sup with offside mexico goal

by Rebecca • 11 Jun 2010, 15:49 • Journals
there was defender standing at goal line yes?

did i miss something
Comments
38
▼
Deactivated7001 11 Jun 2010, 16:50
Ye so what? It doesn't matter whether keeper or outfield player.

image: OffsideTrap

Cleary offside as there is still one player between goal and ball - the keeper. In this case it was an outfield player.
▼
Rebecca 11 Jun 2010, 16:53
oke thanks :D

e: well actually still dont get it :( but i hope i learn soccer rules
Parent
▼
Boss 11 Jun 2010, 16:59
If there are 2 players (f example keeper + defender) between you and the goal you arent offside, if there is only 1 player (for example a defender) between you and the goal, you stand offside
Parent
▼
Rebecca 11 Jun 2010, 17:02
oh now that was clear

cheers
Parent
▼
Krii 11 Jun 2010, 16:51
Gender: Female

TR0LL
▼
Wesbo 11 Jun 2010, 16:53
If keeper is infront of the ball there needs to be two fieldplayers after him instead of just one.
▼
Boss 11 Jun 2010, 16:53
Rofl, wat :)

boring game so far >:
▼
pala 11 Jun 2010, 16:53
its a weird rule but its not offside
▼
zzaps 11 Jun 2010, 16:53
the rule is 2 players, not 1
▼
Fizmo 11 Jun 2010, 16:55
go back to the kitchen :)
▼
Rhand 11 Jun 2010, 16:56
Haven't seen that EVER before, is it something new or just a rare thing?
▼
Deactivated7001 11 Jun 2010, 17:03
Just rare. It's like that since "lifetime". A very good way to fuck up your opponents @ fifa by charging the keeper all the time.
Parent
▼
Rhand 11 Jun 2010, 17:09
Haha, okay :D

Makes sense now I think properly about it though.
Parent
▼
5H1V4 11 Jun 2010, 16:59
rare thing but great job by the ref :)
▼
tyyrd 11 Jun 2010, 17:02
linesman*
Parent
▼
5H1V4 11 Jun 2010, 17:05
yeah.. hes doing great till now
Parent
▼
SQuid 11 Jun 2010, 17:57
the first yellow card was a bit wierd imo
Parent
▼
dinev 11 Jun 2010, 17:05
that rule is retarted,it should only count for goalkeepers and not for regular players.so if another guy was standing at the post (which would probably change nothing at all) it would have been a goal
▼
Boss 11 Jun 2010, 17:07
wat? the rule is quite logic tbh
Parent
▼
dinev 11 Jun 2010, 17:13
it's retarted tbh,if the gk was the player on the line it alright,but if the gk comes out of his goal and misses the ball it should count offside,he could hgave stayed in goal
Parent
▼
Boss 11 Jun 2010, 17:15
that makes no sense at all sir
Parent
▼
dinev 11 Jun 2010, 17:56
you dont get it
Parent
▼
Boss 11 Jun 2010, 17:57
Did you play the game (competetively?
I did, therefor I think this rule is logic
Parent
▼
dinev 11 Jun 2010, 18:25
you must be kiddin
Parent
▼
hAMMER 11 Jun 2010, 17:06
tits or gtfo!
▼
dEzIrE 11 Jun 2010, 17:08
its cuz the goalkeeper was in front of the last mexican attacker
▼
Boss 11 Jun 2010, 17:09
uhm no, its because there was only 1 south-african player left between the mexican attacker and the goal

this just happend to be the case because the goalkeeper was in front of the mexican attacker, your explanation will only confuse ppl
Parent
▼
Wesbo 11 Jun 2010, 17:16
Nice goal lol
▼
Boss 11 Jun 2010, 17:19
true, nice assist aswell
Parent
▼
wArdi 11 Jun 2010, 17:41
Typical woman.
▼
Rhand 11 Jun 2010, 18:01
Yup, South Africa suprised me in a positive way. That Modise is a pretty good player.

Mexico was pretty dissapointing though.
▼
dinev 11 Jun 2010, 18:14
tbh all south africa did was catenaccio with 10 men and 1 fast player up front.they did it pretty well though but else mexico was far better (the game was abit like inter-barca)
Parent
▼
Rhand 11 Jun 2010, 18:19
They were defensive, but not catenaccio style. Anyway, that they didn't lose is a positive surprise on it's own :-)
Parent
▼
dinev 11 Jun 2010, 18:24
yes thats true,anyway they were _pretty_ defensive ,which was actually the right thing against mexico,but they didnt suprise with great gamestyle though
Parent
Back to top