OFFSIDE
Images are sometimes not shown due to bandwidth/network limitations. Refreshing the page usually helps.
You are currently reading a thread in /sp/ - Sports
You are currently reading a thread in /sp/ - Sports
lesson n1 in offside: if the ball is passed unintentionally by the defender is still offside
REFBALL
England needs all the refball they can get
>>68526873
Nice damage control
>ABEs on suicide watch
>>68526873
Is this true or shitpost? I'm a stupid American help pls
>>68526873
Lesson 1 in how to get banged: chat shit
So by your logic if defenders pass to his goalkeeper get's intercepted by other team it should be an offside?
It wasn't passed unintentionally though, Williams knowingly hit the ball that way to get it out but fluffed it, that rule only counts for deflections
>>68527083
Its a portugay
So it's a shitpost
>>68526873
he was onside from the initial cross in
>>68526873
Williams went to the ball intentionally though, not Englel's problem that he couldn't head it into the right direction.
>>68527093
>what does unintentionally mean
>>68527093
if the pass is made intentionally then is not offside
>posting the screen of the ball in mid air
When the ball left his foot Vardy was onside
>>68526873
what a load of shit. offside position is only an offence if the ball is played/touched by a team mate
>>68527133
you can see his head making the movement to head the ball outside, unfortunatelly it went the other way... take your blinders for fuck sake
>i understand offside
>euros don't
What's going on here?
by the comments on this thread i can see that none of you ever played football professionally
>>68527325
Exactly, it wasn't deflected or something, he tried to head it away but blew it.
>>68527409
playing football professionally has nothing to do with it. post a link to a rule that confirms it or GTFO
>>68527409
Playing for your freedom when you got off the boat doesn't equate to playing professionally, Alberto Barbosa.
>>68527409
Fuck you I play for Tranmere Rovers
>>68527409
penaldo get out of here
That rule only counts if Vardy had been offside from the cross. He was onside by a mile since the last time an english player touched it was from the cross.
Learn the rules please.
This means that Gerrard "passing" to Suarez should have been ruled out as offside.
Offside only matters when the ball is last contacted by a teammate:
>Offence
>A player in an offside position is only penalised if, at the moment the ball touches or is played by one of his team, he is, in the opinion of the referee, involved in active play by:
>interfering with play or
>interfering with an opponent or
>gaining an advantage by being in that position
>>68527524
I still consider it onside, because I had no other camera's point of view.
>>68527696
It didn't rebound of williams though, he deliberately hit it (admittedly not in that direction) so it's onside
The Portuguese kid is just trolling, no one can be that deluded
>>68527696
It wasn't a rebound and Vardy was onside at the time of the cross
>>68527409
I played for Whitby Town FC.
You're talking shit.
>>68527696
This is a completely pointless picture, because Vardy was onside the last time an England player touched it (from the cross)
>>68527934
He's onside because Williams attempted to play the ball.
>>68528020
I agree, but that doesn't matter anyway because he was already onside from the cross anyway.
>>68528185
Except Vardy wasn't offside when the shot (cross) was taken. So you're blatantly wrong.
>>68527552
He said professionally
>>68528185
>Vardy's team mate did not shoot
>it did not rebound off Williams
>Vardy wasn't previously in an offside position
literally could not be any less applicable
>>68528196
Well it does, as if the ball had come off Smalling's (I think it was him) head. It would have been offside.
>>68527909
i played for cardiff red goat club when i was 14
>>68526873
>Play PES & FIFA
>Keep getting offside
Hello is pic related correct?
there's a difference between deflection and unintentional back pass. he tried to hit the ball but unintentionally went back, of course the ref can't see and doesn't have the time to judge that, vardy gained advantage from the defenders mistake, doesn't matter if he was onside at the moment of his teammates pass, when the ball was "passed" by williams he was offside
>>68529973
>being this salty over another country's win
I guess we just have a 'small mentality' and 'parked the bus. '
>>68528799
Correct. But what also matters is whether the yellow defender passes it or does the ball deflect off him
>>68527325
His incompetence is irrelevant
>>68527325
That's irrelevant, go and learn the rule you mongoloid.
