Unit2Sucks;842324457 said:

---

Where's the unfair advantage in giving fumbling teams the ball back where they fumbled? Every time I've seen this rule invoked people have been befuddled. Even if you want to penalize the fumbling team, make it 5 yards but giving the ball to the defense because the fumble ended up in the end zone instead of going out of bounds on the 1 yard line is stupid. And if you fumble forward and recover in the end zone, you have a completely different outcome.

I think the rule is completely indefensible and once it happens in the super bowl we'll see a rule change.

---

I'm actually not even a fan of the fumbling team getting the ball back if it goes out of bounds in the regular field of play. That player just made a mistake or the defense foced an error with a good play. Lucky bounces off the field should default to the defense rather than rewarding the offense for messing up and giving them a second chance. Just seems more sporting that way.

Unit2Sucks;842324457 said:

---

Where's the unfair advantage in giving fumbling teams the ball back where they fumbled? Every time I've seen this rule invoked people have been befuddled. Even if you want to penalize the fumbling team, make it 5 yards but giving the ball to the defense because the fumble ended up in the end zone instead of going out of bounds on the 1 yard line is stupid. And if you fumble forward and recover in the end zone, you have a completely different outcome.

I think the rule is completely indefensible and once it happens in the super bowl we'll see a rule change.

---

Disagree.

bearsandgiants;842324461 said:

---

I don't care who wins this game, but that looked like a bad call in fast-mo, from my tv. And I think it was. The offensive player tried to stop on a dime and slipped. I thought he slipped on the grass at first, but on the closeup, he slipped on the defender's ankle. When you're tripped, you don't have a continuous motion with leg in question. Seems like a very easy call to make. I hate how much power officials have. At least NCAA hoops refs, for the most part, let them play. Especially in the playoffs. This is way to big a venue to be making controversial calls. If it's not obvious, let it go. Horrible call, in my opinion. They need replay in a bad way.

---

Oh I wont disagree with you at all. I guess after that Brazilian flop last night, I've lowered my expectations.

That header was incredible though, Ill suffer through these BS penalties in the box just to see that once in awhile

Another great Dutch play.

No flopping, just a determined effort to get the ball in the net.

StillNoStanfurdium;842324462 said:

---

I'm actually not even a fan of the fumbling team getting the ball back if it goes out of bounds in the regular field of play. That player just made a mistake or the defense foced an error with a good play. Lucky bounces off the field should default to the defense rather than rewarding the offense for messing up and giving them a second chance. Just seems more sporting that way.

---

That would be fine with me, my main beef is that there is such a severe distinction between fumbling forward where the ball ends up out of bounds in the end zone vs field of play.

sycasey;842324460 said:

---

I've always thought so too. Return the ball back to the original line of scrimmage or something on a fumble through the end zone. That way the offensive team still doesn't get an advantage from fumbling the ball forward, but the defense doesn't get possession when they didn't actually recover the ball.

---

Exactly. I thought the same thing when Ezeff knocked the ball loose against Oregon (though that was a fantastic play and got us the win).

I'll stop hihacking this thread now so we can talk about flopping.

:beer:

Dismantling of the world champion! Revenge is like the sweetest joy next to..

SoCalBear323;842324478 said:

---

Dismantling of the world champion! Revenge is like the sweetest joy next to..

---

I hope these old dudes don't go googling 2Pac lyrics.

grandmastapoop;842324480 said:

---

I hope these old dudes don't go googling 2Pac lyrics.

---

Haha. That was my intent.

SoCalBear323;842324478 said:

---

Dismantling of the world champion! Revenge is like the sweetest joy next to..

---

They have looked terrible all around, but specifically I don't know if I've ever seen worse goalie play in a World Cup game. Man oh man.

Considering I felt like Spain controlled the first half, the Dutch have just gone absolutely mental

By the Low Land Deutsche.

1-5.

Wait until they meet the real Germans.

Assuming they can get out of Group B.

Chile just destroyed the Australians 3-1.

StillNoStanfurdium;842324462 said:

---

I'm actually not even a fan of the fumbling team getting the ball back if it goes out of bounds in the regular field of play. That player just made a mistake or the defense foced an error with a good play. Lucky bounces off the field should default to the defense rather than rewarding the offense for messing up and giving them a second chance. Just seems more sporting that way.

---

Yeah, that would be okay too -- depends on whether the NFL wants to tilt in favor of offense or defense (I think I know which one they'd pick). It just needs to be more consistent about recovery when the ball goes out. To have two totally different outcomes when it's out of the end zone as opposed to out of the sideline is silly.

