Preston North End v Manchester United

TomPNE94

Big Mak Fan
Joined
Aug 28, 2014
Messages
8,405
Reaction score
3,462
Points
113
Location
Preston
Supports
Simon Makienok
Twitter
@TomMonks94
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

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 20, 2015
Messages
4,099
Reaction score
1,068
Points
113
Supports
Macclesfield Town/Manchester City. It's complicated.
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

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 20, 2015
Messages
4,099
Reaction score
1,068
Points
113
Supports
Macclesfield Town/Manchester City. It's complicated.
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

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 18, 2015
Messages
3,483
Reaction score
1,480
Points
113
Supports
Cambridge United
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

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 6, 2015
Messages
3,835
Reaction score
807
Points
113
Location
Maryland
Supports
Liverpool
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

Big Mak Fan
Joined
Aug 28, 2014
Messages
8,405
Reaction score
3,462
Points
113
Location
Preston
Supports
Simon Makienok
Twitter
@TomMonks94
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

Site Supporter
Site Supporter
Joined
Jan 17, 2015
Messages
13,242
Reaction score
7,221
Points
113
Location
°
Supports
°
It turns out it was a sequel...

c9u1X.gif
 

Shotsfan1993

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 19, 2015
Messages
1,876
Reaction score
311
Points
83
Supports
Aldershot Town
Twitter
@SamOS1993
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

Big Mak Fan
Joined
Aug 28, 2014
Messages
8,405
Reaction score
3,462
Points
113
Location
Preston
Supports
Simon Makienok
Twitter
@TomMonks94
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

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 19, 2015
Messages
1,876
Reaction score
311
Points
83
Supports
Aldershot Town
Twitter
@SamOS1993
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

Big Mak Fan
Joined
Aug 28, 2014
Messages
8,405
Reaction score
3,462
Points
113
Location
Preston
Supports
Simon Makienok
Twitter
@TomMonks94
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

Active Member
Joined
Aug 28, 2014
Messages
467
Reaction score
88
Points
28
Supports
Blackpool
The keeper prevented his goalscoring opportunity. Penalty. All day.
 

Richard Cranium

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 18, 2015
Messages
4,970
Reaction score
2,441
Points
113
Supports
Mansfield
Twitter
@jallsop93
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

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 21, 2015
Messages
7,892
Reaction score
3,937
Points
113
Location
Wrexham
Supports
The Natural Order
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

Big Mak Fan
Joined
Aug 28, 2014
Messages
8,405
Reaction score
3,462
Points
113
Location
Preston
Supports
Simon Makienok
Twitter
@TomMonks94
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

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 17, 2015
Messages
1,425
Reaction score
638
Points
113
Supports
Man Utd
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

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 20, 2015
Messages
4,099
Reaction score
1,068
Points
113
Supports
Macclesfield Town/Manchester City. It's complicated.
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

Big Mak Fan
Joined
Aug 28, 2014
Messages
8,405
Reaction score
3,462
Points
113
Location
Preston
Supports
Simon Makienok
Twitter
@TomMonks94
Yeah, Dowd did us a big favour not sending Kev off, big mates probably :D
 

Destruction

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 18, 2015
Messages
1,361
Reaction score
649
Points
113
Location
Preston
Supports
Not Voting
Twitter
@Cruyff_des
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...
 

Laker

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 18, 2015
Messages
3,483
Reaction score
1,480
Points
113
Supports
Cambridge United
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

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 19, 2015
Messages
1,876
Reaction score
311
Points
83
Supports
Aldershot Town
Twitter
@SamOS1993
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

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 18, 2015
Messages
4,474
Reaction score
1,447
Points
113
Location
Northants
Supports
Gillingham
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

Pick Up The Gun
Joined
Jan 30, 2015
Messages
7,013
Reaction score
2,295
Points
113
Supports
.
iI04qBVyEBQp2.gif


Brought back memories for me.
 

Forum statistics

Threads
16,551
Messages
1,220,949
Members
8,504
Latest member
yunus

SITE SPONSORS

W88 W88 trang chu KUBET Thailand
Fun88 12Bet Get top UK casino bonuses for British players in casinos not on GamStop
The best ₤1 minimum deposit casinos UK not on GamStop Find the best new no deposit casino get bonus and play legendary slots Best UK online casinos list 2022
No-Verification.Casino Casinos that accept PayPal Top online casinos
sure.bet
Need help with your academic papers? Customwritings offers high-quality professionals to write essays that deserve an A!
Top