It came off a Welsh player
>>68526873
just because you got beat by iceland you have to shit on teams who won. also it was not offside because ashley williams (do you even know who that is?) headed the ball into his path.
get fucked 3rd world monkey
I love how all the Johnny foreigners get mad as hell when we Win
you'd be throwing ape shit if you had lost because the ref didn't call that handball
>>68528185
Well, reading comprehension is obviously not your strong suit. Let me translate it into lispy jungle-sudaca spanish:
TSUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUU
>>68527083
Vardy was not offside as it was played through by the opposing player
>>68527087
>>68530347
There was absolutely no handball there, even all the cunts in the studio said so.
Jesus, like I haven't hoped strong enough for early portugal exit.
>>68530347
no we wouldn't because we understand the game, unlike you, who can't even watch football regularly cos you don't own a tv
>>68527409
You played and still got it wrong idiot
JUST
if it's a mere deviation then it's offside FROM THE POSITION OF THE ORIGINAL PASS by the colleague, Vardy wasn't offside at the time of the cross, so it wasn't offside period.
>>68530212
>A non-english is making a thread that doesn't goes my way
>Call him a monkey and be a racist cunt
Typical anglo
>>68528185
Even with this rule he wasnt offside when the cross was taken.Troll harder
It's not a deflection so how can it be unintentional
>>68526873
>being this deluded
>>68530477
>>68530530
Nah, that's just rude m8. Not after a close win like that
>>68526873
>Mexican logic
>>68527325
>you can see his head making the movement to head the ball outside
Which means the pass was intentional. Whether he succeeded it in placing it where he wanted is irrelevant. Otherwise anyone who fucks up a back pass, can just claim he meant to play it with more pace, which means the attacker was offside.
>>68530477
He's English anyway he's probably glad
>>68527524
that's bullshit
wat is obvious bait?
>>68527374
Shitposting that's what is going on, burgerbro.
>>68526873
bad pass=/=unintentional contact with the ball
he tried and fucked up
>>68526873
>mongolia in charge of drawing straight lines
>>68531030
if williams did the pass on purpose to the goalkeeper then it shouldn't be consider offside, but he didn't, jesus christ you guys can't see the fucking grey areas, it's only black and white
>>68531066
I don't think that's the point here
>>68531124
If if you were right, which you're not, it's completely irrelevant because Vardy was onside when the cross was made.
>>68526873
player handballs a certain goal out of the net, doesn't get sent off and no penalty
REFBALL
>>68526873
>Doesn't understand football
>Can't draw a straight line on a computer programme
>>68531124
Last touch by an England player and vardy was onside.
As for intention I don't think the ref is going to stop the game to see if Williams meant it.
does anyone have a still from the initial cross? was vardy offside then
>>68531158
in that case it would be true if the ball was deflected by williams, but he tryed to paly the ball, unintentionally send it backwards, seriously i'm getting tired of you fucking dumb turds
Ambiguous rules. You can interpret this play either way.
>>68531251
He intentionally played the ball, that's literally all that matters, just because it did not exactly go where he intended it to doesn't mean it was unintentional.
The act of the pass is what has to be unintentional, not the result of the pass
>>68531124
What he tried to achieve with this header is irrelevant. The only thing of relevance is that he actively and intentionally touched the ball.
>>68531270
You literally can't, unless you're retarded, or pretending to be retarded like OP. The rule only concerns whether or not they meant to pass, or if it was just a deflection off of the player. Whether their pass was successful is a different matter entirely, and plays no part in this rule.
>>68531270
You can't. It's onside and there is absolutely no argument to be made otherwise
>>68531270
finally, of course the ref was 50% right... if he had the technology to evaluate the situation he probably would called it offside
>>68531317
>The rule only concerns whether or not they meant to pass, or if it was just a deflection off of the player
And even if it was just a deflection (it clearly wasn't), it still wouldn't be called offside because then the moment of the cross would count, not the moment of deflection, and Vardy was onside back then
Nice one Portugal
>>68531317
did he meant to pass the ball backwards?
>relying on a referee to interpret intention
sports, foreign policy, healthcare, leave it to yuros to implement a shitty system
>>68531425
He meant to pass the ball, and that's all that matters here. Whether he succeeded in playing the pass where he wanted it, is completely irrelevant.
>>68526873
Watch it m8, you're chatting shit.
Who cares? We would have won anyway.
>>68531425
Yeah lets stop the game and ask him, next time :3
why are portuguese the worst users on /sp/?
