Preston North End v Manchester United

[TomPNE94]

Bollocks, how can he be certain he is in an offside position? He has to anticipate a touch, it should have been ruled out.

 

[silkyman]

True but I'd still want my goalie to do his main job though. The ball was there to be saved, just save it. Or maybe he's just a shite goalie and that was his 'full' dive!

He's got to hedge his bets in case Rooney gets a touch. He doesn't know 100% that he's offside. He might be being played on by someone out of his sight line. its a split second. All he knows for sure is the ball is coming in and it's heading straight towards an opposition player.

 

[silkyman]

Bollocks, how can he be certain he is in an offside position? He has to anticipate a touch, it should have been ruled out.

This.

I remember Macc losing at Accrington just after the rule was changed. A low trickle of a shot into the bottom corner and two offside players had to jump out of the way. Macc's keeper couldn't commit in case either of them took a touch and his dive was too late. The rule's been shit from the start.

 

[Laker]

This.

I remember Macc losing at Accrington just after the rule was changed. A low trickle of a shot into the bottom corner and two offside players had to jump out of the way. Macc's keeper couldn't commit in case either of them took a touch and his dive was too late. The rule's been shit from the start.

Exactly, Rooney's action (ie standing in an offside position in front if the keeper) influenced the kepper's behaviour. Therefore Rooney was interfering with play and he should have been flagged offside.

 

[G-Dragon]

What's the point of bringing Suarez into the argument, he's one of Liverpool's old divers. Gerrard is still a current one, and yes, he will do it again.

Yes now defend a cheater by talking about future.

 

[TomPNE94]

Honestly, I can't complain.

Best atmosphere I've heard at Deepdale in my lifetime and the feeling when we scored was just immense. United probably deserved it in the end but you could make an argument all 3 goals shouldn't have stood.

Fantastic performance and couldn't have asked for anymore. Hope Arsenal dick the Manc c***.

 

[Stevencc]

It turns out it was a sequel...

 

[Master D]

Leave him alone, he can't afford contact lenses.

 

[slaphead]

Yes now defend a cheater by talking about future.

In the same position every striker in the Premier League would do the same. Even Liverpool's.

 

[Shotsfan1993]

It was offside - read the law, Keown was talking bollocks.

The second may have been given as a foul though it's not always given and the third may have been a dive but was always going to be a penalty when the kepper does that.

Actually, Rooney was NOT offside according to FIFA's laws...

Did Rooney touch the ball? No.
Did he prevent the goalkeeper from playing the ball by clearly obstructing the goalkeepers line of vision or challenging for the ball? No, he didnt attempt to play the ball and when the shot was struck he was not in the goalkeepers line of vision.

Therefore, Rooney was NOT offside according to the latest offside law. Rooney should be deemed offside but the rules say he was not active and therefore not offside.

http://www.fam.org.my/files/rules/laws_of_the_game_amendment_2013.pdf

As for the penalty, is it not a foul to impede the progress of an opponent? If so, then it is a penalty whether there is contact or not. The goalkeeper just by sliding in impedes Rooney's ability to play the ball as he has to avoid the keeper while the ball runs away. The fact that Rooney makes a meal of it I dont think is a factor. Plus, as others have said what striker would not go down in that position? If it was me and we were 2-1 up away late on I would go down and try to win a penalty for my team. No different to a goalkeeper taking 2 minutes over a goal kick late on in a match to waste time - that is as unsporting as diving in my opinion!

 

[TomPNE94]

Actually, Rooney was NOT offside according to FIFA's laws...

Did Rooney touch the ball? No.
Did he prevent the goalkeeper from playing the ball by clearly obstructing the goalkeepers line of vision or challenging for the ball? No, he didnt attempt to play the ball and when the shot was struck he was not in the goalkeepers line of vision.

