• Welcome to the ShrimperZone forums.
    You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which only gives you limited access.

    Existing Users:.
    Please log-in using your existing username and password. If you have any problems, please see below.

    New Users:
    Join our free community now and gain access to post topics, communicate privately with other members, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and free. Click here to join.

    Fans from other clubs
    We welcome and appreciate supporters from other clubs who wish to engage in sensible discussion. Please feel free to join as above but understand that this is a moderated site and those who cannot play nicely will be quickly removed.

    Assistance Required
    For help with the registration process or accessing your account, please send a note using the Contact us link in the footer, please include your account name. We can then provide you with a new password and verification to get you on the site.

MR G

First XI⭐
Joined
Aug 10, 2010
Messages
460
Sitting in the South Lower, was looking at Hurst take the free kick and by I got to Corr he looked about 10 yeards offside (as did about half a dozen others). Could some one with a view across the pitch clear up how he managed to stay on side.
MR G
 
I could not make the game and only got the goals on Tv. But I wondered what happened there. I noticed that as Hurst ran up to take it all the defenders seemed to run out. Which was a tactic used a lot in the old days but not so much now. On TV it looked like it left all our front players miles off side. The camera angle was not good and I just thought one of the defenders must of forgoten to run out.
 
He stayed onside because the lino (sorry referee's assitant) did not give it.

I sit in line with the penalty spot in the East Blacks. Normally the defence drop back when the kick is about to be taken, but Brentford's line held on or around the edge of the penalty area.
 
Was in the South Upper so soulcn't tell 100% but at least two looked offside but hey ho them's the breaks !!!

There was something weird about that lino anyway at the start of the second half when he ran over to check the net he started laughing and waving at us like he was one of the players very strange behaviour I quite like him now thou :smile:
 
Was in the South Upper so soulcn't tell 100% but at least two looked offside but hey ho them's the breaks !!!

There was something weird about that lino anyway at the start of the second half when he ran over to check the net he started laughing and waving at us like he was one of the players very strange behaviour I quite like him now thou :smile:

Don't be fooled by the smile and the wave though , he's probably just leading you on.
As soon as you want him to 'commit' , he'll be off like a shot.
Never get involved with a lino , they are too fickle and will break your heart.
 
Miles offside, Brentford players had every right to be agrieved.

The reason why the linesman didn't give it, from what i saw (sit in East Blacks in line with edge of 18 yard box), is because the linesman was not in line with the last defender, and only seemed to head in that direction once the ball had reached Corr.
 
The only person that matters is Corr. none of the other touched the ball.
so as amny as may have looked offside its only Corr that mattered- and if he managed to stay on side or level with the last defender.
 
Funnily enough, we'd had a similar situation in the 1st half, and I thought they were going to try and step out for that one.
 
Could it be possible that the Brentford player nearest Hurst (and the Lino) was playing him on ?

BBBC would have had that player in his line of vision so could have been staying onside and then timed his run.
 
We were in the east greens ,i have to say it looked at least 3 yds offside.It's about time we got some luck ,thankyou mr linesman.
 
Could it be possible that the Brentford player nearest Hurst (and the Lino) was playing him on ?

BBBC would have had that player in his line of vision so could have been staying onside and then timed his run.

No, Corr was clearly offside, along with about 3 other players
 
I was in the far left of the East stand so got an almost perfect in line view and I just didnt celebrate. I just thought it could not have been a goal. I like the tactic used but they should not be doing that well into their penalty box.
 
No, Corr was clearly offside, along with about 3 other players

You're not getting this are you ? The 3 other players could not have been offside as they were not "active".

The lino (who, incidentally, is a very poor referee at non-league level) when being harangued was pointing across the field as if to suggest someone on the right side of defence had played him on. I certainly didn't see such a person and the only one who looked like he might have been too deep was the "one man wall". I suspect we benefitted from an error.
 
You're not getting this are you ? The 3 other players could not have been offside as they were not "active".

The lino (who, incidentally, is a very poor referee at non-league level) when being harangued was pointing across the field as if to suggest someone on the right side of defence had played him on. I certainly didn't see such a person and the only one who looked like he might have been too deep was the "one man wall". I suspect we benefitted from an error.

Mick - somewhat off at a tangent, but I'll ask as you anywhere as you are here..........why is it that an attacking player can be "inactive" but a defending player cannot?

I understand that the principle of the whole "interfering with play" thing is to give a little more advantage to the attacking team - but it's always bemused me how an attacker can be standing right in front of the goal as a shot goes past him and be deemed "inactive". The next attack a left winger can be played onside by the opposing left back wandering lazily out of defence mulling over what he's going to have for tea later.

Obviously if defenders being active were a consideration it would make the whole thing even more complicated, which is why I firmly believe (and call me old fashioned if you will) that if you are in an offside position you are offside. That's the only way to make it fair. In the current game too much is left to the "discretion" of match officials and it makes it ridiculously difficult for them to do their jobs.
 
CC51DAS is correct. The one-man "wall" played Corr etc onside as the rest of the defence moved up. Poor defending on his part, I feel.
 
Back
Top