Defoe's disallowed goal

[Rory Fitzgerald]

I'd be interested to hear what people think of the decision.

 

Without knowing the rule word-for-word, I understand that if an offside player doesnt interfere with play but gets involved after that direct play (second stage/after other people get involved) then its ok.

 

Personally, I thought it was a valid goal within the interpretation I have been feed by the media.

 

The only thing I can think counted against Defoe was that he chased Kyrgiakos before Kyrgiakos touched the ball and therefore 'interfered' with Krygiakos.

 

But personally, I would have no qualms if that goal was given because the defender and keeper made a balls of it.

[Rimbeux]

Never offside, thought Defoe fouled Reina, it was a tackle from behind in my book

Edited January 20, 2010 by Rimbeux

[Cobs]

I thought the Ref blew cos Defoe fouled Reina but they never showed a close up replay of that

 

Not sure it was offside but then the current offside law is a bit of a mess

[MFletcher]

It was offside.

 

Defoe's presence forced Kyrgiakos to take a touch and look for an alternative ball. Had Defoe not been there, he'd have been able to take a touch and boot it away. His very presence altered the defender's decision making, thus the player was offside. He doesn't have to touch the balll to be interfering.

[Coyler]

He was offside and ran over to chase Kyrgiakos back towards the goal. Thought it was quite funny when the commentary team broke the story that they had been informed that yes, in fact, it should have stood and the officials got it wrong.

[Andy-oh-six]

I'd be interested to hear what people think of the decision.

 

Without knowing the rule word-for-word, I understand that if an offside player doesnt interfere with play but gets involved after that direct play (second stage/after other people get involved) then its ok.

 

Personally, I thought it was a valid goal within the interpretation I have been feed by the media.

 

The only thing I can think counted against Defoe was that he chased Kyrgiakos before Kyrgiakos touched the ball and therefore 'interfered' with Krygiakos.

 

But personally, I would have no qualms if that goal was given because the defender and keeper made a balls of it.

 

That's it for me - Defoe actually started to run after the ball before the Greek touched it. Therefore offside.

[dorgie]

 

The only thing I can think counted against Defoe was that he chased Kyrgiakos before Kyrgiakos touched the ball and therefore 'interfered' with Krygiakos.

 

 

That's the key.

 

What SKY never showed was at what stage the flag went up. Did he put it up when he put pressure on Kyrgiakos ?

 

Either way, we got a break there and Reina wants a kick in the hole for being too casusal.

[Rory Fitzgerald]

Coppell and McAllister disagreeing.

 

Coppell thinks the pressure means offside

 

McAllister thinks Kyrgiakos touch is 2nd phase

 

And then ........ Coppell thinks it should be a goal despite givning his opinion that he thinks the officials gave the decison because Defoe closed down.

[dorgie]

Thought it was quite funny when the commentary team broke the story that they had been informed that yes, in fact, it should have stood and the officials got it wrong.

 

Yeah, me too. THought they were going to produce footage of Graham Poll in a studio somewhere giving his opinion

[Cobs]

Cool

 

Graham Poll to the rescue....

 

 

Defoe is not interfering with play cos he hasn't touched the ball BUT he is gaining an advantage from being in an offside position

 

 

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-1239310/The-offside-rule-explained-Alan-Hansen-Mick-McCarthy-rest-us.html

[charlie clown]

Never offside, thought Defoe fouled Reina, it was a tackle from behind in my book

 

That was my view, couldn't nelieve it was cancelled for offiside rather than because Dafoe hauled Pepe down.

[Nerik]

I think he was onside once Kyrgiakos passed the ball.

[Cobs]

I think he was onside once Kyrgiakos passed the ball.

 

 

that's the moment he became 'active' and offisde

[Cunny]

You can interpret that incident in many ways.

The problem with the offside rule is it is open to interpretation, phases and all that b******s.

 

I'd have been livid if we scored that and it had been disallowed.

Made up tonight though

[pipnasty]

Never thought I would say it but Howard Webb was our 13th man tonight. He gave us a lot and and fair play to him aswell

 

Thought the Defoe thing was offside.

[Ed the Wool]

Grabbing the keepers arrm and dragging him to floor was a foul in my book. Not that Sky mentioned that at all.

[Benzo-13]

Thought it was a foul on Pepe regardless.

[stonty]

The stupid c*** shouldn't have chased the ball,......thick t*** !!

[Coyler]

Hoist by his own petard. The penalty for being offside is...you lose.

[Sir Tokyo Sexwale]

yeah - foul on Reina surely?

 

The answer to this conundrum is what did he award? Direct or indirect FK?

[Coyler]

The answer to this conundrum is what did he award? Direct or indirect FK?

Did Reina shoot?

[Sir Tokyo Sexwale]

probably passed back

[Jarg Armani]

I agree with the original post. Seemed onside within the 2nd phase rule.

 

Thought Reina was probably fouled but that wasn't the decision so it's moooooot.

[stressederic]

It could have been given.

 

It wasn't.

 

I didn't care at the time.

 

Now I think it's funny.

[abc]

It's incidents like these which gets me fuming about the new law.

 

Defoe was offside when the ball was played. He was the ONLY Spurs player close to the ball before Kyrgiakos played it, when he did, and afterwards. Quite simple really - there was no other Spurs player close by, his presence has altered the way Kyrgiakos would have handled the situation. Therefore, OFFSIDE!