Hi there, Guest! Login Register


Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
At home against Hearts 17/02/18
#61
(02-19-2018, 10:11 AM)Deldad7 Wrote: Regarding the second goal, Lafferty is behind the goal line which means he is classed as off the field of play and no longer can be considered as keeping Shalk onside. Therefore it comes down to the last defender on the ground and whether Shalk was behind in line with him or not which the linesman clearly felt he wasnt.

Disagree, the player is very obviously still active and therefore is playing Schalk on. The fact that he's off the pitch has no bearing, he's even holding onto Schalk and tries to clear the ball off the line. How can anyone claim he's not active?????
 
Reply
#62
(02-19-2018, 10:11 AM)Deldad7 Wrote: Regarding the second goal, Lafferty is behind the goal line which means he is classed as off the field of play and no longer can be considered as keeping Shalk onside. Therefore it comes down to the last defender on the ground and whether Shalk was behind in line with him or not which the linesman clearly felt he wasnt.

Lafferty has to get the referees permission to leave the field to be classed as inactive. He's active- see the Van Nistelrooy goal against Italy in 2008 as an example with Panucci off the field of play.
Quote:God bless the Stag Men and Children.
 
Reply
#63
(02-19-2018, 10:21 AM)Despot Wrote: Lafferty has to get the referees permission to leave the field to be classed as inactive. He's active- see the Van Nistelrooy goal against Italy in 2008 as an example with Panucci off the field of play.

Googled it and it states that if the player is behind the goal line they are classed as inactive in play.
 
Reply
#64
(02-19-2018, 10:47 AM)Deldad7 Wrote: Googled it and it states that if the player is behind the goal line they are classed as inactive in play.

Instead of googling it, have a look at the incident. Laferty comes back onto the field of play when trying to clear the ball of the line!

Love the fact you're googling the rules.......maybe Thompson and his assistants should try that!

Here's a link for the highlights as you've obviously not seen it again.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/scotland/43100567
 
Reply
#65
This might sound daft - but if he can be classed as 'inactive' for being over the line, then why is he allowed to clear the ball off the line?
 
Reply
#66
(02-19-2018, 11:45 AM)ELincognito Wrote: This might sound daft - but if he can be classed as 'inactive' for being over the line, then why is he allowed to clear the ball off the line?

Regardless of Lafferty, there was another guy lying flat out with his leg against the back post.
 
Reply
#67
(02-19-2018, 12:17 PM)Pete The Jakey Wrote: Regardless of Lafferty, there was another guy lying flat out with his leg against the back post.

Doesn't really answer the question though does it? I know there was a player lying down - I think if you look a few pages back I brought up that exact point...
 
Reply
#68
(02-19-2018, 02:16 PM)ELincognito Wrote: Doesn't really answer the question though does it? I know there was a player lying down - I think if you look a few pages back I brought up that exact point...

Yes, and I agree with you. The Lafferty question is irrelevant as there was another player playing Schalk on side.
 
Reply
#69
The Lafferty question is relevant if you want to argue there's two playing Schalk onside, not just one Wink

Not disagreeing with yourself Pete, but to carry on Elincognito's point, I dont understand how it can be argued that Lafferty isn't involved in play - given he's the player who cleared the ball, giving rise to the argument it didnt cross the line.
I've heard folk say "aye Schalk was offside because Lafferty is behind the goalline, but it doesnt matter because the ball never crossed the line" - maybe so, but if it didnt cross the line thats entirely because Lafferty was behind the goalline.

Ultimately doesn't matter, I'm just getting really tired of incidents like this (potentially) costing us points.
 
Reply
#70
(02-19-2018, 02:23 PM)staggie1746 Wrote: The Lafferty question is relevant if you want to argue there's two playing Schalk onside, not just one Wink

Not disagreeing with yourself Pete, but to carry on Elincognito's point, I dont understand how it can be argued that Lafferty isn't involved in play - given he's the player who cleared the ball, giving rise to the argument it didnt cross the line.
I've heard folk say "aye Schalk was offside because Lafferty is behind the goalline, but it doesnt matter because the ball never crossed the line" - maybe so, but if it didnt cross the line thats entirely because Lafferty was behind the goalline.

Ultimately doesn't matter, I'm just getting really tired of incidents like this (potentially) costing us points.

VAR required?
 
Reply
#71
(02-19-2018, 02:29 PM)Pete The Jakey Wrote: VAR required?

Depends - if "these things even themselves out" over the season, we're due a series of really dodgy game-changing decisions going for us, so VAR can stay away Tongue

Once balance has been restored, aye bring it on.
 
Reply
#72
(02-19-2018, 02:29 PM)Pete The Jakey Wrote: VAR required?

The ball DID cross the line Linesman on our side west stand a total P with his decisions
 
Reply
#73
I'm happy with progress. We've beaten Dundee soundly, held a good Hearts team to a draw and really should have won the game. That didn't happen, not because of the 'offside' decision but because DKD has not yet developed the confidence to take time to place the ball in the net from 8 yds at this level and not for the first time this season.

Big plus for me was the impact Tansey had when he came on. He dictated the game from that point on and was smart enough to take a yellow to prevent a breakaway. Surely a target signing for next season given that he's not broken into the Aberdeen team and as time goes on it gets less likely?

N'gog not nearly fit yet. Another possible for next season???? Given the severity of his knee injury and that he's been seen favouring that leg as a game progresses he may want a season at this level to recuperate. we've a track record of this. Just thinking out loud......
 