>>68527083
portugal shitposting has been intense for the last few days
>>68531270
>At the last touch by an England player Vardy was onside
So how is he offside when an England player didn't play it to him?
He's standing in an offside position, but he's not offside if an England player doesn't touch the ball fucktard.
>>68526873
Obviously williams didn't intend to pass the ball to vardy. Yet he controlled the ball. Control and intent are two very different things and one leads to offside the other doesnt
>>68531568
Still salty about Iceland.
>>68531576
You can keep repeating it all you like, it doesn't make you any less retarded.
> All these Non-English posters shitting on this Protufail of a thread.
T-thanks guys
>>68531736
Not your exclusive language.
>>68531775
Its not about language you retard. Its about nationality.
THAT REBOUNDS, IS DEFLECTED OR IS PLAYED TO HIM FROM A DELIBERATE SAVE BY AN OPPONENT HAVING BEEN IN AN OFFSIDE POSITION THAT REBOUNDS, IS DEFLECTED OR IS PLAYED TO HIM FROM A DELIBERATE SAVE BY AN OPPONENT HAVING BEEN IN AN OFFSIDE POSITION THAT REBOUNDS, IS DEFLECTED OR IS PLAYED TO HIM FROM A DELIBERATE SAVE BY AN OPPONENT HAVING BEEN IN AN OFFSIDE POSITION THAT REBOUNDS, IS DEFLECTED OR IS PLAYED TO HIM FROM A DELIBERATE SAVE BY AN OPPONENT HAVING BEEN IN AN OFFSIDE POSITION THAT REBOUNDS, IS DEFLECTED OR IS PLAYED TO HIM FROM A DELIBERATE SAVE BY AN OPPONENT HAVING BEEN IN AN OFFSIDE POSITION THAT REBOUNDS, IS DEFLECTED OR IS PLAYED TO HIM FROM A DELIBERATE SAVE BY AN OPPONENT HAVING BEEN IN AN OFFSIDE POSITION THAT REBOUNDS, IS DEFLECTED OR IS PLAYED TO HIM FROM A DELIBERATE SAVE BY AN OPPONENT HAVING BEEN IN AN OFFSIDE POSITION THAT REBOUNDS, IS DEFLECTED OR IS PLAYED TO HIM FROM A DELIBERATE SAVE BY AN OPPONENT HAVING BEEN IN AN OFFSIDE POSITION THAT REBOUNDS, IS DEFLECTED OR IS PLAYED TO HIM FROM A DELIBERATE SAVE BY AN OPPONENT HAVING BEEN IN AN OFFSIDE POSITION THAT REBOUNDS, IS DEFLECTED OR IS PLAYED TO HIM FROM A DELIBERATE SAVE BY AN OPPONENT HAVING BEEN IN AN OFFSIDE POSITION
>>68532033
>THAT REBOUNDS
Wasn't a rebound
>IS DEFLECTED
Wasn't a deflection
>IS PLAYED TO HIM FROM A DELIBERATE SAVE BY AN OPPONENT
Wasn't a save
>HAVING BEEN IN AN OFFSIDE POSITION
Vardy was not in an offside position at the time of the cross
0/10 - none of this is applicable
>A player in an offside position receiving the ball from an opponent, who deliberately plays the ball, is not considered to have gained an advantage.
This, however, is.
>>68532033
>FROM A DELIBERATE SAVE
That literally just refers to the goalie, and still wouldn't have counted here, since Vardy was onside the last time an England player touched the ball.
>>68532117
there's a difference between a intentional forward kick but the ball goes backwards and an intentional backwards pass, only you fuckwits can't seem to figure that out
>>68532316
There is, however, that difference is irrelevant to the situation. The only question that the rule poses is "Did the opponent play the ball intentionally". Not "Did he play the ball intentionally in this particular direction".
Williams intended to play the ball. Whether he intended to play it forward, backwards, to the side or wherever else is not relevant.
>>68527152
then how come the Suarez goal at the last WC counted against England that came off Gerrard's head Dago
>>68532461
Based Vardy.
>>68532033
You fucking retard, if it was a deflection the offside should be called in relation to the position he was when the actual pass/cross happened, not in he relation to the position he was at the moment of the deflection.
