Football (Soccer fútbol fußball 足球 )

5669 readers

21 users here now

Here for discussion of all things association football/soccer!

Rules

No bigotry - including racism, sexism, ableism, homophobia, transphobia, or xenophobia.
Be respectful, especially when disagreeing. Everyone should feel welcome here.
No porn.
No Ads / Spamming.
No piracy

Other Football/Soccer Related Communities

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

[email protected]

[Match thread] Netherlands vs France (Leipzig, 21:00) (reddthat.com)

submitted 5 months ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

15 comments fedilink hide all child comments

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] [email protected] 2 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (1 children)

I don't think it would have mattered honestly, but it obviously has to be called for offside regardless.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 4 months ago (2 children)

I'm biased but just to play devil's advocate: where is the limit?

Imagine everyone is on one half of the pitch except for three players: an attacker with the ball 40 meters from goal, the goalie who is 25 meters from goal, and another attacker who is right next to the goalkeeper, blocking the goalie's path to the goal.

The attacker with the ball shoots the ball through the air into the empty goal, with not even a tiny chance the goalkeeper could ever make it. Is it offside?

I would argue it isn't and I think almost no referee would say it's offside simply because the goalkeeper didn't stand a chance to get anywhere close to the ball.

This is an extreme case, but I feel like today Maignon also would never have gotten that ball.

It's difficult because you can't always know if a goalkeeper would have been able to reach the ball without any interference, but there's gotta be some sort of line between true interference and irrelevant interference that would never change the outcome of what is about to happen.

I probably agree it's offside. As a Dutch person I'm frustrated now, but if I were French I'd be annoyed if the goal had been allowed.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

I think if dumfries took a step forward (as in towards his own goal and away from the french goal and maignan), it should have been given, where he stood didn't exactly line up with the path of the save, but it was close enough to block the dive.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 4 months ago (1 children)

and another attacker who is right next to the goalkeeper, blocking the goalie's path to the goal.

The attacker with the ball shoots the ball through the air into the empty goal, with not even a tiny chance the goalkeeper could ever make it. Is it offside?

It's always context dependent, your version is fairly extreme in that the GK wouldn't be in a position to jump and use his hands to maybe make a theoretical save, but a player in offside position would be interfering with the play. It would be up the ref team to make a subjective call.

Maignan was pointing towards Dumfries almost before the ball had hit the net, it was clear interference even if the GK didn't stand a chance.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 4 months ago

I agree, my example and this situation don't compare. I was just wondering about where the line is. At what point does actual interference matter?

Honestly I think the biggest controversy about this was how long the VAR took. They spent multiple minutes to make this decision which seems a bit crazy.