The Kuyt Goal Against Sunderland

[MSingh]

So come on then, Club alleigences aside, what was that all about ??

Little Poll to boot...

Edited September 27, 2010 by MSingh

[CNF55]

There is a point for 'unsportsmanlike behaviour' because it was quite clear what Turner's intention was - but I voted for 'fair goal' because technically it was.

[StevieH]

can't be offside m. impossible.

[Thaddeus]

There is a point for 'unsportsmanlike behaviour' because it was quite clear what Turner's intention was - but I voted for 'fair goal' because technically it was.

Ditto.

[mrbojangles]

There is a point for 'unsportsmanlike behaviour' because it was quite clear what Turner's intention was - but I voted for 'fair goal' because technically it was.

Ditto.

+ 1

[MSingh]

can't be offside m. impossible.

No, why not Mate ??

Kuyt i'm talking about, not Torres..

Honestly, i thought as in why it couldn't be Offside before adding it to the Poll but unless i'm having a blonde moment, the ball was played forward to Kuyt & he was beyond the second to last Defende, but not the GK, & the ball...................

The blue forward on the left of the diagram is in an offside position as he is in front of both the second-to-last defender (marked by the dotted line) and the ball. Note that this does not necessarily mean he is committing an offside offence; it only becomes an offence if the ball were to be played to him at this moment, whether or not he is in an offside position when he receives the ball, as he could receive the ball in an onside position but he'd still have committed an offside offence.

Edited September 28, 2010 by MSingh

[StevieH]

unless i'm losing my marbles too kuyt can't be offside because he's behind torres. to be offside you have to by default be the furthest forward attacker. that torres passed the ball forward doesn't matter because kuyt ran on from behind torres. it doesn't matter about the second to last defender as - effectively - torres himself is playing kuyt onside.

[MSingh]

unless i'm losing my marbles too kuyt can't be offside because he's behind torres. to be offside you have to by default be the furthest forward attacker. that torres passed the ball forward doesn't matter because kuyt ran on from behind torres. it doesn't matter about the second to last defender as - effectively - torres himself is playing kuyt onside.

Oooohhh i don't know about that Mate, we need one of them " Ask Clattenburg " ( or maybe not him but you know what i mean ) gadgets or something like it anyway..

I was unde rthe impresson it was all abotu teh second from last Defender Mate, it can't be his own Player playing him on, surely ??

Will have a look at this after work Mate, i'd be amazed it it is what you & if it is, i'd find it utter madness of a rule..

[alfieconn]

unless i'm losing my marbles too kuyt can't be offside because he's behind torres. to be offside you have to by default be the furthest forward attacker. that torres passed the ball forward doesn't matter because kuyt ran on from behind torres. it doesn't matter about the second to last defender as - effectively - torres himself is playing kuyt onside.

Oooohhh i don't know about that Mate, we need one of them " Ask Clattenburg " ( or maybe not him but you know what i mean ) gadgets or something like it anyway..

I was unde rthe impresson it was all abotu teh second from last Defender Mate, it can't be his own Player playing him on, surely ??

Will have a look at this after work Mate, i'd be amazed it it is what you & if it is, i'd find it utter madness of a rule..

I am 100% sure that if a player is behind a collegue when he plays the ball then he cannot be offside.

Edited September 28, 2010 by alfieconn

[nev]

School yard defending by the sunderland player and torres had the right to go for the ball as the player played the ball back with his feet,but i voted unsportsmanlike by liverpool just because liverpool player did it.

I was more concerned with stevie me getting away with a sly dig on another player again should have been a red.

[mrtoad]

School yard defending by the sunderland player and torres had the right to go for the ball as the player played the ball back with his feet,but i voted unsportsmanlike by liverpool just because liverpool player did it.

I was more concerned with stevie me getting away with a sly dig on another player again should have been a red.

Agreed, there must be some FA directive that Stevie G is allowed to be treated differently. As for the goal, yeah it was techincally legal, but still feel that it was unsportsmanlike . Seems that that clown Atwell continues to be involved in controversial decisions.

[NADTATIDA1]

Liverpool deserve all the breaks they can get at the moment.......allthough if it was against them i think it wouldn't of been allowed

[salty]

Revenge for the beach ball goal last season.

[alfieconn]

Revenge for the beach ball goal last season.

Yeah, funny how things work out .

[Englander]

Revenge for the beach ball goal last season.

But it was a Liverpool fans beachball.

Ive just seen this goal and i think when he backhealed he meant it to go all the way to his keeper, just he fcuked up.

[MSingh]

unless i'm losing my marbles too kuyt can't be offside because he's behind torres. to be offside you have to by default be the furthest forward attacker. that torres passed the ball forward doesn't matter because kuyt ran on from behind torres. it doesn't matter about the second to last defender as - effectively - torres himself is playing kuyt onside.