SoCalBear323;842324481 said:

---

Haha. That was my intent.

---

I'll make it easy. One of the GOAT.

socaliganbear;842324488 said:

---

I'll make it easy. One of the GOAT.

---

Still gives me chills.

NED is just playing with ESP.

I have never seen such poor defense.

SoCalBear323;842324491 said:

---

Still gives me chills.

---

In my mind, our pump up vid is set to 'Hit em up': "F*ck the tree, f*ck Tommy Trojan, F*ck Joe Bruin, f*ck sparky, Puddles? F*ck you too!"

socaliganbear;842324493 said:

---

In my mind, our pump up vid is set to 'Hit em up': "F*ck the tree, f*ck Tommy Trojan, F*ck Joe Bruin, f*ck sparky, Puddles? F*ck you too!"

---

I've searched and there's really nothing more on this planet that pumps me up more than that Bathea vid.

Man, thats where they put their good crew. That game was pretty well called... let those guys play mostly, and it was insane.

Edit: Nope. Garbage

CALigulabob;842324485 said:

---

Considering I felt like Spain controlled the first half, the Dutch have just gone absolutely mental

---

My wife is Dutch. She and my mother in law are losing their minds. Go Orange!

NYCGOBEARS;842324509 said:

---

My wife is Dutch. She and my mother in law are losing their minds. Go Orange!

---

Don't know why, but I've always rooted for the Dutch.

Party in Amsterdam tonight.

BGolden;842324513 said:

---

Don't know why, but I've always rooted for the Dutch.

Party in Amsterdam tonight.

---

Lotta babies gonna be born in Dutch hospitals next March.

Wat

BGolden;842324513 said:

---

Don't know why, but I've always rooted for the Dutch.

Party in Amsterdam tonight.

---

They seem like the least pretentious of the elite teams.

SoCalBear323;842324531 said:

---

They seem like the least pretentious of the elite teams.

---

Each citizen has one-three marijuanas before every match.

Phantomfan;842324533 said:

---

Each citizen has one-three marijuanas before every match.

---

I can get with that. 😗💨

Phantomfan;842324533 said:

---

Each citizen has one-three marijuanas before every match.

---

Not surprisingly, the vast majority of "smokers" in Amsterdam are tourists.

Australia playing pretty hard, they look good

CALigulabob;842324547 said:

---

Australia playing pretty hard, they look good

---

And they lost to Chile.

The Chill Boys poured it on for a 3-1 victory.

Point differential may curse Spain in the end.

Getting out of Group B suddenly got tough.

Phantomfan;842324383 said:

---

Offsides on a corner? TERRIBLE call.

This world cup just keeps getting more FIFA-y all the time.

---

Phantom

Not to pick on you but why do you believe there can be no offside on a corner kick play?
I really am interested in your logic in asserting that.

I am not trolling you nor am I trying to set you up. Understand that I am very well versed in the LoTG.
There are MANY ways an offside can be called correctly on a corner and actually is not an unusual call.

Again, I really am interested in why you believe this.
Thanks.
TBHW

93gobears;842324560 said:

---

And they lost to Chile.

The Chill Boys poured it on for a 3-1 victory.

Point differential may curse Spain in the end.

Getting out of Group B suddenly got tough.

---

Spain is still alive. Assuming a win vs Australia, they simply need to beat Chile (I'm assuming Chile doesn't beat Netherlands). But I think Spain is done - don't think they'll beat Chile.

KoreAmBear;842324411 said:

---

What is the actual rule for the disallowed goal by Gio on the corner? There's no rule that you have to be onside if the opponent touches it towards the GK right? If so, yah that was a horrible call. The PBP guys though thought since the Cameroon guy flicked it on goal that Gio had to be onside. He would not have been on the flick if the PBP guys were correct - but I doubt that is the rule.

---

KAM:

First and foremost, don't believe the PBP guys on any application of the LotG.

There are two laws at play here and I believe that is why there is some confusion on this particular play.
The two laws are:
LAW 17 - The Corner Kick
LAW 11 - Offside

At the taking of a CK, a player cannot be sanctioned for offside if s/he receives the ball DIRECTLY from the kick. Once another player touches the ball Offside is again in play and should be called, should an offense occur.

To be sanctioned for offside a player must be in an offside position at the moment the ball is last touched by a teammate. The player must then subsequently interfere with active play.

