Jump to content

Officialdom Conspiracy 2020/21?


Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, donegal_ger said:

Thought Hagi was offside when I seen it live but  I'm not sure if Roofe got a touch or it was the defender that flicked it anyway the assistant couldn't see it from where he was so glad he guessed our way.

Tbh focused more on the offside line, had thought it Roofe header. Will watch sportscene when I can. Am sure they'll clarify any offside 😁

Rangers_no1 likes this
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 1.3k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Clancy providing zero protection to Rangers players. Guy's never just an  incompetent ref, he's fucking bent.

To think we used to sing 'Its a Conspiracy'...

The thing is none of us are asking for favours, dubious decisions going our way, we want the big decisions to be correct. Even though we did not play well yesterday, we can't play well every matc

Posted Images

Just now, SeparateEntityMyArse said:

Tbh focused more on the offside line, had thought it Roofe header. Will watch sportscene when I can. Am sure they'll clarify any offside 😁

Its a very close call on whether Roofe touched it or not. Needs to be slowed right down to see.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, SeparateEntityMyArse said:

Tbh focused more on the offside line, had thought it Roofe header. Will watch sportscene when I can. Am sure they'll clarify any offside 😁

If Roofe touched it then it was a definite offside and you can chalk it up as one for the good guys.

Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, dummiesoot said:

Hagi is offside at Roofe's touch but, during second phase which is the more important bit, the goalie and defender put it in front of hagi, therefore he is onside

If it is Roofe's header, which I think it was but need to double check, it doesn't matter about phases after that. It would be offside.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, SeparateEntityMyArse said:

If it is Roofe's header, which I think it was but need to double check, it doesn't matter about phases after that. It would be offside.

That's not true though, AFAIA?

Let's go on the basis Roofe did touch the ball for a minute;

Scenario 1 - Goes straight to Hagi = Offside

Scenario 2 - Hits the bar and goes to Hagi = Offside

Scenario 3 - Hits the bar, hits the goalkeeper and goes to Hagi = Offside

Scenario 4 - Using any of the above but instead of Hagi it goes to a Rangers player(who was onside at the time) he squares it to Hagi  = Onside

Scenario 4 becomes a new phase and although Hagi was initially offside from the Roofe touch, it's the pass from another Rangers player that counts here so the goal should be correctly awarded.

Final scenario which works similarly to Scenario 4, the exact same sequence as yesterday occurs, when the Hamilton defender touches the ball after the goalkeeper did that starts a new phase of play as the same team has touched the ball twice, thus Hagi is onside when he scores whether Roofe touches it or not.

That's my understanding of the offside rule, but I'm sure someone will be able to confirm it using an official law.

dummiesoot likes this
Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Rangers_no1 said:

That's not true though, AFAIA?

Let's go on the basis Roofe did touch the ball for a minute;

Scenario 1 - Goes straight to Hagi = Offside

Scenario 2 - Hits the bar and goes to Hagi = Offside

Scenario 3 - Hits the bar, hits the goalkeeper and goes to Hagi = Offside

Scenario 4 - Using any of the above but instead of Hagi it goes to a Rangers player(who was onside at the time) he squares it to Hagi  = Onside

Scenario 4 becomes a new phase and although Hagi was initially offside from the Roofe touch, it's the pass from another Rangers player that counts here so the goal should be correctly awarded.

Final scenario which works similarly to Scenario 4, the exact same sequence as yesterday occurs, when the Hamilton defender touches the ball after the goalkeeper did that starts a new phase of play as the same team has touched the ball twice, thus Hagi is onside when he scores whether Roofe touches it or not.

That's my understanding of the offside rule, but I'm sure someone will be able to confirm it using an official law.

Doesn’t matter as Accies number 12 touched it onto the bar 😂👍

The offside rule is clear in that Hagi is offside if it rebounds off the bar from Roofe, if he touched it, but isn’t clear on the other touches from the Accies keeper and defender 👍

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Dave Hedgehog said:

Doesn’t matter as Accies number 12 touched it onto the bar 😂👍

 

I know mate, said that on page 11. :lol:

Just discussing the scenario where Roofe had touched it, SEMA thinks it's offside, I believe would still be onside. :thumbup:

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Rangers_no1 said:

I know mate, said that on page 11. :lol:

Just discussing the scenario where Roofe had touched it, SEMA thinks it's offside, I believe would still be onside. :thumbup:

I’m not sure mate, the rule isn’t very clear based on the Accies keeper and defender touching the ball. 👍

Rangers_no1 likes this
Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Rangers_no1 said:

I know mate, said that on page 11. :lol:

Just discussing the scenario where Roofe had touched it, SEMA thinks it's offside, I believe would still be onside. :thumbup:

I think if it had went in his involvement doesnt matter. I think as it came off the bar and his offside involvement then would matter. As above, its grey due to other players being involved before his touch.

Its moot, but here's the legislation 

 

Screenshot_20200830-130658_Samsung Internet.jpg

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Rangers_no1 said:

Reading that law my scenarios are accurate but it doesn't give a scenario where there's a second touch by the opposition after the GK touches it. Mad.

Personally I read it as:

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.... when it has...

rebounded off the goalpost or crossbar.

 

Imo the above fits the circumstances of our goal and had it been Roofe rather than the defender then the goal shouldn't have stood.

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, bluenoz said:

A conspiracy thread is supposed to be about the things we don't get, no the offside goals we do get. Don't give them fuel.

I try to be balanced mate.

When we take into account the decisions we get wrongly but we're still fucked over hugely then there's nowhere to go for those saying it balances out.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...