Championship thread 24/25! (4 Viewers)

[mmttww]

Thought I'd get a season off from trying not to check other results and looking at the table all the time. Thanks, Bling.

 

---

[Sky Blue Pete]

Thought I'd get a season off from trying not to check other results and looking at the table all the time. Thanks, Bling.

Same

 

[SBbucks]

Same

We’ve only got 2 more months of it

 

[David O'Day]

Irrelevant. It was offside at the point it bounced off the back of the #20. A rebound or deflection does not play you onside; it’s only onside if a defender deliberately plays the ball.

it was a long throw wasn't it? then it hit norwich defender who headed it on to the back of his teammate and then it went to the goal scorer

you can't be offside from a throw so unless i missed something where is the oxford touch to make it offside?

 

[David O'Day]

Norwich City 1-1 Oxford United | Championship Highlights

Highlights of the Sky Bet Championship match between Norwich and Oxford

www.skysports.com

1:03

Long throw and the Norwich number 3 heads it on to the back of the norwich number 20?

 

[SBbucks]

it was a long throw wasn't it? then it hit norwich defender who headed it on to the back of his teammate and then it went to the goal scorer

you can't be offside from a throw so unless i missed something where is the oxford touch to make it offside?

Read what I said above, I’m not sure how else to explain it. As soon as it hit #20 on the back and bounced through to the striker it is offside, as #20 clearly didn’t deliberately play it. It was a rebound and thus offside (as clearly defined in the Offside law).

Re your point on the long throw, the throw ends the first time the ball is played by the Oxford player (#33 I think) so that is also not relevant. If the throw had gone straight to the striker (which it didn’t) it would obviously not have been offside.

 

[David O'Day]

Read what I said above, I’m not sure how else to explain it. As soon as it hit #20 on the back and bounced through to the striker it is offside, as #20 clearly didn’t deliberately play it. It was a rebound and thus offside (as clearly defined in the Offside law).

Re your point on the long throw, the throw ends the first time the ball is played by the Oxford player (#33 I think) so that is also not relevant. If the throw had gone straight to the striker (which it didn’t) it would obviously not have been offside.

i did and it was nonsense as it's the norwich number 3 that heads it against the number 20

i've posted the video if you want to watch again

 

[wingy]

Last weeks ref And many of them just blow up on the time given whatever happens

Yes such inconstancy causes the abuse of of officials or should I say anxiety on the terraces.

 

[David O'Day]

Read what I said above, I’m not sure how else to explain it. As soon as it hit #20 on the back and bounced through to the striker it is offside, as #20 clearly didn’t deliberately play it. It was a rebound and thus offside (as clearly defined in the Offside law).

Re your point on the long throw, the throw ends the first time the ball is played by the Oxford player (#33 I think) so that is also not relevant. If the throw had gone straight to the striker (which it didn’t) it would obviously not have been offside.

the only oxford player near the ball is the 47 and he doesn't touch it so the only 2 oxford players who touch it are the throw in taker and the scorer

i have posted the video if you want to watch it against and refresh your memory

 

[wingy]

This could run and run,, What's Pete's interpretation??

 

[David O'Day]

This could run and run,, What's Pete's interpretation??

it can't as he as he is wrong and the video is in this thread

 

[Lamps]

View attachment 41890

Found it i think. Absolutely no chance the MLS is better, in fact i'd make an argument for being around 6th, although admittedly i know little about the Brazilian league.

The Brazilian is close. Just a few hairs breadth in it.

 

[SBbucks]

the only oxford player near the ball is the 47 and he doesn't touch it so the only 2 oxford players who touch it are the throw in taker and the scorer

i have posted the video if you want to watch it against and refresh your memory

The scorer is in an offside position the whole time, so is offside. Why do you think he is onside when he is clearly in an offside position throughout?