You have been visited by the based Viking Johann Berg Gudmundsson. First of his name, messiah of Charlton and breaker of Portuguese chains. Good luck will come to you only if you post "Stay salty Pedro" in this thread.
>>68526873
>if the ball is passed unintentionally by the defender is still offside
What? Did they change that rule again?
>>68532582
Stay salty Pedro
>>68532582
Stay pedo Salty
>see the full-retard trollmode OP post
>108 replies and counting
>people arguing about the details
>>68532582
pedo stay salty
>>68532535
intentional backward pass
>>68526873
I wonder if you're really this stupid
>>68526873
this gol is underrated as fuck imo
>>68531124
>you guys can't see the fucking grey areas, it's only black and white
That's exactly what rules are for moron, they make everything black and white so the people responsible to ensure the rules are followed correctly know when to intervene.
According to the rules it was onside, so the goal is legitimate. There is no grey, there's just you shitposting and me giving you another (you). Enjoy it
>Portugal in charge of logic
Thanks for confirming why your country is such a failure.
>>68526873
This is a proof that being a football fan who has watched many matches, doesn't mean that he knows the rule of the game.
Excerpt from FIFA rules 2016
>>68532582
!ordeP ytlas yatS
>>68533151
/thread
>>68532033
>Having been in an offside position that rebounds
I don't think you understand the offside rule, if everyone interpreted it like you basically anytime a goalie saves in a one on one the player will be called offside. During the phase of play Vardy wasn't offside.
The ball literally dropped to him from an opponent, whether he meant it or not doesn't matter because he just got the ball from the opponent.
Literally every goal you've seen where the fucking keeper doesn't notice the striker hanging around and he drops the ball and gets it stolen from him is the same thing. You're only offside from a pass from another of your players.
>>68531410
>blowjob.gif
>>68526873
MS Paintugal
This explains why Portugal are such cheating cunts, they don't actually know the rules so don't realise they're breaking them.
>>68533151
Touched by a team mate.
Key word
>>68535313
Vardy didn't play the ball from his team mate's touch, but from the header of an opponent player.
>>68535581
yeah exactly it's onside
How did the defense bungle that header so badly?
>>68533151
It says "deliberately plays the ball," not "deliberately misplays the ball."
Thus, Vardy clearly offside.
>>68537172
williams deliberately played the ball though, he just fucked it up
Ashley Williams headed itt backwards, or are you trolling me?
>>68537172
Yeah he didn't play the ball deliberately, he just headed it for fun. He was onside when his teammate last touched the ball foward. If you fuck up a clearing header the forward is not considered offside.
Just like in the same way if a goalie saves but deflects it in a one on one the player isn't offside because he wasn't played it by a team mate.
>>68526873
>138 replies
>aquela linha
Merdapost 20/20, bravo. BravÃssimo.
>>68532461
Based vards
>>68526873
It wasn't a deflection m8.
I'm a ref and I would have made the same call.
>>68527409
>plays football professionally
>ends carrier to shitpost on /sp/
what a life
>>68532461
God save the queen
>>68526873
This is offside: A winger crosses the ball low on the ground and the defender tries to block it but into the path of an offside striiker
This is not offside: A player from the other team plays the ball back and it's intercepted by an opponent striker
A goalie drops the ball on the ground while it's not called dead and a striker in an offside position steals it and scores
If you're a defender and you fuck up a clearing header it's not considered a deflection.
>>68538919
he didn't intended to play the ball back can't you see that?!
>>68539245
>he didn't intend to play the ball
He headed it, numbnuts how do you accidentally move in front of smalling and head the ball away without intending to head it.
He fucked up the direction but he intended to play it. Not intending to play it would be a deflection.
>>68539402
of course he intended to play the ball, but not sending it backwards. this has always been taken into account
>>68539792
>He intended to play the ball
It doesn't say that if you intend to play the ball but fuck up, the opponent is offside does it?
he gained advantage from a non forced mistake, and that is unfair
just like when the wales defender deflected a clear goal with his hand the ref could tell that it was unintentional, he should've use the same criteria in this moment
>>68540076
>gained an advantage from a non-forced mistake,
>unfair
99% of goals are because of a non-forced mistake by someone. Please stop posting now.
>>68540285
He intended to play the ball, he just fucked up the direction.
Ref's aren't there to bail out the defence, the attackers always get the benefit of the doubt.
