» Site Navigation |
|
» Online Users: 161 |
0 members and 161 guests |
No Members online |
Most users ever online was 4,499, 10-26-2015 at 07:55 AM. |
|
|
|
06-29-2015, 04:47 PM
|
#466
|
Moderator
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Pop goes the chupacabra
Posts: 18,532
|
Re: No Faith in the Moral Standards of the Players as a Group
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop
The question is whether a player is in an offside position when the ball is played (passed or shot). So if someone takes a shot and a rebound falls to a player who was in an offside position, she is just as offside as she would have been if the ball had been passed to her. The reason is the same, really.
This is from FIFA's Laws of the Game (Law 11):
What I don't understand, conceptually, is why there is no offsides on a throw-in.
|
Right - but the reason doesn't make as much sense because there is an intervening influence - the goal or (usually) the goalkeeper.
Also, the rule as written says "involved in active play" and "gains an advantage by being in that position" - take for example a shot from one side, with a player in an offside position on the far side (well beyond the goal keeper). On the shot, that player, while in an offside position is not actively involved in the play. Yet if the shot hit the crossbar and fell to that player s/he would be called offside, but only because of subsequent developments (hitting the crossbar) not because at the time the ball was played the player was offside.
__________________
[Dictated but not read]
|
|
|
06-29-2015, 04:49 PM
|
#467
|
Proud Holder-Post 200,000
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Corner Office
Posts: 86,050
|
Re: No Faith in the Moral Standards of the Players as a Group
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop
What I don't understand, conceptually, is why there is no offsides on a throw-in.
|
really? because the d would game that. pull your defense way upfield beyond the throw in point, making the throw in hard to impossible.
__________________
I will not suffer a fool- but I do seem to read a lot of their posts
|
|
|
06-29-2015, 04:52 PM
|
#468
|
Proud Holder-Post 200,000
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Corner Office
Posts: 86,050
|
Re: No Faith in the Moral Standards of the Players as a Group
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mmmm, Burger (C.J.)
Right - but the reason doesn't make as much sense because there is an intervening influence - the goal or (usually) the goalkeeper.
Also, the rule as written says "involved in active play" and "gains an advantage by being in that position" - take for example a shot from one side, with a player in an offside position on the far side (well beyond the goal keeper). On the shot, that player, while in an offside position is not actively involved in the play. Yet if the shot hit the crossbar and fell to that player s/he would be called offside, but only because of subsequent developments (hitting the crossbar) not because at the time the ball was played the player was offside.
|
how's that different than a pass across the field to a guy who hadn't been involved, but suddenly is?
__________________
I will not suffer a fool- but I do seem to read a lot of their posts
|
|
|
06-29-2015, 05:12 PM
|
#469
|
Steaming Hot
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Giving a three hour blowjob
Posts: 8,220
|
Re: No Faith in the Moral Standards of the Players as a Group
Quote:
Originally Posted by Greedy,Greedy,Greedy
Someone needs to do an emoji version of Scalia's dissent. It would probably make more sense.
|
|
|
|
06-29-2015, 05:33 PM
|
#470
|
Moderator
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Pop goes the chupacabra
Posts: 18,532
|
Re: No Faith in the Moral Standards of the Players as a Group
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hank Chinaski
how's that different than a pass across the field to a guy who hadn't been involved, but suddenly is?
|
Because it hit the goalkeeper's hands or rebounded off the cross bar. I take a Palsgraf-type view of things.
__________________
[Dictated but not read]
|
|
|
06-29-2015, 06:03 PM
|
#471
|
Registered User
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: You better believe I'm back!
Posts: 38
|
Re: No Faith in the Moral Standards of the Players as a Group
Quote:
Originally Posted by greatwhitenorthchick
|
Apropos of nothing, I shook Gandalf's hand* at the Pride parade yesterday. Of course, I also flashed my tits in exchange for beads from the float sponsored by State Farm, so I wouldn't say that my alt cred is all that high.
*The hand of Sir Ian McKellan, not that of a random person in a wizard costume.**
**Not an actual costume I saw, but I was on a tamer part of the parade route.
|
|
|
06-29-2015, 07:23 PM
|
#472
|
Moderasaurus Rex
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 32,944
|
Re: No Faith in the Moral Standards of the Players as a Group
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mmmm, Burger (C.J.)
Right - but the reason doesn't make as much sense because there is an intervening influence - the goal or (usually) the goalkeeper.
Also, the rule as written says "involved in active play" and "gains an advantage by being in that position" - take for example a shot from one side, with a player in an offside position on the far side (well beyond the goal keeper). On the shot, that player, while in an offside position is not actively involved in the play. Yet if the shot hit the crossbar and fell to that player s/he would be called offside, but only because of subsequent developments (hitting the crossbar) not because at the time the ball was played the player was offside.
|
If you are loitering behind the defense at the edge of the six-yard box and you receive a pass, you have gained an advantage from being in that position. If you are loitering behind the defense in the same spot and can pounce on a rebound, you have also gained an advantage, not just because the ball came off the keeper or the post, but because you were behind the defense.
Hank, good point re defenses gaming offsides on throw-ins.
