to count as being offside. no it doesnt, the law says the player can either be blocking the line of vision or movement towards the ball therefore you can argue gouffran being stood there makes hart think twice about diving Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jimzk5 Posted January 12, 2014 Share Posted January 12, 2014 Shawcross and Adam are having shockers here. Lovely goal by Adam there! its Charlie Adams. Niall quin says so Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RunRickyRun Posted January 12, 2014 Share Posted January 12, 2014 no it doesnt, the law says the player can either be blocking the line of vision or movement towards the ball therefore you can argue gouffran being stood there makes hart think twice about diving They're two different arguments. If you're arguing that he's offside because he's moving towards the ball then that's one thing (and you'd be wrong) He's not in the line of Hart's vision nor is he blocking a dive, therefore he's not offside. It doesn't matter whether Hart thinks he's offside or not. The rules make no concession for this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
villa4europe Posted January 12, 2014 Share Posted January 12, 2014 quinn also said that this was butlands breakthough year and he's really been making a name for himself at stoke... making his 2nd appearance for stoke today if you were wondering Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LondonLax Posted January 12, 2014 Share Posted January 12, 2014 Gouffran is ducking to avoid the ball. Certainly can see why they'd think he was active. Nothing in the rules about being 'active' The rules in this case are pretty clear cut. They're explained in detailin the appendix to the laws of the game. I guess pundits don't read the rules and people listen to them. The only possible grey area with the decision is whether Goufran impeded Hart's attempt or possible attempt to get the ball. In this case he was nowhere near him. As I explained in the post afterwards, Hart takes a split second to see where Gouffran is standing, it clearly impacted on his decision not to dive. Again, that's not in the laws of the game. Being in the corner of a player's eye does not make a player offside, The player has to be "obstructing the line of vision" of a defender/goalkeeper to count as being offside. no it doesnt, the law says the player can either be blocking the line of vision or movement towards the ball therefore you can argue gouffran being stood there makes hart think twice about diving If Hart decides not to dive that is Hart's silly fault. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
villa4europe Posted January 12, 2014 Share Posted January 12, 2014 no it doesnt, the law says the player can either be blocking the line of vision or movement towards the ball therefore you can argue gouffran being stood there makes hart think twice about diving They're two different arguments. If you're arguing that he's offside because he's moving towards the ball then that's one thing (and you'd be wrong) He's not in the line of Hart's vision nor is he blocking a dive, therefore he's not offside. It doesn't matter whether Hart thinks he's offside or not. The rules make no concession for this. im arguing that he's about a metre and a bit away from hart and pretty much in the trajectory of where hart will be diving, if that isn't classed as blocking a movement towards the ball then i don't know what is im arguing that hart doesnt dive because gouffran is there, which by the rules means he's offside, and im assuming the ref has come to the same decision Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
samjp26 Posted January 12, 2014 Share Posted January 12, 2014 no it doesnt, the law says the player can either be blocking the line of vision or movement towards the ball therefore you can argue gouffran being stood there makes hart think twice about diving They're two different arguments. If you're arguing that he's offside because he's moving towards the ball then that's one thing (and you'd be wrong) He's not in the line of Hart's vision nor is he blocking a dive, therefore he's not offside. It doesn't matter whether Hart thinks he's offside or not. The rules make no concession for this. im arguing that he's about a metre and a bit away from hart and pretty much in the trajectory of where hart will be diving, if that isn't classed as blocking a movement towards the ball then i don't know what is im arguing that hart doesnt dive because gouffran is there, which by the rules means he's offside, and im assuming the ref has come to the same decision That is pretty much what I see, Hart even points straight to Gouffran as soon as it goes in. He clearly watched the ball and I'm assuming he would have dived had Gouffran not been there. Fantastic shot though, oh well 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
roonst83 Posted January 12, 2014 Share Posted January 12, 2014 2-3 Liverpool - one of those penalty decisions that ref's often bottle Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AVFCforever1991 Posted January 12, 2014 Share Posted January 12, 2014 Stoke shooting themselves in the foot again, lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BleedClaretAndBlue Posted January 12, 2014 Share Posted January 12, 2014 Then Suarez plays volleyball in the other box and no pen given haha. Oh well want Stoke to lose anyway Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Electric Avenue Posted January 12, 2014 Share Posted January 12, 2014 Again decisions going to the Sky clubs - Ci£y , pool Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
coda Posted January 12, 2014 Share Posted January 12, 2014 Gerrard refereeing the game as usual. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rovers13 Posted January 12, 2014 Share Posted January 12, 2014 For all the bullshit about Rodgers amazing philosophy when he got hired, Liverpool sure do go long a lot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
roonst83 Posted January 12, 2014 Share Posted January 12, 2014 2-4. More class from Suarez. Liverpool look unreal on the attack. I am simply dreading playing them next week. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts