Mariners vs Smurfs (Sydney)

[style_cafe]

High foot (no contact)= dangerous play = indirect freekick
A kick (basically here a high foot that makes contact)= direct freekick
direct FK in the box= penalty
I got quotes from FIFA lawbook if you want?
I'm convinced ref didn't see it, and tbh I didn't see it (although I was 60 m away )
It was a goalmouth scramble, very difficult for ref to see!

If the ref saw that it was a goalkick he would surely have seen the high foot!

 

[Kareem]

i think the assistant called the goalkick!
Like I said, ref's view was very very poor!
Maybe check a replay? But I'm pretty sure he didn't call the Goalkick

 

[Forum Phoenix]

The hIgh foot made contact with McBreens head, but I think it was the crunching follow through off Cole's knee directly after that actually split the cheekbone - typical boxers cut, though it could have been the boot.
And no he hid not hit the post with his head, Coles knee was in between them.

It was very dangerous and drew blood instantly.
Def pen. But very hard to see. Though I think Style's right, outside the box, we would have seen it given.

And Strebre was definitely disappointing and right after I had been talking him up as the best ref in the HAL... :

 

[bikinigirl]

. i respectfully ask that in the future all forumites refraining from commenting on referees before the match ... nothing good can come of it

. if you give them any praise they can only disappoint ... and strebre was disappointing beyond what could have been imagined (imho of course)

 

[grendel]

The hIgh foot made contact with McBreens head, but I think it was the crunching follow through off Cole's knee directly after that actually split the cheekbone - typical boxers cut, though it could have been the boot.
And no he hid not hit the post with his head, Coles knee was in between them.

It was very dangerous and drew blood instantly.
Def pen. But very hard to see. Though I think Style's right, outside the box, we would have seen it given.

And Strebre was definitely disappointing and right after I had been talking him up as the best ref in the HAL... :

You conveniently ignore the fact that McBreen barrelled through the defenders in order to reach the ball. The referee's conclusion might easily have been that he committed the first foul and could have penalised it with a defensive free kick. Instead he played the advantage and gave them a goal kick. Srebre's reputation remains intact with me...

 

[style_cafe]

. i respectfully ask that in the future all forumites refraining from commenting on referees before the match ... nothing good can come of it

. if you give them any praise they can only disappoint ... and strebre was disappointing beyond what could have been imagined (imho of course)

With all due respect I doubt that the match officials read forums like this before officiating a match

 

[Forum Phoenix]

You conveniently ignore the fact that McBreen barrelled through the defenders in order to reach the ball. The referee's conclusion might easily have been that he committed the first foul and could have penalised it with a defensive free kick. Instead he played the advantage and gave them a goal kick. Srebre's reputation remains intact with me...

:blink:

lol.

I'm not conveniently ignoring anything. McBreen did not illegally push or trip anyone in what was a two against one battle for the ball - with a keeper desperately bearing down also. No way that gets pulled up, especially by a referee like Delovski.
It was quite simply a large striker throwing himself at the trajectory of a whipped in ball, and he _got it_ and he did not knock either player down or grab a shirt or push anyone in the back... however he did cop a boot and knee to the face that split his cheek open.

So no, I'm not sure Strebre got it right at all, unless he was planning on pulling McBreen up for a low head and played advantage.

His only excuse is that it would have been very difficult to see - but the liney's' should have had a better view.

EDIT: Heard McBreen got six stitches.

 

[finally retired]

His only excuse is that it would have been very difficult to see - but the liney's' should have had a better view.

this is the same "liney" who missed the offside goal for Sydney you're talking about.

 

[Forum Phoenix]

this is the same "liney" who missed the offside goal for Sydney you're talking about.

Yes, THAT one.

 

[bikinigirl]

With all due respect I doubt that the match officials read forums like this before officiating a match

. i was in no way suggesting that they read the forums at all

. moreso that we jinx ourselves by saying someone is good ... nothing good can come of that - it can only bite us on the bum

. call it superstition if you will, but some have been wishing to retract their pre-match praise after that performance ... and the assistant has no excuse

 

[style_cafe]

this is the same "liney" who missed the offside goal for Sydney you're talking about.

I too thought that it was off-side to until I checked the latest FIFA rules & interpretations which clearly shows that Rod Allen (the liney) was correct in not giving off-side.

 

[style_cafe]

:blink:

lol.

