i kind of dont understand wut the offside rule says anymore, cos i dnt understand why eesiens gola was dissallowed.
thought the ref was only meant to blow when a player in an offside position interferes with play!!!!!!!!!!!
but this case is different cos the linesman claims that there were more than three chelsea players offside!!!!!!!!!!!
so is that a different rule on its own??
once you av more than three players offside, whether they interfere with play or not, its offside?

thought i was the only one that didnt understand the offside decision, the two players in front were offside but definately not essein. thank God it ended in chelsea's favour.

@ Tosinadeda,

The rule is so simple. . . . .

Essien's goal would have counted but one player was INTERFERING even though he wasn't technically offside.
Drogba was standing directly in front of Pepe Reina(blocking his view). . . .
The rule says an OFFSIDE decision would be called if a player in an offside position touches the ball or interferes with the play.
So, the decision was 100% correct.

didnt see drogba blocking reina IMO

That goal was i PERFECT 1, but d ref's decision on d pitch is final

Thank God its all BLUE now

Yesterday match was d CL final

@ Tosinadeda,

U didn't see Drogba blocking Reina's view?
I am afraid, u may be partially blind
Although, i have seen it given as a goal many times but the rule states a player shall be adjudged offside if he is interfering with play in an offside position. . . . He doesn't have to touch the ball to interfere. . . .DROGBA was the culprit as the other players weren't interfering.

It is simply offside.

Someone said drogba was in front of Reina,the picture there speaks more,i didn't even see drogba around him.well lets just call it a technical error on behalf of the refs and expect an apology,might not come though, Blues 4 Life

the pics looks otherwise to me also

@ Tosinadeda/Mossy4luv,

This is one thing about Gaynners . . . . . your ability to spew balderdash all the time.

Did u watch the game or u are basing your judgement on the picture up there.
The pic u have up there was when the ball had already sailed into the net. . . .
As at the time Essien blasted the shot. . . .Drogba was standing in front of Pepe Reina. . . thus blocking his view n interfering with play.
REPLAYS proved it last night. . . . .The pic u have there does not tell the story as that was taken after the ball went past Reina.

Jackal.:

@ Tosinadeda/Mossy4luv,

This is one thing about Gaynners . . . . . your ability to spew balderdash all the time.

wetin concern gunners for this one?
drogba blocking reina is Shit!
seen the replay over and over again

Yeah, Drogba was blocking Reina's view so he was interfering with play. On reflection, I think the linesman was correct.

Of a truth Drogba was actually blocking Reina's view.

this thread is still open . seems like madam moderator is on leave or somn

dominique:

this thread is still open . seems like madam moderator is on leave or somn

meaning?

case closed.

Kudos to the officials. . .

100% offside.

When the ball sailed into the net, I didn't see any sign of
offside but when I saw the replay, I had to applaud the
officials.

The referee was also spot on with the penalty.

My only grouse was Drogba's foul of Hyypia.

jackal where do u get ur rules .especially ur definition of the when a player interferes wit play.I just wonder.Cos dat aint fifa rules.

Simple the new fifa rules said that the lines man flag doesnt even come up unless the person offside touches the ball or interferes wit play.Interferring wit play aint big grama it means when the player either touches the ball or even if any part of his body touches the ball.

The scenario i stated above didnt happen in essien's goal, none of the players offsidetouch the ball or interfered wit play.And ur claim that Drogba blocked the keeper is 4ny .even if true that means referee should blow when any player blocks the view of the keeper.H many goals has been scored wit keepers view being blocked.PRONTO.

U ve no case.Even all the sports sites including bbc that i visited called it a very controversial decision and did u notice that the Referee seems confused cos he wanted to give it until he saw dat yeye lines man dat pocketed fifa rules.

I know a lot of questions will still be asked about that poor decision

It was a clean goal.

In the Champions league final some years back A.C Milan vs Juventus Shevchenko scored a similar goal that was disallowed because the ref said the player offside interfered with the goal keeper,
this case is also similar.

This should have been posted here > https://www.nairaland.com/nigeria/topic-16635.10144.html

Thank God we won.

