19QOS19 Posted December 1, 2014 Share Posted December 1, 2014 On Malin, Russell totally fooled him into thinking he was going to pull it back to Lyle and Malin took a full step to his left to try to cut out the pull back, leaving Russell a massive gap at the near post to poke it into. We would almost certainly have scored anyway but Malin has basically stood aside and said "on you go Iain, stick it in this corner here". It was very obvious from the Main Stand but presumably wouldn't have been from the Rosefield one. Certainly wasn't obvious in the Sportscene footage from roughly where you were. Russell was miles onside by the way. It wasn't even close. Clearly the Brora players were appealing against Lyle who was offside but as he didn't touch the ball on the way through it was never going to be offside. It was a really well worked goal. Interesting. You're correct in saying my view wasn't the greatest for the incident. I had no doubts about Russell being onside and Lyle being comfortably offside mind you. What's interesting is your description of the goalkeeper's decision making. From what I recall, Lyle walked out and let Russell take the ball, but from my view I didn't think Lyle ever came back onside? If this was the case then surely the goal should have in fact been chopped off? He never touched the ball, but if the GK was anticipating Russell playing the ball to Lyle and therefore leaving a gap for Russell to score, then surely Lyle was technically interfering with play? I couldn't understand why the Brora players were as livid at the time, as it was obvious Lyle was off but Russell was on, but if what you have described is in fact what happened then maybe their thinking was what I've just said and that's why they were so p*ssed off? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monkey Tennis Posted December 1, 2014 Share Posted December 1, 2014 Interesting. You're correct in saying my view wasn't the greatest for the incident. I had no doubts about Russell being onside and Lyle being comfortably offside mind you. What's interesting is your description of the goalkeeper's decision making. From what I recall, Lyle walked out and let Russell take the ball, but from my view I didn't think Lyle ever came back onside? If this was the case then surely the goal should have in fact been chopped off? He never touched the ball, but if the GK was anticipating Russell playing the ball to Lyle and therefore leaving a gap for Russell to score, then surely Lyle was technically interfering with play? I couldn't understand why the Brora players were as livid at the time, as it was obvious Lyle was off but Russell was on, but if what you have described is in fact what happened then maybe their thinking was what I've just said and that's why they were so p*ssed off? That's about right. Lyle did get back onside though by getting behind the ball. As I said earlier in the thread, I can see why Brora felt aggrieved, because Lyle's presence owed everything to him having been offside and is also what drew the 'keeper from his post as SD described. Technically though, I think it's right that it stood. The law now favours attackers more than it used to. Debatable though, certainly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skyline Drifter Posted December 1, 2014 Share Posted December 1, 2014 Interesting. You're correct in saying my view wasn't the greatest for the incident. I had no doubts about Russell being onside and Lyle being comfortably offside mind you. What's interesting is your description of the goalkeeper's decision making. From what I recall, Lyle walked out and let Russell take the ball, but from my view I didn't think Lyle ever came back onside? If this was the case then surely the goal should have in fact been chopped off? He never touched the ball, but if the GK was anticipating Russell playing the ball to Lyle and therefore leaving a gap for Russell to score, then surely Lyle was technically interfering with play? I couldn't understand why the Brora players were as livid at the time, as it was obvious Lyle was off but Russell was on, but if what you have described is in fact what happened then maybe their thinking was what I've just said and that's why they were so p*ssed off? Under current rules Lyle is onside on second phase as soon as he gets behind the ball. They had no reason at all to complain about the goal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
19QOS19 Posted December 1, 2014 Share Posted December 1, 2014 That pretty much closes it then. I was unsure if he had came back on. I never doubted the goal should have stood until it was mentioned by SD that the GK moved to anticipate the pass to Lyle. But if he had come back on then it's irrelevant. I can still sympathise with the players in the heat of the moment mind you. Moving on, is the draw on sky sports today? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hawk Posted December 1, 2014 Share Posted December 1, 2014 That pretty much closes it then. I was unsure if he had came back on. I never doubted the goal should have stood until it was mentioned by SD that the GK moved to anticipate the pass to Lyle. But if he had come back on then it's irrelevant. I can still sympathise with the players in the heat of the moment mind you. Moving on, is the draw on sky sports today? Yep, 2 o'clock a nice we home tie against opposition in a lower league would be nice. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Homer Thompson Posted December 1, 2014 Share Posted December 1, 2014 Interesting. You're correct in saying my view wasn't the greatest for the incident. I had no doubts about Russell being onside and Lyle being comfortably offside mind you. What's interesting is your description of the goalkeeper's decision making. From what I recall, Lyle walked out and let Russell take the ball, but from my view I didn't think Lyle ever came back onside? If this was the case then surely the goal should have in fact been chopped off? He never touched the ball, but if the GK was anticipating Russell playing the ball to Lyle and therefore leaving a gap for Russell to score, then surely Lyle was technically interfering with play? I couldn't understand why the Brora players were as livid at the time, as it was obvious Lyle was off but Russell was on, but if what you have described is in fact what happened then maybe their thinking was what I've just said and that's why they were so p*ssed off? Even if Lyle hadnt got himself back onside I dont see how he is "interfering with play", not that it matters As SD said, Malin took a step to his left and left a huge gap for Russell to roll the ball into Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
