Football season 2013-2014

The Newcastle player was 'interferring with play' - he had to move out of the way of the shot, for goodness sake  The ref. actually got it right.

The problem lies, as you rightly say, in the inconsistency of the ref.s decisions in these type of situations. We should do away with all this 'not interferring with play' bull...  and go back to the rule when I was playing - if any player is offside, then it's offside. End of.

Not sure I'd agree with your first point, WW. The Newcastle player didn't get a touch, didn't attempt to play the ball, didn't impede a defender, and wasn't in the keeper's line-of-sight.

But I'm very much with you on the rule change. The offside rule was so much simpler when I played, and to benefit of both attackers and defenders I think .

Ah well, the current off-side rules must be Sep Blatter's fault because we in the UK blame him for most things wrong in the game these days. 

A mate of mine used to be a premiership linesman, (or was he a referee's assistant). he reckoned whatever f**king language Fergie gave him, he gave the same f**king language back.

He reckoned TV pundits don't have a clue about the rules of the game, even some players and managers don't know the rules.

I think you're getting a little confused.

"The laws of the game" are the codified rules that help define association football.

The referee ruled offside, presumably for interference with play, but it was a harsh call.

There-in lies the problem with the 'new' rule, MDS.

I'm no expert on the rule, but I believe that the player needn't be any of the above to be deemed offside.  I may be wrong. Simply being where he was meant that the player was interferring with play. All this is so subjective though - as we agree, the offside rule should be simpler. Like it was in our day

Now, what if the keeper had half saved the shot and the 'offside' player banged in the rebound ?

"If a player is not interfering with play or seeking to gain an advantage, then he should be"

- Bill Shankley.

http://www.fifa.com/aboutfifa/...-the-game/index.html

Chris, Thank you.

The ref. could argue that the offence "gaining an advantage by being in that position" is valid in this case. The player may not directly be involved but could be gaining advantage by drawing the attention of opposition outfield players or more importantly the keeper. And I don't mean line-of-sight here. O.K. maybe a bit of a weak arguement, but this is why the rule is far too subjective.

Well, who could possibly argue with the impeccable logic of the great Shanks? Certainly not me. 

I thought it was a Brian Clough quote "If he isn't interfering with play he can come and sit on the bench with me?" but I may be wrong (and frequently am as I get older)

Saints' chairman, Nicola Cortese, has quit!

Here's hoping Mo Po won't follow.

Chris

Just been reading about that, seems a strange state of affairs considering the way the club has been 're-organised' and successful. If the chairman had given the required notice of his intentions why is it making such headlines? Rum old caper is modern day footy. 

 Do you sense impending doom? or is that exclusive to Hammers fans

we have enough impending doom down at the boleyn ground, i think we can spread the doom around a little, i hear there manager may be leaving, maybe we could do a manager swap.....

Don't think there's any 'Iron' law  on gloom and doom being the exclusive preserve of WHU.

I've spent the day at the stadium today. You can rest easy that the local media has done the job of the one time Conservative party and done its best to 'go around stirring up apathy'.

The good news, apart from my car-snatch of new chairman Katharina Liebherr that probably won't see the light of day because my editor will deem it as 'monstering', is that MoPo told the 3pm press conference he's staying

Chris

Are you a journalist Chris?

Yup, I'm a lensman.

C.

I'm so fed up with the Dudley Duffer I can't bear to look at my Meatloaf albums.

Yep, Fat Sham out!

That first half yesterday was as dire as anything I've ever seen at the Boleyn.

I`m not a betting man,but after yesterday i think i might have a small punt with the bookies....Fulham,West Ham & Palace,all 3 London clubs to go down !!

Mista H

There's always Cardiff to throw in the mix although they played quite well against Man City yesterday. In fact they put up more of a fight than Man United did so maybe they should be considered too. 

If we (Cardiff) don't get at least a draw against Man U I think we're likely to be on our way down.

West Ham are dire and we lost at home to them so I don't give us much hope of beating any of the other teams around us at the bottom over the next few months.

We've forgotten how to attack when we have the chance. Perhaps OGS will rectify this but we're going to need new players I think. Eikrem and Daehli are the only ones to date and we're still to see what they can do (if anything). Daehli is meant to be 'special' - but that could just mean 'special needs' knowing our luck.

It's going to be interesting anyway, and that's always a bonus even if the football's not too pretty.

Nice win by a hat trick for Chelsea against the old enemy today. Vidic off too, though how Rafael stayed on at the end is a bit of a mystery...

I've got a feeling Palace might escape under Pulis (providing he sorts out a new penalty taker ).  

Hammers ought to survive given their squad but they looked woeful on MoTD against Newcastle. Tactically all over the place. Crowd seems to be getting very restive which will put more pressure on the already stressed-looking players at home.    

God we (WHU) are gonna get DESTROYED at Stamford Bridge Wednesday week...