Therefore, Rooney was NOT offside according to the latest offside law. Rooney should be deemed offside but the rules say he was not active and therefore not offside.

http://www.fam.org.my/files/rules/laws_of_the_game_amendment_2013.pdf

As for the penalty, is it not a foul to impede the progress of an opponent? If so, then it is a penalty whether there is contact or not. The goalkeeper just by sliding in impedes Rooney's ability to play the ball as he has to avoid the keeper while the ball runs away.

Thing is though, Rooney could easily have stayed up, he dived after he had passed Stuckers. anyway, I'm not bothered

 

[Shotsfan1993]

Thing is though, Rooney could easily have stayed up, he dived after he had passed Stuckers. anyway, I'm not bothered

I agree, he could have. But so could defenders when they go for aerial duels in the box and get soft free kicks. And goalkeepers are the most overprotected players on the pitch. They only have to go within a couple of yards of an attacker and go down to get a foul from corners and free kicks these days. So they are as bad as strikers.

 

[TomPNE94]

I agree, he could have. But so could defenders when they go for aerial duels in the box and get soft free kicks. And goalkeepers are the most overprotected players on the pitch. They only have to go within a couple of yards of an attacker and go down to get a foul from corners and free kicks these days. So they are as bad as strikers.

Agreed. Honestly, at real time it looked a stonewall penalty so I can't complain at Dowd for giving it.

 

[SeasideKurt]

The keeper prevented his goalscoring opportunity. Penalty. All day.

 

[TomPNE94]

The keeper prevented his goalscoring opportunity. Penalty. All day.

Yeah, probably.

 

[Richard Cranium]

This.

I remember Macc losing at Accrington just after the rule was changed. A low trickle of a shot into the bottom corner and two offside players had to jump out of the way. Macc's keeper couldn't commit in case either of them took a touch and his dive was too late. The rule's been shit from the start.

But Rooney wasn't in the way. He didn't have to move from the spot he was stood when the ball was struck so it was never going to hit him. If it did, or he made contact with the ball then the flag would have gone up.

 

[Master D]

Actually, Rooney was NOT offside according to FIFA's laws...

Did Rooney touch the ball? No.
Did he prevent the goalkeeper from playing the ball by clearly obstructing the goalkeepers line of vision or challenging for the ball? No, he didnt attempt to play the ball and when the shot was struck he was not in the goalkeepers line of vision.

Therefore, Rooney was NOT offside according to the latest offside law. Rooney should be deemed offside but the rules say he was not active and therefore not offside.

http://www.fam.org.my/files/rules/laws_of_the_game_amendment_2013.pdf

As for the penalty, is it not a foul to impede the progress of an opponent? If so, then it is a penalty whether there is contact or not. The goalkeeper just by sliding in impedes Rooney's ability to play the ball as he has to avoid the keeper while the ball runs away. The fact that Rooney makes a meal of it I dont think is a factor. Plus, as others have said what striker would not go down in that position? If it was me and we were 2-1 up away late on I would go down and try to win a penalty for my team. No different to a goalkeeper taking 2 minutes over a goal kick late on in a match to waste time - that is as unsporting as diving in my opinion!

Good post. It's still a grey area regarding the offside though, as I'm not sure how the officials are meant to go inside the mind of the goalkeeper and decide what he was thinking at that precise moment. The only way it can be debated going by those rules is whether Rooney "challenged for the ball". Pretty obvious that he didn't, he basically stood as still as possible, good play from him really. It's a game about scoring goals though, something like that should never be disallowed in my book.

 

[TomPNE94]

It's a shit rule in general. It should be black and white, if you are ahead of the defence when the ball is played in your direction, you should be offside no matter what in my opinion.

 

[Nilsson]

That was definitely a pen, the keeper completely misjudged the ball, Rooney done well to avoid him he could've caused an injury, the clumsy bastard. Talking of bastards, fuck knows how Kevin Davies didn't receive a 2nd yellow, never liked him.

Played shite again (as expected) but pleased to still be in the cup. Never worried about Arsenal these days, reckon we'll win that.

