DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
---------------------------------------------------------
RateTheRef
HTML https://ratetheref.createaforum.com
---------------------------------------------------------
*****************************************************
DIR Return to: Euros 2024
*****************************************************
#Post#: 80517--------------------------------------------------
Re: A TAYLOR - Netherlands v France
DIR By: Affy_Moose
Date: June 21, 2024, 3:46 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: charlieboy link ---
>
> [quote author=Affy_Moose link=topic=6080.msg80512#msg80512
date=1719002351]
>
> The Dutch attacker is stood effectively where the ball is
going. Whether the goalkeeper would definitely have got there
isn’t the consideration - he didn’t have the opportunity.
>
--- End Quote ---
He didn’t try , the ball was passed him before he even looked at
it.
[/quote]
There is nothing in Law 11 about a minimum level of effort
though he very clearly did make a movement that was consistent
with being impacted - he doesn’t need to make a full length
attempted save into the defender.
#Post#: 80518--------------------------------------------------
Re: A TAYLOR - Netherlands v France
DIR By: guest308
Date: June 21, 2024, 3:48 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: aaa link ---
>
> Law 11 - Offside
>
> Extract from 11.2.
>
> A player in an offside position at the moment the ball is
played or touched* by a team-mate is only penalised on becoming
involved in active play by:
>
> * interfering with play by playing or touching a ball passed
or touched by a team-mate or
> * interfering with an opponent by:
> * preventing an opponent from playing or being able to play
the ball by clearly obstructing the opponent’s line of vision or
> * challenging an opponent for the ball or
> * clearly attempting to play a ball which is close when this
action impacts on an opponent or
> * making an obvious action which clearly impacts on the
ability of an opponent to play the ball
>
> Take your pick. It might not be a popular decision but it was
a correct decision to disallowed the goal.
>
--- End Quote ---
He did not touch the ball nor de he interfere by being in line
of vision .
So goal
#Post#: 80519--------------------------------------------------
Re: A TAYLOR - Netherlands v France
DIR By: ASM
Date: June 21, 2024, 3:50 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
It’s offside and correctly given onfield.
#Post#: 80520--------------------------------------------------
Re: A TAYLOR - Netherlands v France
DIR By: tef
Date: June 21, 2024, 3:51 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
If you don’t disallow the goal in this situation , then you’re
basically saying the only way to get an offside is if the keeper
has to dive into the attacker (and risk injury, giving away a
penalty etc) , which is a pretty ludicrous situation. It has to
be offside.
#Post#: 80521--------------------------------------------------
Re: A TAYLOR - Netherlands v France
DIR By: aaa
Date: June 21, 2024, 3:54 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: charlieboy link ---
>
> [quote author=aaa link=topic=6080.msg80516#msg80516
date=1719002741]
> Law 11 - Offside
>
> Extract from 11.2.
>
> A player in an offside position at the moment the ball is
played or touched* by a team-mate is only penalised on becoming
involved in active play by:
>
> * interfering with play by playing or touching a ball passed
or touched by a team-mate or
> * interfering with an opponent by:
> * preventing an opponent from playing or being able to play
the ball by clearly obstructing the opponent’s line of vision or
> * challenging an opponent for the ball or
> * clearly attempting to play a ball which is close when this
action impacts on an opponent or
> * making an obvious action which clearly impacts on the
ability of an opponent to play the ball
>
> Take your pick. It might not be a popular decision but it was
a correct decision to disallowed the goal.
>
--- End Quote ---
He did not touch the ball nor de he interfere by being in line
of vision .
So goal
[/quote]
Although he did not touch the ball but he did moved slightly
(whether or not it would have touched him is another thing).
The line of vision for the keeper is not always in the front,
sideways (left of right) is also his line of vision. This is
the reason it was a correct decision.
#Post#: 80522--------------------------------------------------
Re: A TAYLOR - Netherlands v France
DIR By: Jake the Peg
Date: June 21, 2024, 4:03 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
The BBC has just stopped the action showing that the “offside”
player was actually behind the keeper when the ball went past
the defender and into the keeper’s line of vision. If that
decision is right in law then to quote Mr Bumble, the law is an
ass.
#Post#: 80523--------------------------------------------------
Re: A TAYLOR - Netherlands v France
DIR By: Whistleblower
Date: June 21, 2024, 4:05 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
I think there is a difference between interfere and potential to
interfere. I do not believe there was any interference and the
more times I see it in slow motion the more I'm convinced the
goal should have been given. Why was Taylor not asked to go to
the monitor so it could be his judgement? Is this not the
protocol at the Euros ?
Taylor had a decent enough match though there was nothing
outstandingly impressive about his performance but perhaps the
match didn't give him the opportunity.
#Post#: 80524--------------------------------------------------
Re: A TAYLOR - Netherlands v France
DIR By: Affy_Moose
Date: June 21, 2024, 4:08 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: Whistleblower link ---
>
> I think there is a difference between interfere and potential
to interfere. I do not believe there was any interference and
the more times I see it in slow motion the more I'm convinced
the goal should have been given. Why was Taylor not asked to go
to the monitor so it could be his judgement? Is this not the
protocol at the Euros ?
>
> Taylor had a decent enough match though there was nothing
outstandingly impressive about his performance but perhaps the
match didn't give him the opportunity.
>
--- End Quote ---
The on-the-field decision was offside. VAR agreed with the
decision (as does most of this thread) and so there is nothing
to review.
I get that fans hate this - but it’s a law applied quite
consistently. As I noted above - UEFA have shared clips to
associations this season on interference and non-interference
and this is entirely consistent with their expectations.
#Post#: 80525--------------------------------------------------
Re: A TAYLOR - Netherlands v France
DIR By: Pm2
Date: June 21, 2024, 4:15 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Good onfield decision by Taylor and Nunn.not sure how it took
Atwell 3mins.Overall decent performance by Taylor.not brilliant
but not bad.
#Post#: 80526--------------------------------------------------
Re: A TAYLOR - Netherlands v France
DIR By: Irishref1985
Date: June 21, 2024, 4:18 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
This ain’t all down to Attwell taking three minutes… he has two
assistants with him in the VAR booth. What happens if two say
offside in the VAR booth and Attwell thinks it’s not? Surely
there is an offside support VAR in the booth who knows what he
is doing…
*****************************************************
Page 2 of 5
DIR Previous Page
DIR Next Page