MATCHWATCH : Rotherham united (a)

335 posts
User avatar
Zip
Hob Nob Legend
Posts: 22408
Joined: 30 Dec 2017 16:39

Re: MATCHWATCH : Rotherham united (a)

by Zip » 28 Feb 2021 10:17

SCIAG Was the exceptional goal that Rotherham scored at the start of the second half offside? It looked good to me, but the angle wasn’t great.


Definitely strayed offside during the build up.

Royals and Racers
Hob Nob Regular
Posts: 4740
Joined: 05 Jan 2012 16:48

Re: MATCHWATCH : Rotherham united (a)

by Royals and Racers » 28 Feb 2021 10:24

SCIAG Was the exceptional goal that Rotherham scored at the start of the second half offside? It looked good to me, but the angle wasn’t great.

I thought exactly the same at the time, but can`t find a replay to confirm.
Edit just seen it on ifollow highlights- he was in an offside position when the ball was kicked but it came off a Royals player, so not sure how that effects it ?

Stranded
Hob Nob Subscriber
Hob Nob Subscriber
Posts: 19587
Joined: 14 Apr 2004 12:42
Location: Propping up the bar in the Nags

Re: MATCHWATCH : Rotherham united (a)

by Stranded » 28 Feb 2021 11:38

Royals and Racers
SCIAG Was the exceptional goal that Rotherham scored at the start of the second half offside? It looked good to me, but the angle wasn’t great.

I thought exactly the same at the time, but can`t find a replay to confirm.
Edit just seen it on ifollow highlights- he was in an offside position when the ball was kicked but it came off a Royals player, so not sure how that effects it ?


If he was offside when the ball was kicked by a teammate then it coming off a defender now has no impact and he is off.

User avatar
Franchise FC
Hob Nob Super-Addict
Posts: 10855
Joined: 22 May 2007 16:24
Location: Relocated to LA

Re: MATCHWATCH : Rotherham united (a)

by Franchise FC » 28 Feb 2021 11:56

Stranded
Royals and Racers
SCIAG Was the exceptional goal that Rotherham scored at the start of the second half offside? It looked good to me, but the angle wasn’t great.

I thought exactly the same at the time, but can`t find a replay to confirm.
Edit just seen it on ifollow highlights- he was in an offside position when the ball was kicked but it came off a Royals player, so not sure how that effects it ?


If he was offside when the ball was kicked by a teammate then it coming off a defender now has no impact and he is off.

The vagaries of the current laws is such that I know that if the defender 'plays' the ball it can render the original offside void, but I don't think I understand what the definition of 'plays' has now become. (see the Mings vs Man City discussions)
Is a deflection enough to have 'played' the ball ?
If the defender attempts to tackle an opponent who plays it almost at the same time as the defender ...... etc, etc,

User avatar
Snowflake Royal
Hob Nob Legend
Posts: 39398
Joined: 20 Jun 2017 17:51

Re: MATCHWATCH : Rotherham united (a)

by Snowflake Royal » 28 Feb 2021 12:00

Taking another look, it does seem marginally off.


SCIAG
Hob Nob Addict
Posts: 6362
Joined: 17 Jun 2008 17:43
Location: Liburd for England

Re: MATCHWATCH : Rotherham united (a)

by SCIAG » 28 Feb 2021 12:12

Stranded
Royals and Racers
SCIAG Was the exceptional goal that Rotherham scored at the start of the second half offside? It looked good to me, but the angle wasn’t great.

I thought exactly the same at the time, but can`t find a replay to confirm.
Edit just seen it on ifollow highlights- he was in an offside position when the ball was kicked but it came off a Royals player, so not sure how that effects it ?


If he was offside when the ball was kicked by a teammate then it coming off a defender now has no impact and he is off.

If it was deflected off an opposition player then yes, he is offside having gained an advantage. If it was deliberately played by an opposition defender then it's onside.

Nameless
Hob Nob Addict
Posts: 8851
Joined: 23 Aug 2013 12:25

Re: MATCHWATCH : Rotherham united (a)

by Nameless » 28 Feb 2021 12:15

Zip
Royals and Racers
Nameless
A freeze frame showing someone ‘just’ offside is IMHO far from ‘getting away with one’. Decisions should be made in real time, by eye. The game is fast descending into farce because people think it is a suitable sport to break down to millimetres and fractions of seconds.

What !!!! it shows the assistant wasn`t doing his job properly. We have had others that have gone against us, so it does even out over time but Morrison was offside.


100% agreed. If he’s offside by small margins he is still offside. Junior is very sharp on such things and called it straight away. I was surprised the Rotherham commentary team didn’t question it.



There is a huge difference between being offside in w y which it is reasonable for. Human to detect in real,time and being offside in a way which requires freeze frames, millimetre perfect poitioning of lines and analysing to individual frames. Someone claiming Morrison was definitely offside based on still image not taken in line with the last defender doesn’t equate to a linesman failing to do his job. We’ve made officiating almost impossible by imposing crazy levels of ‘accuracy’ which are unnecessary. Of course if someone is fractionally offside they are technically offside but my belief is allowing officials to call things by eye and allowing a sensible degree of tolerance makes for a better game. Offside should be about preventing a player gain8ng an unfair advantage and your toe being a millimetre beyond a defender does not do that.