@ Femikay149,

Your football knowledge is nuthing to write home about.

A player does not have to touch the ball to INTERFERE with play.
If a player standing in an offside position blocks the goalie's view. . . .He is adjudged to be offside based on INTERFERENCE.
Take off ur rose-tinted specs and get some footie knowledge.

But really jackal i didnt know such a rule existed till dat  match was played.
Interferance by obstruction.
Guess its new then

Jackal i might have to disagree with you on this one.
Sentiments apart, Essien's was a good goal and it will stand as such if it were any other referee
But i think it was cancelled to even things out given that Chelsea's first goal was an offside
Salomon Kalou, this afternoon's TV replays showed, was offside when he got that pass.
But somehow the lines man never saw it and i think that was the reason some decisions went against Chelski
Yes three Chelsea players were offside when Essien took the ball but they never interfered

if the reason u gave above about Drogba blocking Reina's view was the case, then Essien's goal against Everton 2weeks back (Thursday Nite) shouldn't have stood because Joe Cole interefered by running across the face of the ball without touching the ball, thereby confusing Tim Howard.

So i feel it was cancelled just to even things out.
Any dissenting views?

Emperoh:


if the reason u gave above about Drogba blocking Reina's view was the case, then Essien's goal against Everton 2weeks back (Thursday Nite) shouldn't have stood because Joe Cole interefered by running across the face of the ball without touching the ball, thereby confusing Tim Howard.

I didnt see the game you are refering to but if Joe Cole was
in an offside position when he "confused" Tim Howard, then
the goal shouldnt have stood.

emperoh,

kalou was not offside !
go take a look at that replay again; he was in line with hyypia and the linesman was on the same plan !
if he was offside, the linesman would've seen him clearly on his right side of view; but hyypia was right there, blocking his view on kalou !


i still don't understand how essien's goal is offsided
i remember a CL game where henry was offside. he actually made an initial move for the ball then changed his mind. someone else put the ball in for the arse and it counted !

chac & akinalabi,
r u saying, everybody should've ran off to give pepe reina a clear view ? then how do u intend to score if u keep letting the keeper on whatever parts of the post u want to send the ball

maybe you guys could give me a reminder of a similar case previously ?

I don't argue blindly
The line was drawn and Kalou was 21/2 INCHES AHEAD OF HYPPIA

wormedup:


r u saying, everybody should've ran off to give pepe reina a clear view ? then how do u intend to score if u keep letting the keeper on whatever parts of the post u want to send the ball

No.

I'm saying, don't be in an offside position. . .

This is the simplest part of the offside rule to me.

@ Emperoh/Wormedup,

Essien's goal was offside not because of Essien's shot but because of DROGBA's position when Essien pulled the trigger.
If Drogba had stayed clear of Reina's view when Essien took the shot then it would have been a valid goal.
4 Chelsea players were OFFSIDE, 3 were INACTIVE in an OFFSIDE POSITION but Drogba's postion makes him ACTIVE.
He was blocking the view of the goalie as Essien pulled the trigger thus rendering the goal INVALID.

I have seen such goals disallowed many atimes.
Joe Cole was in an offside position against Everton.(INACTIVE) . . . . No contact with the ball. . . .He wasn't blocking Howard's view.
His position does not affect the play even though he was standing in an OFFSIDE position thus making him (INACTIVE).
Ma advice: Y'all guys should get SKYSPORTS.

DSTV gets its services from Sky Sports and we all saw what happened
Me thinks its a very valid goal but just a reason to have evened things out
Whatever Liverpool still lost

@jackal,

Jackal again, thought u were dead. remember bammy,  suck head. You need to go to the Assylum. you are full of shit. I bet,thats the way u u swear  at your loved ones. BASTARDO!!!

DAMN YOU! to Hell. I HATE YOU WITH PASSION. ARGGHH!!!!!!!!!!!!!

dyabman
u no even post anything dey yab the person wey no do you anything
ha u don buy case ooh
just run comot for this thread
b4 them use ur meat do pepper soup
sharp sharp oooooh