Looking at the clip above I would say that the ball comes off him. Yes, he is making a forward movement but he was not intentionally playing the ball. His movement meant the the ball bounced off him & went towards Benzema . Unless he think he was clearing or passing the ball with his knee.
What about the first tackle? That's a clear 'playing of the ball'.
If it comes from a Liverpool forward deflection that’s a goal isn’t it? I don’t understand
Has to be deliberate.
That’s a fucking joke
I suppose the logic to it would be that if you permitted deflections/ unintentional touches to keep it onside then you could just keep your striker up in the oppos half and just boot it at their last man who may be in your half and hope it deflects and runs on to your striker who would be onside...if that makes sense.
So basically the only way it would never be offside is from a short back pass. Who intentionally plays an offside forward in.
Well it's any deliberate play of the ball. I think I'm right in saying that had Fabinho gone in for the tackle and poked it towards Benzema it wouldn't have been offside but because Konate got their first and then it unintentionally came off Fabinho it's offside. I could of course be wrong, never know these days.
If it comes from a Liverpool forward deflection that’s a goal isn’t it? I don’t understand
Has to be deliberate.
That’s a fucking joke
I suppose the logic to it would be that if you permitted deflections/ unintentional touches to keep it onside then you could just keep your striker up in the oppos half and just boot it at their last man who may be in your half and hope it deflects and runs on to your striker who would be onside...if that makes sense.
Wasn't the old rule if the deflection majorly changed the path of the ball, it wouldn't be offside?
Otherwise you're just punishing attackers for defensive mistakes.
If it comes from a Liverpool forward deflection that’s a goal isn’t it? I don’t understand
Has to be deliberate.
That’s a fucking joke
I suppose the logic to it would be that if you permitted deflections/ unintentional touches to keep it onside then you could just keep your striker up in the oppos half and just boot it at their last man who may be in your half and hope it deflects and runs on to your striker who would be onside...if that makes sense.
But in the common sense real world that never happens naturally. Which is why UEFA struggled with it. I’m fact, football was fine with that rule until they interfered.
If it comes from a Liverpool forward deflection that’s a goal isn’t it? I don’t understand
Has to be deliberate.
That’s a fucking joke
I suppose the logic to it would be that if you permitted deflections/ unintentional touches to keep it onside then you could just keep your striker up in the oppos half and just boot it at their last man who may be in your half and hope it deflects and runs on to your striker who would be onside...if that makes sense.
Wasn't the old rule if the deflection majorly changed the path of the ball, it wouldn't be offside?
Otherwise you're just punishing attackers for defensive mistakes.
Not sure mate. I'm normally about 5 years behind when it comes to understanding rule changes!
Don't have sky sports/ BT sports so unfortunately don't see a lot of european football but as predicted by some earlier on this thread it seems to be what Mardid's game plan was.
There are 2 ahead of him in the pecking order - 1 if Walker plays RCB.
Agreed. Plus James has the benefit of 3/5 at the back experience. Admittedly, Walker at RCB would help Trent as he'd naturally be able to cover but I'd still go James.
Comments
But I called it as a Valverde touch in real time and no replays I’ve seen since have convinced me otherwise…
I suppose the logic to it would be that if you permitted deflections/ unintentional touches to keep it onside then you could just keep your striker up in the oppos half and just boot it at their last man who may be in your half and hope it deflects and runs on to your striker who would be onside...if that makes sense.
Otherwise you're just punishing attackers for defensive mistakes.
Don't have sky sports/ BT sports so unfortunately don't see a lot of european football but as predicted by some earlier on this thread it seems to be what Mardid's game plan was.
Thought it looked off at first sight.
They did you there TAA.
This Madrid is unusually functional for Real team, working hard and defending as a team. A bit Mourinhoish.
Just like that Mo.