Royals and Racers
Hob Nob Regular
Posts: 4740
Joined: 05 Jan 2012 16:48

Re: MATCHWATCH : Rotherham united (a)

by Royals and Racers » 28 Feb 2021 12:22

Nameless
Zip
Royals and Racers What !!!! it shows the assistant wasn`t doing his job properly. We have had others that have gone against us, so it does even out over time but Morrison was offside.


100% agreed. If he’s offside by small margins he is still offside. Junior is very sharp on such things and called it straight away. I was surprised the Rotherham commentary team didn’t question it.



There is a huge difference between being offside in w y which it is reasonable for. Human to detect in real,time and being offside in a way which requires freeze frames, millimetre perfect poitioning of lines and analysing to individual frames. Someone claiming Morrison was definitely offside based on still image not taken in line with the last defender doesn’t equate to a linesman failing to do his job. We’ve made officiating almost impossible by imposing crazy levels of ‘accuracy’ which are unnecessary. Of course if someone is fractionally offside they are technically offside but my belief is allowing officials to call things by eye and allowing a sensible degree of tolerance makes for a better game. Offside should be about preventing a player gain8ng an unfair advantage and your toe being a millimetre beyond a defender does not do that.

I understand what you are saying but realistically the only way us punters can check- not being in line as an assistant is supposed to be- is to check the coverage. In fact on this occasion there were 3 Reading players behind the last defender who did raise his arm as if to say "he`s off"

User avatar
Snowflake Royal
Hob Nob Legend
Posts: 39398
Joined: 20 Jun 2017 17:51

Re: MATCHWATCH : Rotherham united (a)

by Snowflake Royal » 28 Feb 2021 14:30

Nameless
Zip
Royals and Racers What !!!! it shows the assistant wasn`t doing his job properly. We have had others that have gone against us, so it does even out over time but Morrison was offside.


100% agreed. If he’s offside by small margins he is still offside. Junior is very sharp on such things and called it straight away. I was surprised the Rotherham commentary team didn’t question it.



There is a huge difference between being offside in w y which it is reasonable for. Human to detect in real,time and being offside in a way which requires freeze frames, millimetre perfect poitioning of lines and analysing to individual frames. Someone claiming Morrison was definitely offside based on still image not taken in line with the last defender doesn’t equate to a linesman failing to do his job. We’ve made officiating almost impossible by imposing crazy levels of ‘accuracy’ which are unnecessary. Of course if someone is fractionally offside they are technically offside but my belief is allowing officials to call things by eye and allowing a sensible degree of tolerance makes for a better game. Offside should be about preventing a player gain8ng an unfair advantage and your toe being a millimetre beyond a defender does not do that.

A linesman could definitely have seen that. It wasn't mms. But I can see why it might be missed.


User avatar
bcubed
Hob Nob Super-Addict
Posts: 11439
Joined: 30 Oct 2004 18:16
Location: Would do better with a stick of rhubarb

Re: MATCHWATCH : Rotherham united (a)

by bcubed » 28 Feb 2021 15:14

Nameless
Zip
Royals and Racers What !!!! it shows the assistant wasn`t doing his job properly. We have had others that have gone against us, so it does even out over time but Morrison was offside.


100% agreed. If he’s offside by small margins he is still offside. Junior is very sharp on such things and called it straight away. I was surprised the Rotherham commentary team didn’t question it.



There is a huge difference between being offside in w y which it is reasonable for. Human to detect in real,time and being offside in a way which requires freeze frames, millimetre perfect poitioning of lines and analysing to individual frames. Someone claiming Morrison was definitely offside based on still image not taken in line with the last defender doesn’t equate to a linesman failing to do his job. We’ve made officiating almost impossible by imposing crazy levels of ‘accuracy’ which are unnecessary. Of course if someone is fractionally offside they are technically offside but my belief is allowing officials to call things by eye and allowing a sensible degree of tolerance makes for a better game. Offside should be about preventing a player gain8ng an unfair advantage and your toe being a millimetre beyond a defender does not do that.


Totally agree with the sentiment although really not sure of the answer.

Certainly the balance needs changing. We want to see more goals so why not give benefit of the doubt to the attacker? Perhaps it should require a clear gap between the attacking player and the last defender before it counts as offside?

User avatar
Snowflake Royal
Hob Nob Legend
Posts: 39398
Joined: 20 Jun 2017 17:51

Re: MATCHWATCH : Rotherham united (a)

by Snowflake Royal » 28 Feb 2021 16:32

bcubed
Nameless
Zip
100% agreed. If he’s offside by small margins he is still offside. Junior is very sharp on such things and called it straight away. I was surprised the Rotherham commentary team didn’t question it.