Now a couple of things can happen as relates to opposing players.

If an opponent plays AND controls the ball then the player in an offside position (PIOP) can then play or challenge for the ball without being sanctioned.

If an opponent touches the ball but does NOT control the ball then the PIOP IS still restricted from play and CAN be sanctioned if that player subsequently interferes with active play.

NOTE: a ball that simply glances off the head is generally not considered to have been controlled.

TheBearsHaveWon;842324580 said:

---

If an opponent touches the ball but does NOT control the ball then the PIOP IS still restricted from play and CAN be sanctioned if that player subsequently interferes with active play.

NOTE: a ball that simply glances off the head is generally not considered to have been controlled.

---

But on a corner kick, it is almost impossible to have been in an offsides position at the time the teammate plays the ball. If the defender heads w/o controlling the ball as in this case, it does not mean offensive player is offside because he was not in an offside position when the ball was kicked by his teammate. If another offensive player heads the ball, then offsides is in play.

It seems pretty evident that the ref just couldn't tell who headed it and thought the offensive player -not the defender- made contact and then called offsides. It was not an error in interpreting the rules or the way the rule is written, but simply the ref just not seeing what happened correctly. Imagine that.

ColoradoBear1;842324587 said:

---

But on a corner kick, it is almost impossible to have been in an offsides position at the time the teammate plays the ball. If the defender heads w/o controlling the ball as in this case, it does not mean offensive player is offside because he was not in an offside position when the ball was kicked by his teammate. If another offensive player heads the ball, then offsides is in play.

It seems pretty evident that the ref just couldn't tell who headed it and thought the offensive player -not the defender- made contact and then called offsides. It was not an error in interpreting the rules or the way the rule is written, but simply the ref just not seeing what happened correctly. Imagine that.

---

Colorado
I agree with your analysis of the laws in your first paragraph. I do not comment on anything beyond that.

KAM asked what the Law was for this play and I was answering that.

I cannot comment beyond providing clarification and explanation of the LotG. I hold a position with USSF where I must adhere to a code of ethics, a code I take seriously. This code restricts me from commenting directly on the performance of a referee nor to question or comment on their calls.

Not directed at anyone in particular:
Just to pick a nit, in soccer the word is singular: Offside.
This comes from the British term for team (a "side"). When a player was out of position, he was "off his side". Hence, offside.
Sorry. The term offsides when used in terms of soccer is as grating as fingernails on a chalkboard for me. Yes, pedantic.

TheBearsHaveWon;842324567 said:

---

Phantom

Not to pick on you but why do you believe there can be no offside on a corner kick play?
I really am interested in your logic in asserting that.

I am not trolling you nor am I trying to set you up. Understand that I am very well versed in the LoTG.
There are MANY ways an offside can be called correctly on a corner and actually is not an unusual call.

Again, I really am interested in why you believe this.
Thanks.
TBHW

---

In this case, most easly asserted because a defender is at the post. Literally as far towards the back line as possible.

Additionally there can be no offside on a direct corner. If there was no contact, the first player to touch it would be legal for those two reasons.

Finally, a player can not be offside on a ball deliberately played by a defender. Ie the header (if it touched the yellow player) is a deliberate play, not a save, and so not offside if a green player then plays it. (Maybe control is more of a factor than I understood)



I posted a gif replay. There is a claim a defender touched the ball first...even then it was a tight call. Everyone was basically in line, with the yellow player sprinting for to clear the ball. You don't stick yourself in the game on that kind of play. No one can tell anything on the replays...but the ref seems to have seen something to disallow a goal in the World Cup for the third time in two matches.

I am interested to know why you would say an offside call on that play (a corner played by the first person to clearly touch it) would be called

ColoradoBear1;842324587 said:

---

If the defender heads w/o controlling the ball as in this case, it does not mean offensive player is offside because he was not in an offside position when the ball was kicked by his teammate. If another offensive player heads the ball, then offsides is in play.

---

I think TBHW has it right, the offside position was judged at the moment the ball hit the defender. Doesn't matter which team touched it, it's offside either way going by the rules.

I'm guessing the rule is written that way so you can't pass a ball to a teammate in offside position by bouncing it off of a defender. Doesn't seem fair in the Dos Santos case, however.

Too bad Dos Santos was robbed by the earlier call. Very close. My understanding is that if it is so close you can't decide, you don't make the call. On the other hand, the offside line that was drawn on the TV screen could have been a little generous (we're talking 6" here).