Oooohhh i don't know about that Mate, we need one of them " Ask Clattenburg " ( or maybe not him but you know what i mean ) gadgets or something like it anyway..

I was unde rthe impresson it was all abotu teh second from last Defender Mate, it can't be his own Player playing him on, surely ??

Will have a look at this after work Mate, i'd be amazed it it is what you & if it is, i'd find it utter madness of a rule..

I am 100% sure that if a player is behind a collegue when he plays the ball then he cannot be offside.

It seems the Rules say differetnly Chaps..

Dirk Kuyt was Offside, by about 25 Yards too !!

A player is in an offside position if:

• he is nearer to his opponents' goal line than both the ball and the second last opponent

http://www.offside-ref.co.uk/laws/11-offside-rule/detailed/

[mrbojangles]

unless i'm losing my marbles too kuyt can't be offside because he's behind torres. to be offside you have to by default be the furthest forward attacker. that torres passed the ball forward doesn't matter because kuyt ran on from behind torres. it doesn't matter about the second to last defender as - effectively - torres himself is playing kuyt onside.

Oooohhh i don't know about that Mate, we need one of them " Ask Clattenburg " ( or maybe not him but you know what i mean ) gadgets or something like it anyway..

I was unde rthe impresson it was all abotu teh second from last Defender Mate, it can't be his own Player playing him on, surely ??

Will have a look at this after work Mate, i'd be amazed it it is what you & if it is, i'd find it utter madness of a rule..

I am 100% sure that if a player is behind a collegue when he plays the ball then he cannot be offside.

It seems the Rules say differetnly Chaps..

Dirk Kuyt was Offside, by about 25 Yards too !!

A player is in an offside position if:

• he is nearer to his opponents' goal line than both the ball and the second last opponent

http://www.offside-ref.co.uk/laws/11-offside-rule/detailed/

I think the key word there is "both" Singhers.

The fact that Kuyt was behind the ball when Torres passed it to him, meant he was onside. IMO and understanding of the rules.

[StevieH]

I think the key word there is "both" Singhers.

The fact that Kuyt was behind the ball when Torres passed it to him, meant he was onside. IMO and understanding of the rules.

think you're right boj, "both" is absolutely the key word here. kuyt was behind the play and behind the ball so can't be offside whether torres passes it forward, square or backwards.

[Devil]

A player is in an offside position if he is closer to the opponent's goal line than both the ball and the second-to-last defender.

Never Offside!

[MSingh]

Well what a silly fcukign rule that is then ??

So am i right in saying if he was in front of the ball ( which he wasn't, he was behind it by a couple of Yards ) he would have BEEN Offside ??

Madness, he was 20 Yards behind/in front of any other Defender except the Goalkeeper & the ball was played forward to him by a Team Mate in order to gain an advantage & ultimately score a Goal..

Surely that's what the Offside Rule is there for, to stop people being 20 Yards in front/behind the Defence no ??????????

Madness if you ask me, i was always unde rthe impression that the Offside rule i sthere to stop " Goalhanging ", obviously not with this rule as it is..

But the Rule is what it is..

So anyway, Dev, are you one of the one's i take it that ( & remember it's Club aleeigences aside in this Thread ) voted for the Liverpool unsportsmanlike option ??

[Mossfinn]

So am i right in saying if he was in front of the ball ( which he wasn't, he was behind it by a couple of Yards ) he would have BEEN Offside ??

Only if he was interfering with play, in which case Torres would have had to take it on himself.

However, Singers, what about a case when played from your own half and two players break through, defenders caught flat footed, surely under your your rules the second man is offside, if he is behind the ball, he can't be. In my opinion of course, but then I prefer Rugby,

[Mossfinn]

Well what a silly fcukign rule that is then ??

Madness, he was 20 Yards behind/in front of any other Defender except the Goalkeeper & the ball was played forward to him by a Team Mate in order to gain an advantage & ultimately score a Goal..

Surely that's what the Offside Rule is there for, to stop people being 20 Yards in front/behind the Defence no ??????????

Not when the ball was originally played, there was three Sunderland layers in front of him.

[StevieH]

Well what a silly fcukign rule that is then ??

So am i right in saying if he was in front of the ball ( which he wasn't, he was behind it by a couple of Yards ) he would have BEEN Offside ??

Madness, he was 20 Yards behind/in front of any other Defender except the Goalkeeper & the ball was played forward to him by a Team Mate in order to gain an advantage & ultimately score a Goal..

Surely that's what the Offside Rule is there for, to stop people being 20 Yards in front/behind the Defence no ??????????

Madness if you ask me, i was always unde rthe impression that the Offside rule i sthere to stop " Goalhanging ", obviously not with this rule as it is..

But the Rule is what it is..

