DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
---------------------------------------------------------
RateTheRef
HTML https://ratetheref.createaforum.com
---------------------------------------------------------
*****************************************************
DIR Return to: General Discussion
*****************************************************
#Post#: 87587--------------------------------------------------
Re: Sam Allison - Derby vs Sunderland
DIR By: Claretman
Date: January 22, 2025, 4:51 am
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: Blind Referee link ---
>
> A competent referee would speak with his assistant, assess and
evaluate all of the relevant information and then make a
decision based upon this - you have an obligation as a referee,
at any level, to ensure a decision is accurate and correct and
not just blindly accept a very, very late offside flag
>
> Let’s not try and defend the indefensible here - it appears
from the footage and from what the fella at the game said, to be
a horrendous decision - fortunately it hasn’t impacted on the
result
>
--- End Quote ---
The referee may well have spoken with his assistant and fourth
official as they all have a comms system for said purpose at
this level.
#Post#: 87588--------------------------------------------------
Re: Sam Allison - Derby vs Sunderland
DIR By: Blind Referee
Date: January 22, 2025, 4:55 am
---------------------------------------------------------
He may well have done, but the decision is still wrong !
#Post#: 87591--------------------------------------------------
Re: Sam Allison - Derby vs Sunderland
DIR By: yfc54
Date: January 22, 2025, 5:30 am
---------------------------------------------------------
When Isidor approached the referee at the end the official
clearly says offside. Ludicrous decision
#Post#: 87592--------------------------------------------------
Re: Sam Allison - Derby vs Sunderland
DIR By: Irishref1985
Date: January 22, 2025, 6:29 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Suspend them all.. Ridiculous officialism
#Post#: 87596--------------------------------------------------
Re: Sam Allison - Derby vs Sunderland
DIR By: Ref25
Date: January 22, 2025, 6:54 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Those describing this decision as “inexplicable”, “extremely
poor”, “shocking”, “indefensible”, “horrendous” or “ludicrous”
are way off the mark. You might disagree with it, but even then
it is not as bad as is being made out. On the basis Isidor was
offside on the initial ball through I think the correct
decision, which is a complicated one, has been reached.
The goal has been disallowed for an offside offence and that can
only have been against SUN18 (Isidor) - otherwise the flag would
have gone up as soon as SUN28 touched the ball and that player
was a country mile onside. I’ll assume it was correct to judge
Isidor as being in an offside position on the initial ball
through - very tight and can’t tell from the Sky Sports
highlights footage.
As the ball is played through, Isidor doesn’t commit any
offence. Running forward / towards the ball isn’t an offence on
its own. The LOTG state:
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 an opponent by:
1. preventing an opponent from playing or being able to play the
ball by clearly obstructing the opponent’s line of vision or
2. challenging an opponent for the ball or
3. clearly attempting to play a ball which is close when this
action impacts on an opponent or
4. making an obvious action which clearly impacts on the ability
of an opponent to play the ball
…
In situations where:
a player moving from, or standing in, an offside position is in
the way of an opponent and interferes with the movement of the
opponent towards the ball this is an offside offence if it
impacts on the ability of the opponent to play or challenge for
the ball; if the player moves into the way of an opponent and
impedes the opponent's progress (e.g blocks the opponent) the
offence should be penalised under Law 12
Isidor runs towards the ball and his path takes him into the
running line of DER32 who is trying to get back towards the ball
and SUN28. Isidor then slows up / stops and this clearly impacts
the ability of DER32 to challenge for the ball. Without the
direct presence and contact of Isidor, DER32 can get close to
the ball / SUN28 and possibly challenge for the ball. I’d agree
that Isidor doesn’t know where DER32 is and he doesn’t
deliberately look to block or make contact with DER32, but
that’s irrelevant. He has both:
Made an obvious action that impacts the ability of DER32 to play
the ball.
Met all the criteria listed for the “In situations where” bit of
the offences listed in Law 11.
All of this happens before SUN26 touches the ball to “reset” the
decision making process and make a new judgement on offside
position.
This decision requires teamwork from the match officials. AR2
has to alert the other officials that Isidor is in an offside
position at the point of the initial play. It is then AR1 and/or
the 4th official who are best placed to monitor Isidor and
whether he commits an offence. AR2 and the referee need to focus
on the ball. Once the goal has been scored, I imagine AR1 (more
likely than the 4th official) has come in to describe Isidor’s
actions and why they think that is an offence. Offside has then
been given - AR2 won’t put the flag up for offside until it is
decided over the communication system that is the final
decision.
It’s going to look a bit delayed / messy because you can’t flag
early and there has to be input / discussion from whole team.