__________________
“It was fortunate that so few men acted according to moral principle, because it was so easy to get principles wrong, and a determined person acting on mistaken principles could really do some damage." - Larissa MacFarquhar
|
|
|
06-29-2015, 10:17 PM
|
#473
|
Moderator
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Flower
Posts: 8,434
|
Re: No Faith in the Moral Standards of the Players as a Group
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mmmm, Burger (C.J.)
Right - but the reason doesn't make as much sense because there is an intervening influence - the goal or (usually) the goalkeeper.
Also, the rule as written says "involved in active play" and "gains an advantage by being in that position" - take for example a shot from one side, with a player in an offside position on the far side (well beyond the goal keeper). On the shot, that player, while in an offside position is not actively involved in the play. Yet if the shot hit the crossbar and fell to that player s/he would be called offside, but only because of subsequent developments (hitting the crossbar) not because at the time the ball was played the player was offside.
|
If you're sitting on the far post offsides, the keeper has to worry about you and play in a different position than if you were not there, opening up the goal for the shooter. You have affected the play without touching the ball. That is why there can be an offsides call even if the offsides player has not touched the ball.
__________________
Inside every man lives the seed of a flower.
If he looks within he finds beauty and power.
I am not sorry.
|
|
|
06-29-2015, 10:29 PM
|
#474
|
Proud Holder-Post 200,000
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Corner Office
Posts: 86,050
|
Re: No Faith in the Moral Standards of the Players as a Group
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pretty Little Flower
If you're sitting on the far post offsides,
|
Most of the true contributors here have asked for creation of a separate soccer board, but you lot ignore our logic. So we have to put up with these posts. But if we must be exposed can you not recognize that you should explain these foreign concepts?
__________________
I will not suffer a fool- but I do seem to read a lot of their posts
|
|
|
06-29-2015, 11:01 PM
|
#475
|
Moderator
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Pop goes the chupacabra
Posts: 18,532
|
Re: No Faith in the Moral Standards of the Players as a Group
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hank Chinaski
really? because the d would game that. pull your defense way upfield beyond the throw in point, making the throw in hard to impossible.
|
Couldn't they do the same thing with the ball in the field of play? Defense would still have to worry about a slashing run past the back line of the defense as the throw is made, which is why the strategy doesn't work when employed during the run of play.
__________________
[Dictated but not read]
|
|
|
06-29-2015, 11:04 PM
|
#476
|
Moderator
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Pop goes the chupacabra
Posts: 18,532
|
Re: No Faith in the Moral Standards of the Players as a Group
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hank Chinaski
Most of the true contributors here have asked for creation of a separate soccer board, but you lot ignore our logic. So we have to put up with these posts. But if we must be exposed can you not recognize that you should explain these foreign concepts?
|
I appreciate that Flower responded non-mocking tones. That would not happen on the separate Hank board that many contributors have proposed.
__________________
[Dictated but not read]
|
|
|
06-30-2015, 10:35 AM
|
#477
|
I am beyond a rank!
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 17,115
|
Re: No Faith in the Moral Standards of the Players as a Group
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop
We stayed at the Orkos/Mikri Vigla end of Plaka, but I was good with drinking Mythos. The food was really, really good -- not the most interesting cuisine, but terrific ingredients.
|
I don't know what they do to those tomatoes (and may not want to) but they are good enough to make you want a bowl of tomatoes, cucumber and feta with a little green pepper, oregano, oil and vinegar at every meal.
|
|
|
06-30-2015, 01:18 PM
|
#478
|
[intentionally omitted]
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: NYC
Posts: 18,596
|
Re: No Faith in the Moral Standards of the Players as a Group
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mmmm, Burger (C.J.)
Couldn't they do the same thing with the ball in the field of play? Defense would still have to worry about a slashing run past the back line of the defense as the throw is made, which is why the strategy doesn't work when employed during the run of play.
|
There is no need to worry about offsides on a throw-in because the throw-in rule is so stupid that you very rarely are able to put the ball in a dangerous position. You should be able to throw the ball in any way you want. This two-handed requirement makes no sense.
TM
|
|
|
06-30-2015, 01:31 PM
|
#479
|
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Throwing a kettle over a pub
Posts: 14,709
|
Re: No Faith in the Moral Standards of the Players as a Group
Quote:
Originally Posted by ThurgreedMarshall
There is no need to worry about offsides on a throw-in because the throw-in rule is so stupid that you very rarely are able to put the ball in a dangerous position. You should be able to throw the ball in any way you want. This two-handed requirement makes no sense.
TM
|
Or go the other way and make the flip throw a requirement.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aLoBNf25X3w
A guy on our high school team would always freak out the other team the first time he did one. Of course, he could throw it just as far without flipping (which was a freaking mile), but it wasn't nearly as cool.
__________________
No no no, that's not gonna help. That's not gonna help and I'll tell you why: It doesn't unbang your Mom.
|
|
|
06-30-2015, 01:32 PM
|
#480
|
[intentionally omitted]
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: NYC
Posts: 18,596
|
Top 20
|
|
|
|
|
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
|