Torquay United Fans Forum

ferrarilover wrote:Eunan is ONSIDE. The position of the goalkeeper is irrelevant. Law 11 - a player is offside if he is nearer his opponents goal line than both the ball and the second last defender at the time the ball is played. This is the Prima Facie rule, there are riders to this, but none are relevant here.
The salient point is that to be offside, Eunan MUST be nearer the OxforD goal line than the ball when Rene passes it to him. Freeze frame the FLS and see that Eunan is clearly level with Rene when the ball is played. Another piss poor decision costing a team two valuable points.

Oxford's first is A) Hugely lucky (no complaints, just an observation) and B) A very clear foul by Rendell on Bobby.

Bobby at fault for their second, he came then stopped. Having come that far, he needs to fly out with his fists and just do what he can. As we saw, if the striker gets it, it's in.

Morris is VERY unlucky. They both go for the ball, it's not dangerous, and their bloke gets as much of him as he does of their guy. Their bloke then retaliates, so really, if anyone goes off, it's the Oxford guy.

I said it at the time and I stand by it now, Tai's shot is going over when ye keeper palms it in, cheers then.

Matt.

cambgull wrote:It's already been worked out that it's because of there being only one player behind the ball. So it is offside.

Jeff wrote:I think if we were to watch the Eunan offside again, we'd see it was probably the correct decision.

Yes their defender was on the line, but it's not his position that is important - its that of the keeper. When Rene played the ball to Eunan, they were both goal-side of the keeper and thus there was only one player between them and the goal. The only question really is whether the pass was forward, and from where I was I think it marginally was.

leetufc wrote:Watching the Manchester derby this afternoon, and I am shocked that Kompany got sent off for that tackle. Yes, he used both feet and his studs were slightly showing, but there was no malice whatsoever, and he clearly won the ball and got none of the man. I don't even see it as a foul, let alone a red card. I know that people will say by the letter of law he had to go, but for me that's a ridiculous comment. Referees need to show some common sense and realise that tacking is all part of the game, and the rules should be use as a guideline, not pure black and white fact. Remarkable decision in my eyes.

Is this a further sign that tackling in football is being eradicated?

And yet again Chris Foy is making the headlines for a contentious refereeing decision this season. When are refs going to take account for bad performances like managers and players are?

leetufc wrote:I know the ref only gets one chance, and has to make a call based on one view, but for me it's too quick a call from Foy. I have always said if a ref is going to send a player off, he should give himself at least ten seconds to calm himself and have a think about the decision and what just happened. Foy didn't, and too many referees don't. He also showed inconsistency moments later in not booking Giggs for a challenge from behind, which I personally also don't think is a booking, but by the letter of the law it is. Another case of the players reputation preceding them, as in the Lampard situation a few weeks ago.

I am planning on taking some refereeing courses when I have some free time in the near future, so maybe I'll take a different view then, but having spoke to my friend who is a qualified local referee, he called it the same as I did. Yes, his studs were showing, but his feet are on the ground when he made contact.

Jerry wrote: His only managerial job? Did you miss his six years at Leyton Orient?

northyorkshiregull wrote:What a bunch of bed wetters there are on this site.Were the board supposed to take on the man who came top of the poll on here?Every manager with experience has failed at one club or another otherwise they wouldnt be looking for work.