#Post#: 87597--------------------------------------------------
Re: Sam Allison - Derby vs Sunderland
DIR By: Ashington46
Date: January 22, 2025, 7:11 am
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: Ref25 link ---
>
> Those describing this decision as “inexplicable”, “extremely
poor”, “shocking”, “indefensible”, “horrendous” or “ludicrous”
are way off the mark. You might disagree with it, but even then
it is not as bad as is being made out. On the basis Isidor was
offside on the initial ball through I think the correct
decision, which is a complicated one, has been reached.
>
> The goal has been disallowed for an offside offence and that
can only have been against SUN18 (Isidor) - otherwise the flag
would have gone up as soon as SUN28 touched the ball and that
player was a country mile onside. I’ll assume it was correct to
judge Isidor as being in an offside position on the initial ball
through - very tight and can’t tell from the Sky Sports
highlights footage.
>
> As the ball is played through, Isidor doesn’t commit any
offence. Running forward / towards the ball isn’t an offence on
its own. The LOTG state:
>
> 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 an opponent by:
>
> 1. preventing an opponent from playing or being able to play
the ball by clearly obstructing the opponent’s line of vision or
> 2. challenging an opponent for the ball or
> 3. clearly attempting to play a ball which is close when this
action impacts on an opponent or
> 4. making an obvious action which clearly impacts on the
ability of an opponent to play the ball
>
> …
>
> In situations where:
> a player moving from, or standing in, an offside position is
in the way of an opponent and interferes with the movement of
the opponent towards the ball this is an offside offence if it
impacts on the ability of the opponent to play or challenge for
the ball; if the player moves into the way of an opponent and
impedes the opponent's progress (e.g blocks the opponent) the
offence should be penalised under Law 12
>
> Isidor runs towards the ball and his path takes him into the
running line of DER32 who is trying to get back towards the ball
and SUN28. Isidor then slows up / stops and this clearly impacts
the ability of DER32 to challenge for the ball. Without the
direct presence and contact of Isidor, DER32 can get close to
the ball / SUN28 and possibly challenge for the ball. I’d agree
that Isidor doesn’t know where DER32 is and he doesn’t
deliberately look to block or make contact with DER32, but
that’s irrelevant. He has both:
>
> Made an obvious action that impacts the ability of DER32 to
play the ball.
> Meets all the criteria listed for the “In situations where”
bit of the offences listed in Law 11.
>
> All of this happens before SUN26 touches the ball to “reset”
the decision making process and make a new judgement on offside
position.
>
> This decision requires teamwork from the match officials. AR2
has to alert the other officials that Isidor is in an offside
position at the point of the initial play. It is then AR1 and/or
the 4th official who are best placed to monitor Isidor and
whether he commits an offence. AR2 and the referee need to focus
on the ball. Once the goal has been scored, I imagine AR1 (more
likely than the 4th official) has come in to describe Isidor’s
actions and why they think that is an offence. Offside has then
been given - AR2 won’t put the flag up for offside until it is
decided over the communication system that is the final
decision.
>
> It’s going to look a bit delayed / messy because you can’t
flag early and there has to be input / discussion from whole
team.
>
--- End Quote ---
Thank you Ref25 for a thorough explanation of what may or may
not have been the case that the decision was based on.
Everything you have said is relevant.
Sadly, this whole situation just confirms what a sad mess the
game is becoming because of frequent changes to the Laws and
their interpretation and, at the top level, an ever increasing
reliance on VAR. It really did used to be a very simple game to
play, to officiate and to watch.
#Post#: 87598--------------------------------------------------
Re: Sam Allison - Derby vs Sunderland
DIR By: Joecphillips
Date: January 22, 2025, 7:20 am
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: Ref25 link ---
>
> Those describing this decision as “inexplicable”, “extremely
poor”, “shocking”, “indefensible”, “horrendous” or “ludicrous”
are way off the mark. You might disagree with it, but even then
it is not as bad as is being made out. On the basis Isidor was
offside on the initial ball through I think the correct
decision, which is a complicated one, has been reached.
>
> The goal has been disallowed for an offside offence and that
can only have been against SUN18 (Isidor) - otherwise the flag
would have gone up as soon as SUN28 touched the ball and that
player was a country mile onside. I’ll assume it was correct to
judge Isidor as being in an offside position on the initial ball
through - very tight and can’t tell from the Sky Sports
highlights footage.