Reply
#74
N'gog not nearly fit yet. Another possible for next season???? Given the severity of his knee injury and that he's been seen favouring that leg as a game progresses he may want a season at this level to recuperate. we've a track record of this. Just thinking out loud......





[/quote])

Shocking tackle on him that eventually had to make him leave the field of play,straight leg ,studs up. Right in front of Thomson,the Hibs player then pretended he was hurt ,and Thomson fell for it. We got a throw in and lost a player!
 
Reply
#75
(02-19-2018, 08:31 PM)tattiedave Wrote: N'gog not nearly fit yet.  Another possible for next season????  Given the severity of his knee injury and that he's been seen favouring that leg as a game progresses he may want a season at this level to recuperate.  we've a track record of this.  Just thinking out loud......
)

Shocking tackle on him that eventually had to make him leave the field of play,straight leg ,studs up. Right in front of Thomson,the Hibs player then pretended he was hurt ,and Thomson fell for it. We got a throw in and lost a player!
[/quote]

Now Dave, I know you're a hearts man and as a result, dislike Hibs, but you can't possibly blame a Hibs player when it was Hearts we were playing!
 
Reply
#76
(02-19-2018, 07:21 PM)the reaper Wrote: We've beaten Dundee soundly, held a good Hearts team to a draw and really should have won the game. That didn't happen, not because of the 'offside' decision but because DKD has not yet developed the confidence to take time to place the ball in the net from 8 yds at this level and not for the first time this season.
Harsh on DKD who has been excellent and one of our best players in his first season in senior football. Especially considering it was Dow who missed the chance and not him!

(02-19-2018, 07:21 PM)the reaper Wrote: N'gog not nearly fit yet. Another possible for next season???? Given the severity of his knee injury and that he's been seen favouring that leg as a game progresses he may want a season at this level to recuperate. we've a track record of this. Just thinking out loud......
He's still absolutely the best option up front even unfit. Him and Schalk seem to link up well. Hopefully we stay up and he fires us to the top 6 next year! Considering he's only 28/29 and hadnt played in a while, he'll likely be up to speed before the split (or maybe that wishful thinking)
 
Reply
#77
(02-19-2018, 08:31 PM)tattiedave Wrote: N'gog not nearly fit yet. Another possible for next season???? Given the severity of his knee injury and that he's been seen favouring that leg as a game progresses he may want a season at this level to recuperate. we've a track record of this. Just thinking out loud......
)

Shocking tackle on him that eventually had to make him leave the field of play,straight leg ,studs up. Right in front of Thomson,the Hibs player then pretended he was hurt ,and Thomson fell for it. We got a throw in and lost a player!
[/quote]

N'gog had cramp. There was a worse tackle on O'Brien earlier with both feet off the ground and studs up. Nothing done.

(02-19-2018, 10:03 PM)MarkPockets Wrote: Harsh on DKD who has been excellent and one of our best players in his first season in senior football. Especially considering it was Dow who missed the chance and not him!

He's still absolutely the best option up front even unfit. Him and Schalk seem to link up well. Hopefully we stay up and he fires us to the top 6 next year! Considering he's only 28/29 and hadnt played in a while, he'll likely be up to speed before the split (or maybe that wishful thinking)

DKD blasted the ball over the bar when it could have been in the back of the net. Watch the highlights it wasn't Dow.

There's more to come IMO from DKD, Schalk and N'gog. That's why I'd like to be sure all are signed up for next season.
 
Reply
#78
(02-19-2018, 10:09 PM)the reaper Wrote: )

That's why I'd like to be sure all are signed up for next season.

Much as I'd love this, if we're in the championship all three will be off.
 
Reply
#79
(02-19-2018, 03:40 PM)Ross shire buff Wrote: The ball DID cross the line Linesman on our side west stand a total P with his decisions

That linesman got most of the offside decisions correct. The only one he got wrong was when he did not flag one of our strikers offside (forget who) when coming back to head the ball from a goalkick.

(02-19-2018, 10:03 PM)MarkPockets Wrote: Harsh on DKD who has been excellent and one of our best players in his first season in senior football.

Only because most of the rest of the team have been poor. DKD seems to manage around one decent game in six. On Saturday he was poor. Gave away the ball far too often, was unable to deliver an accurate cross, and the sitter he missed was a shocker - at least he knew that.

(02-19-2018, 02:18 PM)Pete The Jakey Wrote: Yes, and I agree with you. The Lafferty question is irrelevant as there was another player playing Schalk on side.

Not irrelevant. The defender on the ground possibly was level and playing Schalk on, but for him to be onside, Lafferty needed to count as well. But as Lafferty was still most definitely active, then he was playing Schalk on.
 
Reply
#80
(02-20-2018, 12:00 AM)Five Minutes from the Ground Wrote: That linesman got most of the offside decisions correct. The only one he got wrong was when he did not flag one of our strikers offside (forget who) when coming back to head the ball from a goalkick.


Only because most of the rest of the team have been poor. DKD seems to manage around one decent game in six. On Saturday he was poor. Gave away the ball far too often, was unable to deliver an accurate cross, and the sitter he missed was a shocker - at least he knew that.


Not irrelevant. The defender on the ground possibly was level and playing Schalk on, but for him to be onside, Lafferty needed to count as well. But as Lafferty was still most definitely active, then he was playing Schalk on.

Disagreement here.
Not sure you are off-side, if you receive the ball from a goal kick?

DKD did ok, pity he lashed at that one from a few yards out, did the hard part, then blasted over, plenty skill in him, just needs to learn a bit.

Pleased to see Tansey did quite well when he came on, hoping for great things from him.
 
Reply
  


Forum Jump:


Browsing: 1 Guest(s)