• Dear Guest, Please note that adult content is not permitted on this forum. We have had our Google ads disabled at times due to some posts that were found from some time ago. Please do not post adult content and if you see any already on the forum, please report the post so that we can deal with it. Adult content is allowed in the glory hole - you will have to request permission to access it. Thanks, scara

OMT - Tottenham Hotspur vs Ajax

Man of the match

  • Total voters
    63
  • Poll closed .
Kandi1977 said:
The rule IS very simple
Click to expand...

Except its not, at all. Its not a factual on/off rule as it used to be.

Its now a thought experiment as to who was doing what in which phase and whether they were interfering/impacting at any given point.

Its an opinion piece with no real right or wrong.

Ive seen countless goals given where an offside player has been deemed to not be effecting play but they are clearly drawing attention from the Keeper/Defenders. How can that be right?
 
nayimfromthehalfwayline said:
Except its not, at all. Its not a factual on/off rule as it used to be.

Its now a thought experiment as to who was doing what in which phase and whether they were interfering/impacting at any given point.

Its an opinion piece with no real right or wrong.

Ive seen countless goals given where an offside player has been deemed to not be effecting play but they are clearly drawing attention from the Keeper/Defenders. How can that be right?
Click to expand...
I beg to differ. The rule is simple enough. Most rules in football are subjective, so I really don't see what the issue is. Unless you receive the ball or is right in the path off the ball, you're not interfering, and not in a punishable offside position.
 
Kandi1977 said:
This is hilarious! You honestly think that you should be able to pick and choose which attacker you play offside?? My word! Yes, that sounds like a real improvement to the rule! Hahaha! Incredible! So a player running from the deep, being 10 meters onside, should be flagged, because the defenders played another attacker, on the other side of the pitch, offside.

How about that for improvement!
Seriously????
Click to expand...

The issue with it is that the guy who was offside if he isn't interfering he should at least get onside once... he was offside for the whole move and even ran to the ball.

You can't defend that as a defender as you can only deal with the man your marking

Dont forget the player getting the ball was on the back of verts foot so was borderline offside too, but okay don by trippier who played his player offside, but he wasn't classed as involved in play
 
Kandi1977 said:
I beg to differ. The rule is simple enough. Most rules in football are subjective, so I really don't see what the issue is. Unless you receive the ball or is right in the path off the ball, you're not interfering, and not in a punishable offside position.
Click to expand...

Except when you are in the keepers eyeline, or in space that will be a golden spot in the next phase so the defender needs to keep half-marking you - you ARE interfering with play.
 
Kandi1977 said:
I beg to differ. The rule is simple enough. Most rules in football are subjective, so I really don't see what the issue is. Unless you receive the ball or is right in the path off the ball, you're not interfering, and not in a punishable offside position.
Click to expand...

But that non interfering player can stand in front of the keeper or run in a direction that takes a defender with them so thereby having an impact

Remember Lampard at City away jumping over the ball after a shot... given as not interfering yet he was jumping over the ball.
 
nayimfromthehalfwayline said:
Except when you are in the keepers eyeline, or in space that will be a golden spot in the next phase so the defender needs to keep half-marking you - you ARE interfering with play.
Click to expand...
Every player on the pitch is in the eyeline of the GK (unless he's facing the wrong way....). I really really don't see any issue with the rule. The goal was perfectly ok. IF van de Beek had squared it to the other attacker, it would have been offside, as he then would have gained an advantage from originally being in an offside position.
 
Theres a big difference between a midfielder 20 yards away in the keeper field of vision and an attacker in the box 5 yards away.

Its cool, you dont see a problem - but plenty do.
 
We should learn from our past European experience when we go to Ajax for the second leg. We have beaten Ajax home and away in the 1982 Cup Winners' Cup Round 1 match. So we can be inspired by the fact we have beaten Ajax away before.

We can also learn from our 2008 UEFA Cup Round of 16 against another Dutch team PSV. We lost 1-0 at home to PSV but won the second leg away 1-0. We would have won that match in the penalties if that idiot Jenas did not miss our 5th penalty with a stupid fancy kick. With our poor record in the penalties, we should do all we can to win the match in normal time against Ajax.
 
Last edited:
We are Tottenham said:
This is perfection..off course they are interfering with play the goalkeeper in this case has no idea if there is a pass or shot. It really is perfection..less someone can explain different.
Click to expand...

It’s just how the rules “evolved” to ensure more goals and easier decisions for refs (and probably make it better for TV)

In real life: A player can be interfering with play for a ton of reasons. Ultimately any player that near the goal must have an effect on defenders in some way.

Interpretation by refs: Player is only interfering if they touch the ball, attempt to play the ball, touch a defender who could play the ball or cross the line of sight of the goalkeeper.

It is how it is. The guy *was* having an effect on play, but not in a way that gets penalised. Arguably the defence should have held the line regardless.
 
elyid said:
It’s just how the rules “evolved” to ensure more goals and easier decisions for refs (and probably make it better for TV)

In real life: A player can be interfering with play for a ton of reasons. Ultimately any player that near the goal must have an effect on defenders in some way.

Interpretation by refs: Player is only interfering if they touch the ball, attempt to play the ball, touch a defender who could play the ball or cross the line of sight of the goalkeeper.

It is how it is. The guy *was* having an effect on play, but not in a way that gets penalised. Arguably the defence should have held the line regardless.
Click to expand...

They should do what you have to do in rugby... you have to get inside before attacking again
 
DeanoAustin said:
Poch is talking bollox. Messi strolled around for a lot of that game and didn’t work nearly as hard as some of our lads. He just happens to be on another planet talent wise.
Click to expand...

Before he took control of the game I thought his passing was sloppy. Only watched the second half mind.
 
Bedfordspurs said:
But that non interfering player can stand in front of the keeper or run in a direction that takes a defender with them so thereby having an impact

Remember Lampard at City away jumping over the ball after a shot... given as not interfering yet he was jumping over the ball.
Click to expand...

That was before the rule change, Lampard would now be given offside as he was in the GK’s eye-line.
 
mudshark said:
Agreed. The truism that the next game is always the most important has never deserved sharper focus IMO. Absolutely imperative for me we take all three points. Can't risk another end-of-season fold-up bringing back memories of SJP, 2016. There's a danger of that, I think, if things don't go our way in Amsterdam. Just for once, let's try and do it the easy way.
Click to expand...

No? Well, ok, please yourselves.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back