>
> As the ball is played through, Isidor doesn’t commit any
offence. Running forward / towards the ball isn’t an offence on
its own. The LOTG state:
>
> 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 an opponent by:
>
> 1. preventing an opponent from playing or being able to play
the ball by clearly obstructing the opponent’s line of vision or
> 2. challenging an opponent for the ball or
> 3. clearly attempting to play a ball which is close when this
action impacts on an opponent or
> 4. making an obvious action which clearly impacts on the
ability of an opponent to play the ball
>
> …
>
> In situations where:
> a player moving from, or standing in, an offside position is
in the way of an opponent and interferes with the movement of
the opponent towards the ball this is an offside offence if it
impacts on the ability of the opponent to play or challenge for
the ball; if the player moves into the way of an opponent and
impedes the opponent's progress (e.g blocks the opponent) the
offence should be penalised under Law 12
>
> Isidor runs towards the ball and his path takes him into the
running line of DER32 who is trying to get back towards the ball
and SUN28. Isidor then slows up / stops and this clearly impacts
the ability of DER32 to challenge for the ball. Without the
direct presence and contact of Isidor, DER32 can get close to
the ball / SUN28 and possibly challenge for the ball. I’d agree
that Isidor doesn’t know where DER32 is and he doesn’t
deliberately look to block or make contact with DER32, but
that’s irrelevant. He has both:
>
> Made an obvious action that impacts the ability of DER32 to
play the ball.
> Meets all the criteria listed for the “In situations where”
bit of the offences listed in Law 11.
>
> All of this happens before SUN26 touches the ball to “reset”
the decision making process and make a new judgement on offside
position.
>
> This decision requires teamwork from the match officials. AR2
has to alert the other officials that Isidor is in an offside
position at the point of the initial play. It is then AR1 and/or
the 4th official who are best placed to monitor Isidor and
whether he commits an offence. AR2 and the referee need to focus
on the ball. Once the goal has been scored, I imagine AR1 (more
likely than the 4th official) has come in to describe Isidor’s
actions and why they think that is an offence. Offside has then
been given - AR2 won’t put the flag up for offside until it is
decided over the communication system that is the final
decision.
>
> It’s going to look a bit delayed / messy because you can’t
flag early and there has to be input / discussion from whole
team.
>
--- End Quote ---
The initial point of assuming he was offside is wrong but even
then the defender is not challenging for the ball and would not
have been in a position to unless the defender planned on going
straight through the back of another Sunderland player.
The defender also changes path slightly to initiate contact so
we have an onside player who has been taken out when not
challenging for the ball and no realistic possibility of it
being played by the defender given as offside.
The closest part of the law that would apply is: “a player in an
offside position is moving towards the ball with the intention
of playing the ball and is fouled before playing or attempting
to play the ball, or challenging an opponent for the ball, the
foul is penalised as it has occurred before the offside offence”
This is also why players will continue to surround referee’s for
decisions, it occasionally works.
#Post#: 87599--------------------------------------------------
Re: Sam Allison - Derby vs Sunderland
DIR By: Acme Thunderer
Date: January 22, 2025, 7:33 am
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: Ref25 link ---
>
> Those describing this decision as “inexplicable”, “extremely
poor”, “shocking”, “indefensible”, “horrendous” or “ludicrous”
are way off the mark. You might disagree with it, but even then
it is not as bad as is being made out. On the basis Isidor was
offside on the initial ball through I think the correct
decision, which is a complicated one, has been reached.
>
> The goal has been disallowed for an offside offence and that
can only have been against SUN18 (Isidor) - otherwise the flag
would have gone up as soon as SUN28 touched the ball and that
player was a country mile onside. I’ll assume it was correct to
judge Isidor as being in an offside position on the initial ball
through - very tight and can’t tell from the Sky Sports
highlights footage.
>
> As the ball is played through, Isidor doesn’t commit any
offence. Running forward / towards the ball isn’t an offence on
its own. The LOTG state:
>
> 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 an opponent by:
>
> 1. preventing an opponent from playing or being able to play
the ball by clearly obstructing the opponent’s line of vision or
> 2. challenging an opponent for the ball or
> 3. clearly attempting to play a ball which is close when this
action impacts on an opponent or
> 4. making an obvious action which clearly impacts on the
ability of an opponent to play the ball
>
> …
>
> In situations where:
> a player moving from, or standing in, an offside position is
in the way of an opponent and interferes with the movement of
the opponent towards the ball this is an offside offence if it
impacts on the ability of the opponent to play or challenge for
the ball; if the player moves into the way of an opponent and
impedes the opponent's progress (e.g blocks the opponent) the
offence should be penalised under Law 12
>
> Isidor runs towards the ball and his path takes him into the
running line of DER32 who is trying to get back towards the ball
and SUN28. Isidor then slows up / stops and this clearly impacts
the ability of DER32 to challenge for the ball. Without the
direct presence and contact of Isidor, DER32 can get close to
the ball / SUN28 and possibly challenge for the ball. I’d agree
that Isidor doesn’t know where DER32 is and he doesn’t
deliberately look to block or make contact with DER32, but
that’s irrelevant. He has both:
>
> Made an obvious action that impacts the ability of DER32 to
play the ball.