die hard doonhamer Posted December 1, 2014 Share Posted December 1, 2014 The new law says he has to participate in play (ie be within a playing distance of the ball) to be offside, rather than interfere. The only exception is if he obstructs the view of the goalkeeper. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
palmy_cammy Posted December 1, 2014 Share Posted December 1, 2014 The goalkeeper completely sold himself it was quite amusing to see. Almost as funny as a furious Lyle who felt Russell should have squared it to him. The way Saturday went for him Lyle probably would have missed. The goalkeeper was at fault for the first as well so I'm not really getting this high praise for him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
19QOS19 Posted December 1, 2014 Share Posted December 1, 2014 Even if Lyle hadnt got himself back onside I dont see how he is "interfering with play", not that it matters As SD said, Malin took a step to his left and left a huge gap for Russell to roll the ball into The keeper would have taken a step to his left anticipating that Russell was going to cut it back for Lyle. It's all irrelevant now, as it's been stated Lyle came back onside. But had he not, then he must surely have been interfering with play if the GK was expecting Russell to cut it back. Basically: If Lyle wasn't there, the GK would have his front post covered. Lyle was there, therefore the GK had to guess as to what Russell would do; shoot or cutback. In this instance he wrongly predicted Russell would go for the cutback. With the ruling nowadays, I don't know (if Lyle hadn't come back onside) if it would have been given as offside, but in that instance I would have to say Lyle certainly indirectly interfered with play. As I say though, I don't know how the rules would apply in that situation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
die hard doonhamer Posted December 1, 2014 Share Posted December 1, 2014 The keeper would have taken a step to his left anticipating that Russell was going to cut it back for Lyle. It's all irrelevant now, as it's been stated Lyle came back onside. But had he not, then he must surely have been interfering with play if the GK was expecting Russell to cut it back. Basically: If Lyle wasn't there, the GK would have his front post covered. Lyle was there, therefore the GK had to guess as to what Russell would do; shoot or cutback. In this instance he wrongly predicted Russell would go for the cutback. With the ruling nowadays, I don't know (if Lyle hadn't come back onside) if it would have been given as offside, but in that instance I would have to say Lyle certainly indirectly interfered with play. As I say though, I don't know how the rules would apply in that situation. It wouldn't be offside. You have to challenge for the ball to be offside now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skyline Drifter Posted December 1, 2014 Share Posted December 1, 2014 The goalkeeper completely sold himself it was quite amusing to see. Almost as funny as a furious Lyle who felt Russell should have squared it to him. The way Saturday went for him Lyle probably would have missed. The goalkeeper was at fault for the first as well so I'm not really getting this high praise for him. I didn't see the first "live" as it happened before I got out to my seat but having seen it on tv I thought the keeper should have done better with it. He should have got the first effort pushed wide rather than against his own post. Don't think he quite got his angles right on the 2nd either. Malin did ok but was nothing special. The keeper would have taken a step to his left anticipating that Russell was going to cut it back for Lyle. It's all irrelevant now, as it's been stated Lyle came back onside. But had he not, then he must surely have been interfering with play if the GK was expecting Russell to cut it back. Basically: If Lyle wasn't there, the GK would have his front post covered. Lyle was there, therefore the GK had to guess as to what Russell would do; shoot or cutback. In this instance he wrongly predicted Russell would go for the cutback. With the ruling nowadays, I don't know (if Lyle hadn't come back onside) if it would have been given as offside, but in that instance I would have to say Lyle certainly indirectly interfered with play. As I say though, I don't know how the rules would apply in that situation. As dhd has already said, there's no longer an "interfering with play" anyway, If he's not actually playing the ball or obstructing the keeper's view then it wouldn't have been ruled out anyway, even if he was standing on the goal line on the other post throughout the move. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Strathman Posted December 1, 2014 Share Posted December 1, 2014 Did not realise Grant Munro was injured on top of Tokeley being in Angola. Massive loss for Brora that two. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MOTD Wannabee Posted December 4, 2014 Share Posted December 4, 2014 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JRS LEFT PEG Posted December 4, 2014 Share Posted December 4, 2014 Did not realise Grant Munro was injured on top of Tokeley being in Angola. Massive loss for Brora that two. They are both as slow as a week in the jail. Their replacements done better than they would have . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
19QOS19 Posted December 5, 2014 Share Posted December 5, 2014 Noticed Grant Munro texting during his warm up. I thought it looked extremely unprofessional tbh. Unless of course he was using his phone for another reason; a stop watch or taking pictures of the Championship's top football ground Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.