No Faith in the Moral Standards of the Players as a Group

[Mmmm, Burger (C.J.)]

Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop

The question is whether a player is in an offside position when the ball is played (passed or shot). So if someone takes a shot and a rebound falls to a player who was in an offside position, she is just as offside as she would have been if the ball had been passed to her. The reason is the same, really.

This is from FIFA's Laws of the Game (Law 11):



What I don't understand, conceptually, is why there is no offsides on a throw-in.

Right - but the reason doesn't make as much sense because there is an intervening influence - the goal or (usually) the goalkeeper.

Also, the rule as written says "involved in active play" and "gains an advantage by being in that position" - take for example a shot from one side, with a player in an offside position on the far side (well beyond the goal keeper). On the shot, that player, while in an offside position is not actively involved in the play. Yet if the shot hit the crossbar and fell to that player s/he would be called offside, but only because of subsequent developments (hitting the crossbar) not because at the time the ball was played the player was offside.

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop

What I don't understand, conceptually, is why there is no offsides on a throw-in.

really? because the d would game that. pull your defense way upfield beyond the throw in point, making the throw in hard to impossible.

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally Posted by Mmmm, Burger (C.J.)

Right - but the reason doesn't make as much sense because there is an intervening influence - the goal or (usually) the goalkeeper.

Also, the rule as written says "involved in active play" and "gains an advantage by being in that position" - take for example a shot from one side, with a player in an offside position on the far side (well beyond the goal keeper). On the shot, that player, while in an offside position is not actively involved in the play. Yet if the shot hit the crossbar and fell to that player s/he would be called offside, but only because of subsequent developments (hitting the crossbar) not because at the time the ball was played the player was offside.

how's that different than a pass across the field to a guy who hadn't been involved, but suddenly is?

[greatwhitenorthchick]

Originally Posted by Greedy,Greedy,Greedy

Someone needs to do an emoji version of Scalia's dissent. It would probably make more sense.

[Mmmm, Burger (C.J.)]

Originally Posted by Hank Chinaski

how's that different than a pass across the field to a guy who hadn't been involved, but suddenly is?

Because it hit the goalkeeper's hands or rebounded off the cross bar. I take a Palsgraf-type view of things.

[BackInTheNewYorkGroove]

Originally Posted by greatwhitenorthchick

Apropos of nothing, I shook Gandalf's hand* at the Pride parade yesterday. Of course, I also flashed my tits in exchange for beads from the float sponsored by State Farm, so I wouldn't say that my alt cred is all that high.

*The hand of Sir Ian McKellan, not that of a random person in a wizard costume.**

**Not an actual costume I saw, but I was on a tamer part of the parade route.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally Posted by Mmmm, Burger (C.J.)

Right - but the reason doesn't make as much sense because there is an intervening influence - the goal or (usually) the goalkeeper.

Also, the rule as written says "involved in active play" and "gains an advantage by being in that position" - take for example a shot from one side, with a player in an offside position on the far side (well beyond the goal keeper). On the shot, that player, while in an offside position is not actively involved in the play. Yet if the shot hit the crossbar and fell to that player s/he would be called offside, but only because of subsequent developments (hitting the crossbar) not because at the time the ball was played the player was offside.

If you are loitering behind the defense at the edge of the six-yard box and you receive a pass, you have gained an advantage from being in that position. If you are loitering behind the defense in the same spot and can pounce on a rebound, you have also gained an advantage, not just because the ball came off the keeper or the post, but because you were behind the defense.

Hank, good point re defenses gaming offsides on throw-ins.

[Pretty Little Flower]

Originally Posted by Mmmm, Burger (C.J.)

Right - but the reason doesn't make as much sense because there is an intervening influence - the goal or (usually) the goalkeeper.

Also, the rule as written says "involved in active play" and "gains an advantage by being in that position" - take for example a shot from one side, with a player in an offside position on the far side (well beyond the goal keeper). On the shot, that player, while in an offside position is not actively involved in the play. Yet if the shot hit the crossbar and fell to that player s/he would be called offside, but only because of subsequent developments (hitting the crossbar) not because at the time the ball was played the player was offside.

If you're sitting on the far post offsides, the keeper has to worry about you and play in a different position than if you were not there, opening up the goal for the shooter. You have affected the play without touching the ball. That is why there can be an offsides call even if the offsides player has not touched the ball.

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally Posted by Pretty Little Flower

If you're sitting on the far post offsides,

Most of the true contributors here have asked for creation of a separate soccer board, but you lot ignore our logic. So we have to put up with these posts. But if we must be exposed can you not recognize that you should explain these foreign concepts?

[Mmmm, Burger (C.J.)]

Originally Posted by Hank Chinaski

really? because the d would game that. pull your defense way upfield beyond the throw in point, making the throw in hard to impossible.

Couldn't they do the same thing with the ball in the field of play? Defense would still have to worry about a slashing run past the back line of the defense as the throw is made, which is why the strategy doesn't work when employed during the run of play.

[Mmmm, Burger (C.J.)]

Originally Posted by Hank Chinaski

Most of the true contributors here have asked for creation of a separate soccer board, but you lot ignore our logic. So we have to put up with these posts. But if we must be exposed can you not recognize that you should explain these foreign concepts?

I appreciate that Flower responded non-mocking tones. That would not happen on the separate Hank board that many contributors have proposed.

[Adder]

Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop

We stayed at the Orkos/Mikri Vigla end of Plaka, but I was good with drinking Mythos. The food was really, really good -- not the most interesting cuisine, but terrific ingredients.

I don't know what they do to those tomatoes (and may not want to) but they are good enough to make you want a bowl of tomatoes, cucumber and feta with a little green pepper, oregano, oil and vinegar at every meal.

[ThurgreedMarshall]

Originally Posted by Mmmm, Burger (C.J.)

Couldn't they do the same thing with the ball in the field of play? Defense would still have to worry about a slashing run past the back line of the defense as the throw is made, which is why the strategy doesn't work when employed during the run of play.

There is no need to worry about offsides on a throw-in because the throw-in rule is so stupid that you very rarely are able to put the ball in a dangerous position. You should be able to throw the ball in any way you want. This two-handed requirement makes no sense.

TM

[Did you just call me Coltrane?]

Originally Posted by ThurgreedMarshall

There is no need to worry about offsides on a throw-in because the throw-in rule is so stupid that you very rarely are able to put the ball in a dangerous position. You should be able to throw the ball in any way you want. This two-handed requirement makes no sense.

TM

Or go the other way and make the flip throw a requirement.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aLoBNf25X3w

A guy on our high school team would always freak out the other team the first time he did one. Of course, he could throw it just as far without flipping (which was a freaking mile), but it wasn't nearly as cool.

[ThurgreedMarshall]

http://www.lawtalkers.com/forums/sho...postcount=3402

http://www.lawtalkers.com/forums/sho...postcount=3403

http://www.lawtalkers.com/forums/sho...postcount=3404

http://www.lawtalkers.com/forums/sho...postcount=3405

TM