I think we are to quick to jump on refs for any 50/50 call. In this case, having just seen the replay (admittedly from an oblique angle and not side on) it looks to me like Geronimooooooo was just offside, and he was definitely active once he went up to compete for the header, whether he got a touch on it or not.
I just don't get that quite of thinking - don't we want decisions to be correct?
The problem I have is that if a goal had not been "scored" and it had gone wide for a goal kick instead, would the refs have had their talk and given an offside? I highly doubt it, but I could be wrong. I don't think it is right for officials to give different decisions on an incident based on the events that followed the incident.
The problem I have is that if a goal had not been "scored" and it had gone wide for a goal kick instead, would the refs have had their talk and given an offside? I highly doubt it, but I could be wrong. I don't think it is right for officials to give different decisions on an incident based on the events that followed the incident.
The problem I have is that if a goal had not been "scored" and it had gone wide for a goal kick instead, would the refs have had their talk and given an offside? I highly doubt it, but I could be wrong. I don't think it is right for officials to give different decisions on an incident based on the events that followed the incident.
Question for all you lino's out there, if you know a player is offside, but are unsure if he was involved in the play, are you supposed to raise your flag to let the ref know the player was offside and leave the judgement up to him as to whether he was involved in the play or not?
So the assistant ref did exactly what he is supposed to? Fair play to him then.
I don't think it was offside.
If you are old and wise you were probably young and stupid
It was very close, but I think Geronimo's shoulder was offside.