So anyway, Dev, are you one of the one's i take it that ( & remember it's Club aleeigences aside in this Thread ) voted for the Liverpool unsportsmanlike option ??

well, kind of. if he was in front of torres when torres passed the ball he would have been offside.

i don't think it was unsportsmanlike, it was just a <deleted> lack of professionalism from both michael turner and stuart atwell. i'm still more confused why torres didn't go round the keeper and finish it himself.

[alfieconn]

Well what a silly fcukign rule that is then ??

So am i right in saying if he was in front of the ball ( which he wasn't, he was behind it by a couple of Yards ) he would have BEEN Offside ??

Madness, he was 20 Yards behind/in front of any other Defender except the Goalkeeper & the ball was played forward to him by a Team Mate in order to gain an advantage & ultimately score a Goal..

Surely that's what the Offside Rule is there for, to stop people being 20 Yards in front/behind the Defence no ??????????

Madness if you ask me, i was always unde rthe impression that the Offside rule i sthere to stop " Goalhanging ", obviously not with this rule as it is..

But the Rule is what it is..

So anyway, Dev, are you one of the one's i take it that ( & remember it's Club aleeigences aside in this Thread ) voted for the Liverpool unsportsmanlike option ??

Now we know why your always saying that goals against the scammers were offside

[mrbojangles]

Well what a silly fcukign rule that is then ??

So am i right in saying if he was in front of the ball ( which he wasn't, he was behind it by a couple of Yards ) he would have BEEN Offside ??

Madness, he was 20 Yards behind/in front of any other Defender except the Goalkeeper & the ball was played forward to him by a Team Mate in order to gain an advantage & ultimately score a Goal..

Surely that's what the Offside Rule is there for, to stop people being 20 Yards in front/behind the Defence no ??????????

Madness if you ask me, i was always unde rthe impression that the Offside rule i sthere to stop " Goalhanging ", obviously not with this rule as it is..

But the Rule is what it is..

So anyway, Dev, are you one of the one's i take it that ( & remember it's Club aleeigences aside in this Thread ) voted for the Liverpool unsportsmanlike option ??

Now we know why your always saying that goals against the scammers were offside

Especially penalties

[Devil]

Well what a silly fcukign rule that is then ??

So am i right in saying if he was in front of the ball ( which he wasn't, he was behind it by a couple of Yards ) he would have BEEN Offside ??

Madness, he was 20 Yards behind/in front of any other Defender except the Goalkeeper & the ball was played forward to him by a Team Mate in order to gain an advantage & ultimately score a Goal..

Surely that's what the Offside Rule is there for, to stop people being 20 Yards in front/behind the Defence no ??????????

Madness if you ask me, i was always unde rthe impression that the Offside rule i sthere to stop " Goalhanging ", obviously not with this rule as it is..

But the Rule is what it is..

So anyway, Dev, are you one of the one's i take it that ( & remember it's Club aleeigences aside in this Thread ) voted for the Liverpool unsportsmanlike option ??

Ha

[MSingh]

Well what a silly fcukign rule that is then ??

Madness, he was 20 Yards behind/in front of any other Defender except the Goalkeeper & the ball was played forward to him by a Team Mate in order to gain an advantage & ultimately score a Goal..

Surely that's what the Offside Rule is there for, to stop people being 20 Yards in front/behind the Defence no ??????????

Not when the ball was originally played, there was three Sunderland layers in front of him.

Originally played by the Sunderland Player you mean , the Free Kick itself ??

That part's irrelevent though as 1 ) it was played by the opposition player & 2 ) the " offside " part i'm talkign about is the Torres >> Kuyt pass..

If that's what you mean ??

& sorry Moss, i've read the other post of yours a couple of times & i can't work out what you mean i'm afraid..

[Mossfinn]

& i can't work out what you mean i'm afraid..

Don't worry, people say that across the whole forum

[Mossfinn]

& sorry Moss, i've read the other post of yours a couple of times & i can't work out what you mean i'm afraid..

Anyway, lets see if I can make this perhaps a little clearer and you must really dislike me to encourage my good self to research football!

I found your diagram of post 6 on Wiki, not sure if that is where you got it from?

However, after reading part of the remaining article there was this part of the law:

Offside position

A player is in an offside position if three conditions are met:

first, the player must be on the opposing team's half of the field.

Yes he was, so offside as it stands.

Second, there must be fewer than two opposing players between him and the opposing goal line, with the goalkeeper counting as an opposing player for these purposes.

OK, on this count he is offside,

However,

Thirdly, the player must be in front of the ball.

If that is a correct interpretation of the law, or someone writing the laws as he so wishes on Wiki, he cannot be offside.

He wasn't goal hanging, he was a few yards from the half way line when he started his run.

[Jockstar]

He wasn't offside when the ball is played. Its simple. :jap: