I know people won’t accept this but being in their eyeline alone is not enough

Snd it’s quite surprising how many people claim that it is. The rule is quite clear. The player blocking the keepers line of sight also needs to prevent them from playing the ball.

Whilst I don’t accept that he was blocking his view anyway (as the keeper was taller and the ball was above them) Cantwell being there did not prevent the keeper from being able to play the ball.

So whilst I understand why it was given, the law is clearly not being applied correctly as people seem to just assume that if they are in an offside position and in the keepers eyeline then it’s offside. It isn’t.

It would be different if the header had bern at them or close to them and Todd had ducked at the last minute leaving Schmeical no time to react.

Posted By: Jim on August 29th 2021 at 19:17:03

Message Thread

For the avoidance of all doubt re offside... (Other Football) - Worthing Yellow, Aug 29, 19:05:51
- I know people won’t accept this but being in their eyeline alone is not enough (Other Football) - Jim, Aug 29, 19:17:03
  - Fuck me jim. You’re arguing with a qualified ref (n/m) (Other Football) - Legacy Fan, Aug 29, 21:22:16
  - We need to suit you up as a defensive midfielder. (Other Football) - SeattleSounders, Aug 29, 19:36:34
  - This hopefully explains it for you (Other Football) - SCC 28, Aug 29, 19:33:58
    - It just proves my point to be honest. It’s about the ability to play the ball (Other Football) - Jim, Aug 29, 19:40:36
      - Yes Cantwell affected his ability to play the ball (Other Football) - SCC 28, Aug 29, 19:43:13
        
        Cantwell did not prevent him from playing the ball. (Other Football) - Jim, Aug 29, 19:44:39
        
        He affected his ability to play the ball! (Other Football) - SCC 28, Aug 29, 19:51:00
        
        It’s not irrelevant. If he would never have saved it then what Cantwell did not (Other Football) - Jim, Aug 29, 19:52:56
        
        It’s about affecting the keeper for the millionth time (Other Football) - SCC 28, Aug 29, 19:57:28
        
        READ THE RULE (n/m) (Other Football) - Jim, Aug 29, 20:09:33
        
        We can all read, your problem is understanding it (n/m) (Other Football) - SCC 28, Aug 29, 20:34:39
        
        I don’t think it’s as clear cut as you say based on the letter of the law (Other Football) - SimonOTBC, Aug 29, 21:23:24
        
        READ THE RULES JACKIE WEAVER (Other Football) - Cardiff Canary, Aug 29, 20:11:48
        
        Is this the 5 minute argument or the full half hour? (n/m) (Other Football) - watfordcanary, Aug 29, 20:10:32
      - You’re still assuming VAR is refereeing the game (Other Football) - APB, Aug 29, 19:43:04
        
        It is an obvious mistake though (n/m) (Other Football) - Jim, Aug 29, 19:44:04
        
        It’s not. (Other Football) - APB, Aug 29, 20:42:52
        
        That so many people are disagreeing with you suggests it was not an obvious mistake (n/m) (Other Football) - watfordcanary, Aug 29, 19:56:51
        
        So standing in front of the keeper isn’t impacting his ability?! (Other Football) - SCC 28, Aug 29, 19:48:25
        
        Once again. Read the rule. Read the words of the actual rule (law) (n/m) (Other Football) - Jim, Aug 29, 19:53:32
        
        The whole reason players stand in front of the goalkeeper (Other Football) - SeattleSounders, Aug 29, 19:55:31
        
        That may be the case but read the rule (Other Football) - Jim, Aug 29, 20:12:14
        
        He was never reaching the ball (Other Football) - SCC 28, Aug 29, 20:35:41
        
        So his ability to be able to play a ball you admit he was never able to play was (Other Football) - Jim, Aug 29, 20:47:45
        
        Yes his ability to go for the ball was affected (Other Football) - SCC 28, Aug 29, 21:28:12
        
        Ability to be able to play the ball (Other Football) - Jim, Aug 29, 21:37:29
        
        But the wording isn’t about reaching (Other Football) - SCC 28, Aug 29, 21:46:50
        
        The wording says it has to prevent the player from being able to play the ball (Other Football) - Jim, Aug 29, 21:50:34
        
        Yes potentially saving the ball (Other Football) - SCC 28, Aug 29, 21:57:47
        
        He’s just really thick unfortunately (n/m) (Other Football) - SCC 28, Aug 29, 20:00:56
        
        No (Other Football) - Cardiff Canary, Aug 29, 20:00:45
        
        You see that a lot in baseball (Other Football) - watfordcanary, Aug 29, 20:08:13
    - And whether the ball could be saved or not (Other Football) - SCC 28, Aug 29, 19:39:33
      - It is because whether the player is stopped from being able to play the ball is (Other Football) - Jim, Aug 29, 19:43:14
        
        He was clearly prevented from playing the ball (Other Football) - SCC 28, Aug 29, 20:34:03
- Yep - that sounds about right (Other Football) - Cardiff Canary, Aug 29, 19:16:00

Reply to Message

In order to add a post to the WotB Message Board you must be a registered WotB user.

If you are not yet registered then please visit the registration page. You should ensure that their browser is setup to accept cookies.