 

[silkyman]

As for the penalty, is it not a foul to impede the progress of an opponent? If so, then it is a penalty whether there is contact or not. The goalkeeper just by sliding in impedes Rooney's ability to play the ball as he has to avoid the keeper while the ball runs away. The fact that Rooney makes a meal of it I dont think is a factor. Plus, as others have said what striker would not go down in that position? If it was me and we were 2-1 up away late on I would go down and try to win a penalty for my team. No different to a goalkeeper taking 2 minutes over a goal kick late on in a match to waste time - that is as unsporting as diving in my opinion!

Did the keeper impede him? He didn't even need to jump to ride the challenge and then kicked the floor when the keeper was behind him.

If he had genuinely had to dive out of the way to avoid a shattered leg, then perhaps you'd have a point, but he really fucking didn't. He tried to trail a leg to make contact with the 'keeper, missed, went over and conned the ref.

 

[TomPNE94]

Yeah, Dowd did us a big favour not sending Kev off, big mates probably

 

[G-Dragon]

In the same position every striker in the Premier League would do the same. Even Liverpool's.

Remember Robbie Fowler?

 

[Destruction]

Not read the thread, thought we did as well as we could have hoped for. Nice to get a goal and the lead, we were always going to tire second half and it seems we didn't overly get the rub of the green but that's football.

Honestly thought United were shite. Rooney is wasted, Falcao does nowt, Di Maria couldn't cross a ball that finished in play and if Shaw is worth 30mil...

 

[slaphead]

Remember Robbie Fowler?

Yeah, short fat bloke with a big nose for white lines. What about him?

 

[Laker]

Actually, Rooney was NOT offside according to FIFA's laws...

Did Rooney touch the ball? No.
Did he prevent the goalkeeper from playing the ball by clearly obstructing the goalkeepers line of vision or challenging for the ball? No, he didnt attempt to play the ball and when the shot was struck he was not in the goalkeepers line of vision.

Therefore, Rooney was NOT offside according to the latest offside law. Rooney should be deemed offside but the rules say he was not active and therefore not offside.

http://www.fam.org.my/files/rules/laws_of_the_game_amendment_2013.pdf

As for the penalty, is it not a foul to impede the progress of /QUOTE]

Actually, Rooney was NOT offside according to FIFA's laws...

Did Rooney touch the ball? No.
Did he prevent the goalkeeper from playing the ball by clearly obstructing the goalkeepers line of vision or challenging for the ball? No, he didnt attempt to play the ball and when the shot was struck he was not in the goalkeepers line of vision.

Therefore, Rooney was NOT offside according to the latest offside law. Rooney should be deemed offside but the rules say he was not active and therefore not offside.

http://www.fam.org.my/files/rules/laws_of_the_game_amendment_2013.pdf
!

It's not as simple as that according to the link you provide though is it? The second point in that article doesn't actually require Rooney to touch the ball and is open to interpretation. In my mind under that point, Rooney was offside and I think it's ridiculous to argue otherwise.

I think what this thread proves, if nothing else, is that the offside law is a mess which is far from clear.

 

[Shotsfan1993]

The law says he has to be in the direct eyeline of the keeper. He wasnt. They used to have a bit about offside players distracting the keeper but that was taken out

 

[joethegill]

How on earth are people defending Rooney's dive? There are two clear aspects for me here - firstly, the law states that it is a foul if a player 'kicks or attempts to kick an opponent; trips or attempts to trip an opponent', which means that yes, it was a penalty.

HOWEVER, secondry to this, Rooney still dived. I completely agree that point one means it was a penalty, but trying to defend the dive? Nah, not buying that. None of this 'trying to avoid contact' bullshit.

If a player raises his hands to an opponent in the face then an offence has been commited. If the player who has been pushed in the face then rolls around on the floor then he is cheating. Just the same as Rooney did.

 

[Pagnell]

Brought back memories for me.

 

[The Paranoid Pineapple]

This was pretty much the highlight of the match, wasn't it?

https://www.facebook.com/video.php?v=878645038947696

Also, can't quite believe how awful Keown is on co-commentary. Absolutely dreadful.

 

[Stevencc]

Brought back memories for me.

And me...