you are the ref...

[magicroundabout]

I was CM and Parker made the game look so easy...I thought it wouldn't suit him due to the bobbly pitch but he was pinging it everywhere and first time most of the time....worst thing is they're all scummers as it was Kidlington who we were playing....

who do you play for and what league

[jonny72]

The defenders may not necessarily had time to get back though....e.g. that means that any CF could just wait on the edge of their 18yrd box until the winger gets passed him and pulls the ball back (i.e. the CF does not get ahead of the winger) to him and he is onside?? surely not??

the plot thickens....the rule needs mpore clarity....ya think?!?!

But as the winger was onside and the striker then moved in to an onside position before the ball was played, so the defenders must have had enough time to get back (distance wise they wouldn't be disadvantaged and its their problem if they are too slow).

The rules are now crystal clear, the confusion comes from people not reading them properly and questioning whether the rules should be what they are. I think they're pretty good, as play was stopped far too often before due to offside when the player had nothing to do with the play. If people take the time to read, understand and accept the rules everything would be fine.

[Arriba]

the initial pass, then the second should be treated seperately.quite rightly they were and it's a valid goal

[penhill red]

yeah definitely the right decision, van nistlerooy is the master of perfecting this, always does it. Really it does rely on the wingers being pacey alot.

[jimbob]

who do you play for and what league

shrivy and its hellenic vets prem...guessing you still play MR??

I know I've said it earlier but it seems the consensus on here is that its a goal (which I guess was proved by the refs decision!)...so for all you CF's out there, just sit on the edge of the oppositions 18 yard box, put the ball in the onion bag....and keep the rule book in your sock just in case ;-)

[[email protected]]

You won't like this, but the correct decision was to award a goal.  I will try and explain simply why...

The ball was initially played to the winger who was onside but the CF was offside. 
Because the ball went to the onside player (winger) and the striker didn't recieve the ball or interfere with an opponent who could get the ball (how could he if he is in the middle of the pitch) then the correct decision is to play on.  Assuming when the winger crosses to the stricker (2nd phase) the stricker is now onside, then the goal has got to stand.

Years ago (more than 10) the offside law changed from the old "if someone is offside, give a free-kick" to the newer version "give the free-kick if an offside player interferes with play or an opponent".  You get pricks like Andy Gray and Alan Hansen who say rubbish like "why do they keep changing it?" (they don't, and haven't changed it for about 10 years) and "why don't they go back to the old method?" (because the "new" method is fairer and you get more goals as a result - therefore matches are more entertaining).

I guess the reason why the ref didn't have his book to show you why, is because the latest one is 140 pages long and would take a bag on its own.  If you want to understand more about the offside law, you can download a pdf version at http://www.thefa.com/TheFA/RulesandRegulations/~/media/Files/PDF/Get%20into%20Football/Referees/lawsofthegameen_0910.ashx/lawsofthegameen_0910.pdf and look at pages 31, and 100-108.

Now , cue the jokes about "interfering with an opponent"!

[Barry Scott]

My mate played Centre Half against Christian Roberts the other week. Just thought i'd drop that in there.

[Doore]

Who is Christian Roberts playing for Barry?

[Barry Scott]

It was for a Cardiff old boys team of some sorts and wasn't professional. My mate just stepped in to help out for a mate or some bollocks and found he was up against Chrissy Roberts.