 

[SBbucks]

the only oxford player near the ball is the 47 and he doesn't touch it so the only 2 oxford players who touch it are the throw in taker and the scorer

i have posted the video if you want to watch it against and refresh your memory

I don’t need to see the video again as I’ve watched it 10 times in slow motion on Sky as I couldn’t believe it had been allowed.

 

[David O'Day]

The scorer is in an offside position the whole time, so is offside. Why do you think he is onside when he is clearly in an offside position throughout?

ffs

you can not be offside from a throw
no other oxford player touches the ball
the norwich number 3 plays the ball on purpose creating a new phase of play
it hits the back of the norwich 20 and falls to the striker

it's onside, no one else including norwich think it was offside but crack on mate

 

[SBbucks]

I don’t need to see the video again as I’ve watched it 10 times in slow motion on Sky as I couldn’t believe it had been allowed.

The relevant section from Law 11 as you don’t seem to believe it

2. Offside offence
A player in an offside position at the moment the ball is played or touched* by a team-mate is only penalised on becoming involved in active play by:

gaining an advantage by playing the ball or interfering with an opponent when it has:
rebounded or been deflected off the goalpost, crossbar or an opponent

 

[SBbucks]

ffs

you can not be offside from a throw
no other oxford player touches the ball
the norwich number 3 plays the ball on purpose creating a new phase of play
it hits the back of the norwich 20 and falls to the striker

it's onside, no one else including norwich think it was offside but crack on mate

He hasn’t received the ball from a throw so that is absolutely irrelevant. He has received it an offside position from a rebound so is offside.

 

[David O'Day]

The relevant section from Law 11 as you don’t seem to believe it

2. Offside offence
A player in an offside position at the moment the ball is played or touched* by a team-mate is only penalised on becoming involved in active play by:

gaining an advantage by playing the ball or interfering with an opponent when it has:
rebounded or been deflected off the goalpost, crossbar or an opponent

that would be great if an oxford player touched the ball, please note the word team mate

as we have established you can not be offside from a throw in so another oxford player would need to be the "team mate" who touches or plays the ball

that doesn't matter though as the norwich number 3 heads the ball out on purpose creating a new phase of play

 

[David O'Day]

He hasn’t received the ball from a throw so that is absolutely irrelevant. He has received it an offside position from a rebound so is offside.

1:02 - he's received it from a rebound of an oxford player heading it on to his own player

 

[Lamps]

He hasn’t received the ball from a throw so that is absolutely irrelevant. He has received it an offside position from a rebound so is offside.

Not as simple as that.

The player wasn't offside from the throwin. The player got the ball after an attempted pass. This call could have gone either way as it could have been interpreted either way as was the header an attempted pass?

The rule is if an attempted pass is made and the ball is intercepted by a player in an offside position it isn't offside.

 

[Shannerz]

The relevant section from Law 11 as you don’t seem to believe it

2. Offside offence
A player in an offside position at the moment the ball is played or touched* by a team-mate is only penalised on becoming involved in active play by:

gaining an advantage by playing the ball or interfering with an opponent when it has:
rebounded or been deflected off the goalpost, crossbar or an opponent

The Norwich defender heads it against his own man, sending it back towards the goalscorer.

No Oxford player touches the ball from the throw but the scorer. A Norwich man plays it to him. It's onside.

 

[Shannerz]

In other news, I like Oxford's purple kit.

 

[David O'Day]

The Norwich defender heads it against his own man, sending it back towards the goalscorer.

No Oxford player touches the ball from the throw but the scorer. A Norwich man plays it to him. It's onside.

i've posted a video showing him that

 

[SBbucks]

that would be great if an oxford player touched the ball, please note the word team mate

as we have established you can not be offside from a throw in so another oxford player would need to be the "team mate" who touches or plays the ball

that doesn't matter though as the norwich number 3 heads the ball out on purpose creating a new phase of play

We’re not going to agree on this as you clearly don’t understand the concept of the throw ending the minute it touches another player (it does not have to be a team mate), so you continually saying “can’t be offside from a throw in” is a red herring.

Guarantee that VAR rules that out (we’ve seen similar examples in the premier league over the last few seasons), but understand that the referee and assistant have clearly not seen in detail what has happened.
Ultimately Oxford got lucky and so did we.

 

[Shannerz]

We’re not going to agree on this as you clearly don’t understand the concept of the throw ending the minute it touches another player (it does not have to be a team mate), so you continually saying “can’t be offside from a throw in” is a red herring.

Even if he's in an offside position, the ball's played to him by an opponent, not a team-mate, so he's not offside.

No Oxford player touches the ball to make him offside.

 

[shepardo01]

Anyway - tomorrow;

Bristol City Vs Hull
Swansea Vs 'Boro
West Brom Vs QPR

 

[Lamps]

If the Norwich defender hadn't passed to/hit his team mate it would have been offside.

 

[SBbucks]

The Norwich defender heads it against his own man, sending it back towards the goalscorer.

No Oxford player touches the ball from the throw but the scorer. A Norwich man plays it to him. It's onside.

Another one who doesn’t understand the offside law.
It rebounds off #20 (he doesn’t deliberately play it) so cannot be playing the striker onside. It is only played on if it is deliberate.
So if we all accept that the striker is standing in an offside position, he is not played on, and is thus offside.

You might want to educate yourselves from Law 11 in the FA handbook.

 

[Lamps]

Even if he's in an offside position, the ball's played to him by an opponent, not a team-mate, so he's not offside.

No Oxford player touches the ball to make him offside.

Offside without what could be seen as a pass to a team mate. If the last Norwich player to touch it was the GK deemed to have made a save it would also have counted as offside.

 

[SBbucks]

Same

Pete, as someone who understands the laws of the game, what are your thoughts on the onside/offside debate?

 

[robbiethemole]

Irrelevant. It was offside at the point it bounced off the back of the #20. A rebound or deflection does not play you onside; it’s only onside if a defender deliberately plays the ball.

can't be offside from a throw in

 

[Shannerz]

Another one who doesn’t understand the offside law.
It rebounds off #20 (he doesn’t deliberately play it) so cannot be playing the striker onside. It is only played on if it is deliberate.
So if we all accept that the striker is standing in an offside position, he is not played on, and is thus offside.

You might want to educate yourselves from Law 11 in the FA handbook.

Hmm. I concede this. I think you're right, but it's a strange one if no attacking player has played the ball. You'd think the deflection clause is written with a deflection from an attacking pass in mind.

Anyway, it's given, so all good for us.

 

[David O'Day]

Another one who doesn’t understand the offside law.
It rebounds off #20 (he doesn’t deliberately play it) so cannot be playing the striker onside. It is only played on if it is deliberate.
So if we all accept that the striker is standing in an offside position, he is not played on, and is thus offside.

You might want to educate yourselves from Law 11 in the FA handbook.

it rebounds off the 20 after the norwich player heads it clear

the striker can not be offside as the norwich number 3 plays the ball on purpose, the deflection part of Law 11 applies to deflections off defenders when the attacking team have played the ball

there is not a world a player can be offside from a defenders clearance hitting the back of his own teammate

i know this, the ref and his assistant know this and norwich city now this

in fact the only person arguing for an offside is a city fan who originally said an oxford player touched the ball and can't admit they are wrong

sleep it off mate

 

[David O'Day]

can't be offside from a throw in

you can't also be offside if a defender tries to head it clear and heads it into the back of his own player

 

[Lamps]

Another one who doesn’t understand the offside law.
It rebounds off #20 (he doesn’t deliberately play it) so cannot be playing the striker onside. It is only played on if it is deliberate.
So if we all accept that the striker is standing in an offside position, he is not played on, and is thus offside.

You might want to educate yourselves from Law 11 in the FA handbook.