I'm not conveniently ignoring anything. McBreen did not illegally push or trip anyone in what was a two against one battle for the ball - with a keeper desperately bearing down also. No way that gets pulled up, especially by a referee like Delovski.
It was quite simply a large striker throwing himself at the trajectory of a whipped in ball, and he _got it_ and he did not knock either player down or grab a shirt or push anyone in the back... however he did cop a boot and knee to the face that split his cheek open.

So no, I'm not sure Strebre got it right at all, unless he was planning on pulling McBreen up for a low head and played advantage.

His only excuse is that it would have been very difficult to see - but the liney's' should have had a better view.

EDIT: Heard McBreen got six stitches.

I agree with you FP except that the liney did not have a good view (I was sitting above him) It was the ref`s call & I believe he got it wrong.

With all the debate on this issue it makes me think how brave it was of McBreen to put his head in there.
I know i`ve criticised him in the past but his bravery stepped him up a peg in my books.

 

[bikinigirl]

I too thought that it was off-side to until I checked the latest FIFA rules & interpretations which clearly shows that Rod Allen (the liney) was correct in not giving off-side.

. could you please let us know what the latest rule is then?

. i thought as soon as he moved towards the ball he was offside (considering, of course, where he was when the ball was played)

 

[finally retired]

. could you please let us know what the latest rule is then?

. i thought as soon as he moved towards the ball he was offside (considering, of course, where he was when the ball was played)

check out the Laws Of The Game and the "interactive offside rule" demo at http://www.fifa.com/worldfootball/lawsofthegame.html (Hopefully the A-League linesmen and women all have this in the favourites). I too thought as soon as he moved towards the ball he was offside, but after looking at the demo it seems that unless he actually touches the ball (in the Sydney game he didn't....I think it was Cazarine who was "offside" but Petratos ran through so Cazarine was never in "active play") or makes "distracting gestures" (running for the ball doesn't appear to count as a distracting gesture) then the play is not stopped for an offside infringement.......so I apologise to the linesman for the abuse I heaped on him during the match.

 

[dibo]

You're right to a point. Cazarine did influence the defenders - he's running with the ball! Sainsbury's watching Cazarine, not Petratos. He sees Petratos later. He doesn't need to play the ball in that instance to be offside.

Easy with replays and all, but simply put if Cazarine stood still, no issue. He moves towards the ball so he's off.

 

[elevated position]

Either way Ryan should have come out and attacked the ball, he has to play to the whistle. He must have had that point made to him at half time because he defused a close call by coming out and batting the ball away.

 

[offtheball]

Surely if the player in an offside position has an adverse affect on the defenders then it should be offside.

Similarly in the Brisbane thrashing, Bozanic was in an offside position when Kwasnik scored. Bozanic just stood there but Kwas would not have scored but for his presence.

 

[bulldogmariner]

Surely if the player in an offside position has an adverse affect on the defenders then it should be offside.

Similarly in the Brisbane thrashing, Bozanic was in an offside position when Kwasnik scored. Bozanic just stood there but Kwas would not have scored but for his presence.

That was a mistake. Bozanic was clearly offside. I think they got the no offside call right on the Peratos goal.

 

[grendel]

so maybe spectators should consider that the Assistant Referee is more likely to be correct on matters of the law and more well-versed in the latest law updates than they are. Let's face it, they are performing those particular duties a lot more frequently than the average one-eyed spectator. That would certainly stop me shooting off insults at them, going away from the game convinced I was right and never being put right about my mistaken belief because I was arrogant enough to think I knew better. Or maybe spectator arrogance is all part of the game...? It might help if someone from the FFA was able to publicly justify controversial refereeing decisions, so that the reasons for making them was clearer to viewers.

 

[style_cafe]

check out the Laws Of The Game and the "interactive offside rule" demo at http://www.fifa.com/worldfootball/lawsofthegame.html (Hopefully the A-League linesmen and women all have this in the favourites). I too thought as soon as he moved towards the ball he was offside, but after looking at the demo it seems that unless he actually touches the ball (in the Sydney game he didn't....I think it was Cazarine who was "offside" but Petratos ran through so Cazarine was never in "active play") or makes "distracting gestures" (running for the ball doesn't appear to count as a distracting gesture) then the play is not stopped for an offside infringement.......so I apologise to the linesman for the abuse I heaped on him during the match.

Thanks for the reply to Bikinigirl, you saved me looking it up again

Who would want to be a liney anyway?..lol