> Met all the criteria listed for the “In situations where” bit
of the offences listed in Law 11.
>
> All of this happens before SUN26 touches the ball to “reset”
the decision making process and make a new judgement on offside
position.
>
> This decision requires teamwork from the match officials. AR2
has to alert the other officials that Isidor is in an offside
position at the point of the initial play. It is then AR1 and/or
the 4th official who are best placed to monitor Isidor and
whether he commits an offence. AR2 and the referee need to focus
on the ball. Once the goal has been scored, I imagine AR1 (more
likely than the 4th official) has come in to describe Isidor’s
actions and why they think that is an offence. Offside has then
been given - AR2 won’t put the flag up for offside until it is
decided over the communication system that is the final
decision.
>
> It’s going to look a bit delayed / messy because you can’t
flag early and there has to be input / discussion from whole
team.
>
--- End Quote ---
Thank you for a great post. I agree fully with your last
sentence. Yes, it was very messy and delayed, so delayed that
even the Sky commentator seemed flummoxed by what happened next.
My concern is that both Allison and the AR on the far side
seemed satisfied that a good goal had been scored and can be
seen moving back towards the centre. However, because any
subsequent discussion within the whole team was not relayed or
available in the public domain, the confusion arose as to why
the goal had been chalked off so late. It might have been better
if Allison or his 'boss' (Webb?) could have been allowed to
issue a post-match statement detailing exactly why the goal was
disallowed, but to date I have not seen such a statement, so it
is all still conjecture, which is a pity in my view.
#Post#: 87600--------------------------------------------------
Re: Sam Allison - Derby vs Sunderland
DIR By: Ref25
Date: January 22, 2025, 8:11 am
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: Joecphillips link ---
>
> The initial point of assuming he was offside is wrong but even
then the defender is not challenging for the ball and would not
have been in a position to unless the defender planned on going
straight through the back of another Sunderland player.
>
> The defender also changes path slightly to initiate contact so
we have an onside player who has been taken out when not
challenging for the ball and no realistic possibility of it
being played by the defender given as offside.
>
> The closest part of the law that would apply is: “a player in
an offside position is moving towards the ball with the
intention of playing the ball and is fouled before playing or
attempting to play the ball, or challenging an opponent for the
ball, the foul is penalised as it has occurred before the
offside offence”
>
> This is also why players will continue to surround referee’s
for decisions, it occasionally works.
>
--- End Quote ---
Offside position from initial pass - I haven’t seen something
that shows conclusively either way. The pile on of criticism for
the decision hasn’t been focussed on that and it is definitely a
very close call.
Challenging for the ball - Well, DER32 didn’t really get the
opportunity to following the collision with Isidor. I don’t
agree that DER32 would have to have gone “straight through the
back of” a Sunderland player to challenge for the ball. Plenty
of opportunity to put a challenge in or go body-to-body. The
LOTG define “challenge” as An action where a player competes /
contests with an opponent for the ball.
DER32 doesn’t initiate the contact. It comes because Isidor
slows down / changes position to go from getting close to the
ball to setting up for an incoming pass. I’m not saying Isidor
initiates the contact in some sort of unsporting way (like when
a player initiates contact to win a penalty). It just happens
because of a legitimate action from Isidor, but it is because of
what Isidor does. The considerations in Law 11 for actions by an
attacker in an offside position don’t require them to be
deliberate with the intention of interfering with an opponent.
I disagree on the foul before offside point. I don’t think it is
a foul on either player - it a coming together because both
players move into space that they’re entitled to move into.
That’s about Law 12 rather than Law 11.
I simply don’t believe that this decision has been given because
players have surrounded the referee. It’s likely the input and
main driver for the decision has come from one of the other
officials, who the players are nowhere near.
#Post#: 87603--------------------------------------------------
Re: Sam Allison - Derby vs Sunderland
DIR By: robbieg
Date: January 22, 2025, 1:31 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
On the assumption that there are perfectly good reasons for
disallowing the goal all I will say is that the aftermath just
looked so very very messy and rightly or wrongly the officials
haven't come out with much credit in my opinion.
*****************************************************
Page 2 of 3
DIR Previous Page
DIR Next Page