Liverpool v Tottenham Hotspur. Sunday 4 Feb. 16.30

  • The Fighting Cock is a forum for fans of Tottenham Hotspur Football Club. Here you can discuss the latest matches, our players and any transfer news surrounding Spurs.

    Registration only takes a minute and removes most of the adverts. You're here now, you might as well...

    Get involved!

There’s a famous quote, from a manager of repute, Bill Nic, Shankly, Busgy, or someone that if you aren’t interfering with play, you shouldn’t be on the pitch.

By the laws of the game, Kane was onside for that goal, but as Jenas said on MOTD, it is not an ideal law. Its open to interpretation in, like handball, the act must be deliberate. Who is to know for a fact what someone has done deliberately or not? Also, by just being behind Lovren, Kane interfered with play, as Lovren may not have played the ball had Kane not been there.

But we got the decision and they didn’t so all good for me. I’d be upset if it had happened at the other end though.
 

Register to remove

I will also add that Kane was miles offside from the initial pass before Lovren touched it.
Baffled why the complaints haven't been about that. Odd to say he wasn't interfering in the first passage of play.
He's not offside until he becomes "active", and he didn't become "active" as the ball never got to him until after Lovren's involvement, which itself created a new phase of play. "Active" has been drilled down to basically, did he kick the ball or stop an opponent from doing so. Neither of which he did.

Phase one: Attempted pass Dele to Kane, incomplete, intercepted by Lovren, no offside as Kane not active
Phase two: Attempted clearance by Lovren went to Kane, no offside as "pass" was by Liverpool player

It may not be a good rule but that's the rule. Kane was never offside.
 

ArcspacE

BINNED AGAIN
I will also add that Kane was miles offside from the initial pass before Lovren touched it.
Baffled why the complaints haven't been about that. Odd to say he wasn't interfering in the first passage of play.
He would have only been flagged offside if he touched the ball
 
He's not offside until he becomes "active", and he didn't become "active" as the ball never got to him until after Lovren's involvement, which itself created a new phase of play. "Active" has been drilled down to basically, did he kick the ball or stop an opponent from doing so. Neither of which he did.

Phase one: Attempted pass Dele to Kane, incomplete, intercepted by Lovren, no offside as Kane not active
Phase two: Attempted clearance by Lovren went to Kane, no offside as "pass" was by Liverpool player

It may not be a good rule but that's the rule. Kane was never offside.
Ok fuck the scousers then they don't have a leg to stand on
 
Last edited:

Register to remove

I will also add that Kane was miles offside from the initial pass before Lovren touched it.
Baffled why the complaints haven't been about that. Odd to say he wasn't interfering in the first passage of play.
Rules an ass but it was right as the rules are. Remember the Firmino / Lloris challenge earlier in the game, they commented on the fact they wont flag until he touches the ball.
 
There’s a famous quote, from a manager of repute, Bill Nic, Shankly, Busgy, or someone that if you aren’t interfering with play, you shouldn’t be on the pitch.
The problem with that quote is that it fundamentally misunderstands the definition of "interfering with play" in the context of offside.

If you're a right wing, making a run to the by-line, lose the ball cleared to centre circle, new pass comes out wide the other way to the left winger... you could easily be in an offside position still when the new ball down the left wing is made but you're all the way over on the other side of the pitch jogging back, clearly then you're not interfering with play.

That's what the original rule was there for, that's what they were trying to avoid, as pre-rule change that was being called offside. As usual though the FA have bastardised it to the extent that "not interfering with play" is no longer the rule, now it's "active vs passive" and active basically means, did you touch the ball or not.
 

coughymachine

Happy Clapping Melter
Three days later and these cunts are still crying like the victims that they make themselves out to be...

What a sanctimonious cunt Aldridge is. Had Kevin Palmer been able to read, he might have stumbled across this.

If I was in that position in my playing days, I probably would have gone down as well, but I'd have made sure the keeper clattered into me if I was going to go looking for a penalty. All strikers do it, but Kane didn't do a very good job of getting enough contact to justify a penalty...
So, Aldridge calls Dele and Kane 'cheats', yet claims the only difference between what they did and what he used to do was that his deception was more convincing?
 
Three days later and these cunts are still crying like the victims that they make themselves out to be...

Dele dives sometimes, I understand his reputation. He doesn't do it nearly as often as is made out (and the one vs Liverpool was soft, he never claimed for it and even tried to play on) but he's earned the reputation.

Kane though, that's ridiculous. He's not a diver. He made no attempt to stay on his feet, sure, but that's no different to any other striker in the league and every other time the pundits say "he has a right to go down" and so on.

Brand Dele, fine, but this crap about Kane is plain wrong.
 

Bazali

Cute Jon
Dele dives sometimes, I understand his reputation. He doesn't do it nearly as often as is made out (and the one vs Liverpool was soft, he never claimed for it and even tried to play on) but he's earned the reputation.

Kane though, that's ridiculous. He's not a diver. He made no attempt to stay on his feet, sure, but that's no different to any other striker in the league and every other time the pundits say "he has a right to go down" and so on.

Brand Dele, fine, but this crap about Kane is plain wrong.
As you say Dele never claimed it was a penalty so by that if you fall over you get booked now?

Still think he tried to con the ref though
Just didn’t do it very well and failed to get awarded a nailed on pen against ManUre
 
He did the old "go down expecting contact" didn't he, which is fair enough it's simulation. He didn't ever ask for a pen though, tried to play on and even acknowledged the misdeed to the ref after being booked.

Not defending the dive but the reaction has, as ever, been OTT.
 
Fuck Aldridge and his hypocrisy. Anyone would think we invented diving!

Dele was a Liverpool fan, his hero was Gerrard, probably tried to copy all aspects of his play including his diving and play-acting.

This self-righteous bullshit has to stop.
 
Dele dives sometimes, I understand his reputation. He doesn't do it nearly as often as is made out (and the one vs Liverpool was soft, he never claimed for it and even tried to play on) but he's earned the reputation.

Kane though, that's ridiculous. He's not a diver. He made no attempt to stay on his feet, sure, but that's no different to any other striker in the league and every other time the pundits say "he has a right to go down" and so on.

Brand Dele, fine, but this crap about Kane is plain wrong.
100%. Many, MANY times I’ve seen Kane get clattered in the box and he muscles on and stays on his feet, to the point that I sometimes wish he had dropped! As you say, ANY striker in the position how found himself in at the weekend would have done the same. And any player or fan that says different is a fucking liar.
 
Not really, I thought about that too, but it could be that the ball is placed as far to the left of the "D" as possible:



Today, the ball is barely in the "D" so you could get another 40cm to the left in that picture.....
If all the defenders are lined up on the 6yrd box marking up, you could have one player right on the byline on the edge of the 18yrd box and the ball played diagonally forward to him.

The worrying thing is this is a perfectly legal move, yet I bet 9 out 10 times it would be flagged offside, and if it wasnt, and led to a goal, you would have all the nonsense we are having now, by people who dont know the rules.
The "D" at a corner kick is classed as the byline so under the rules it is impossible to pas the ball forwards.
 

Register to remove

In those days would it not haha been offside regardless of if he passed to him? Thought it was black or white offside rather than interference or intent, if you were in an offside position and the ball goes forwards you are offside?
I wasn't sure which scenario you were referring to but i think Nick may have answered for me anyway:llorishowudoin:. In the Waddle situation the ref mistakenly thought waddle was making a pass, if your not passing the ball it shouldn't be offside.
 
Top Bottom