>>68540076
Too bad thats not a rule you impoverished monkey
>68530403
But it was an unintentional play to the attacker so the offside is judged when the England player crossed the ball into the box, and Vardy was STILL in an onside position. So the right call was made, just your rational was wrong
>>68540076
Yeah so if he headed it into his own goal the ref has to bring play back and disallow it because you can't benefit from a non-forced mistake right?
>>68526873
They talked about it afterwards on ITV
The rule is that if the defender intentionally played the ball (like Ashley Williams did, intentionally trying head the ball away), then it's fine.
If the ball comes off the defender as a "deflection" then it's offside.
>>68540347
are you kidding me? so a player makes a foul and you score a goal from the free kick and it's not forced? ahahahhahaha go back to petting your koala
>>68540537
>poortugal can only conceive of goals through flopping
Amazing.
Cant make this up
>>68540537
>makes a foul
What foul? He steps in front of Smalling and heads it towards Vardy.
Offside is not a foul numbnuts, and you can't be offside if an opponent plays the ball to you. Jesus fuck you're retarded.
>>68540537
Can you score an own goal? Do you think anyone intends to score an own goal?
Are you retarded?
The answer to all of these questions are yes.
>>68540609
i'm just making a point, it has nothing to do with game. for fuck sakes, you are exhausting
>>68540666
>making a point
About what? Unforced errors being a foul?
Is logic making your brain hurt, fucktard?
WHY ARE YOU BRINGING UP OW GOALS?
>>68540666
You have poverty of the mind and body. It manifests itself in your neighbirhoods and education.
>>68540726
FOULS ARE NOT UNFORCED ERRORS
>>68540740
Own goals are an advantage from a non-forced mistake. I know this is very hard to understand but you pretend that football is a fairness contest.
>>68540789
>Foul
What foul? Standing in an offside position isn't a foul. And you're not offside if an opponent plays the ball to you. Heading the ball in an attempt to clear it isn't a deflection.
So if it's not a deflection and an opponent plays a ball to you. Go score a free goal.
>>68540805
then why is that when a player deflects the ball is not considered own goal but only if he has the intention to put the ball in?
>>68540968
It wasn't deflected, retard. It was played backwards
>>68540968
in this case if williams netted the ball it was going to be a own goal because he intentionally tried to head the ball but it went the other way
>>68540968
>when a player deflects the ball is not considered an own goal
Deflection is when an opponent kicks the ball at you and you have no control.
The defender deliberately got in front of the opponent and head the ball but screwed up the direction. There's no offside if the ball is played back by an opponent.
He played the ball intentionally, he fucked up but it's not a deflection.
>>68541002
it was not played backwards, playing the ball implies the action of kicking/heading it, and a FUCKING DIRETION! FORWARD OR BACKWARDS.
HE DIDN'T INTEND TO PLAY IT BACKWARDS
>>68541198
Read the rules, champ. Language is extremely important. You don't have a grasp of it if you think what you're saying is true.
>>68541253
i fucking know the rules i played football for 20 years professionally and had this calls made hundreds of times
>>68539792
Does this mean that own goals don't count Because the player didn't mean to play it backwards?
>>68541329
Oh, Ronnie, don't be upset Vardy is more creative than you.
This is the new generation, learn to accept it.
>>68541198
>He didn't intend to play it backwards
That's not the criteria, it's whether he intended to play the ball. It's not a deflection so he intended to play the ball, he didn't block the ball into Vardy's path, he headed the ball to keep the ball away from the player behind him.
He intended to head the ball and he headed it. So he intended to play the ball.
>>68541329
Yeah and my dad owns Fifa so I know better.
nice troll portubro
netted yourself almost 200 replies
>>68541543
>implying he didn't start trolling when it dawned on him he was wrong.
This was educatuonal to say the least
>>68526873
Action was too fast to see who passed the ball, the ref says it's offside in 90% of thoses situations. So Portubro is right, REFBALL
It's obvious when you watch the entire game, the anglos are clearly advantaged
I'm American and even I know you're wrong
>>68545658
Like we care about t.amerifatburger's opinion
Go build ur faggot wall and leave us alone
>>68545931
but if I leave you alone how am I supposed to spread freedom?
>>68546092
We don't even want freedom, we're good