There is a huge difference between being offside in w y which it is reasonable for. Human to detect in real,time and being offside in a way which requires freeze frames, millimetre perfect poitioning of lines and analysing to individual frames. Someone claiming Morrison was definitely offside based on still image not taken in line with the last defender doesn’t equate to a linesman failing to do his job. We’ve made officiating almost impossible by imposing crazy levels of ‘accuracy’ which are unnecessary. Of course if someone is fractionally offside they are technically offside but my belief is allowing officials to call things by eye and allowing a sensible degree of tolerance makes for a better game. Offside should be about preventing a player gain8ng an unfair advantage and your toe being a millimetre beyond a defender does not do that.


Totally agree with the sentiment although really not sure of the answer.

Certainly the balance needs changing. We want to see more goals so why not give benefit of the doubt to the attacker? Perhaps it should require a clear gap between the attacking player and the last defender before it counts as offside?

Won't work with vAR because you'll continue to get mm decisions on whether it's a clear gap and that gives the attacker the ability to stretch a toe out backwards to stay inside and gain about3 / 4 ft on now

User avatar
bcubed
Hob Nob Super-Addict
Posts: 11439
Joined: 30 Oct 2004 18:16
Location: Would do better with a stick of rhubarb

Re: MATCHWATCH : Rotherham united (a)

by bcubed » 28 Feb 2021 16:49

Snowflake Royal
bcubed
Nameless

There is a huge difference between being offside in w y which it is reasonable for. Human to detect in real,time and being offside in a way which requires freeze frames, millimetre perfect poitioning of lines and analysing to individual frames. Someone claiming Morrison was definitely offside based on still image not taken in line with the last defender doesn’t equate to a linesman failing to do his job. We’ve made officiating almost impossible by imposing crazy levels of ‘accuracy’ which are unnecessary. Of course if someone is fractionally offside they are technically offside but my belief is allowing officials to call things by eye and allowing a sensible degree of tolerance makes for a better game. Offside should be about preventing a player gain8ng an unfair advantage and your toe being a millimetre beyond a defender does not do that.


Totally agree with the sentiment although really not sure of the answer.

Certainly the balance needs changing. We want to see more goals so why not give benefit of the doubt to the attacker? Perhaps it should require a clear gap between the attacking player and the last defender before it counts as offside?

Won't work with vAR because you'll continue to get mm decisions on whether it's a clear gap and that gives the attacker the ability to stretch a toe out backwards to stay inside and gain about3 / 4 ft on now


I know and you and I have debated this before. I just think this would be better than the current situation and you could just use torso as the measuring point. There would still be mm decisions but if they’ve only just avoided a daylight gap because of a mm I’m less sympathetic than the current toe just over the line, where as Nameless said no real advantage has been gained.

User avatar
Franchise FC
Hob Nob Super-Addict
Posts: 10855
Joined: 22 May 2007 16:24
Location: Relocated to LA

Re: MATCHWATCH : Rotherham united (a)

by Franchise FC » 28 Feb 2021 20:26

Stick with 15 second rule.

If you can’t tell within that time it’s the equivalent of umpires call, so goes with the original decision


User avatar
Franchise FC
Hob Nob Super-Addict
Posts: 10855
Joined: 22 May 2007 16:24
Location: Relocated to LA

Re: MATCHWATCH : Rotherham united (a)

by Franchise FC » 28 Feb 2021 20:30

Am I alone in being extremely irate when I hear the words ‘first contact’ ?

Assume there’s contact outside the box. If the victim keeps going and scores is the game brought back ... no
Assume there’s contact outside the box. The victim keeps going and i for more than a few seconds and is then taken out. Is the game brought back for the first foul ... no
Why isn’t the point of reference the LAST point of contact ?

URZZZZ
Hob Nob Addict
Posts: 7279
Joined: 20 Apr 2013 18:30

Re: MATCHWATCH : Rotherham united (a)

by URZZZZ » 01 Mar 2021 09:38

Zip
URZZZZ
Snowflake Royal Me. It doesn't show signs of any lessons being learnt or significant improvements.


Lessons being learnt from what? We last dropped points from a winning position against Millwall where the general consensus was that his subs were too “attacking”, I.e bringing off a defensive “RB” for a more attacking one. Surely, in terms of bringing on more defensive players off the bench this time and us holding on, it worked to an extent?

Result was the main thing anyway. With wins comes momentum , which brings about better decisions on/off the pitch by both the team and the staff. Our team as a whole didn’t win anywhere near enough games 1-0 for a long period so it’s a pleasing change we can grind out these victories that have been so lacking for so long and are indicative of a promotion winning team

Can’t afford to waste this win though over the next few games


Apart from not bringing on Puscas for Joao the subs were better yesterday. TMac was excellent when he came on and was very unlucky to be dropped in the first place.
Pauno is still very reluctant to make changes when things are not going well though.


I’d argue Baldock for Joao would make more sense in closing a game out - as he’s more energetic, more experienced and more intelligent than Puscas. IIRC he did a decent job closing the game out at Huddersfield a few weeks back. Obviously less of a goal threat but that’s not as important when holding onto a lead

Unfortunately for McIntyre, you knew the one game we had a poor defensive display, Moore was going to end up back in the team; regardless of how many games he played well prior to it

335 posts

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot], Google [Bot], Mid Sussex Royal, royal67 and 428 guests

It is currently 28 Mar 2024 16:29