RefSix

Sterling offside vs Watford?

alexgr

RefChat Addict
#2
I think you can argue either way. The defender definitely makes a deliberate play (which would mean Sterling isn't offside), but does Sterling interfere enough (in terms of the LOTG) for him to be penalised before the defender plays the ball? Think there's a strong case for both really
 

RobOda

RefChat Addict
#12
I was surprised it was overruled. I'm guessing for 'deliberate play'?

I would have thought it counted as one of the clauses for challenging for the ball / impacting the opponent? Wouldn't mind seeing a bit of an in-depth explanation of it like how the UEFA did for their VAR calls.
 
#13
Clearly, clearly an offside offence for me. I don't see how there's any debate about it. The law states that:
A player in an offside position at the moment the ball is played or touched by a team-mate is only penalised on becoming involved in active play by [...] interfering with an opponent by [...] challenging an opponent for the ball
Sterling was in an offside position when Aguero played it and challenges an opponent for the ball before the opponent plays it. I don't see how anyone can say that's not an offside offence. The fact that an opponent played the ball after Sterling had already fulfilled all the criteria for committing an offside offence, is wholly irrelevant, as far as I'm concerned.
 

cwyeary

RefChat Addict
#14
Clearly, clearly an offside offence for me. I don't see how there's any debate about it. The law states that:
It's so clearly offside that I almost wonder if the ref missed the touch by Aguero or thought it was a defender. I just can't fathom a PL ref thinking that the defender's touch a split second before Sterling would negate offside.
 
#16
If this isn't an offside offence, I no longer know what a challenge for a ball is.

It's difficult enough to know, when an offside is given when the attacker is 10 yards away from ball but is running behind a defender as no offence has taken place. But even the guidance diagram at the back of the LOTG indicates that if an attacking player is moving towards the ball and is very close to the defender, perhaps a metre away, then an offside offence has occurred.

The Harry Kane not offside decision v Liverpool a couple of years was correct as he wasn't challenging. Sterling is surely challenging, surely.
 

Brian Hamilton

I am the storm
Observer/Tutor
#17
Interfering with an opponent is closely defined and jst as with gaining an advantage, the definition is not what is expected in everyday language
1552202231416.png
Did Sterling prevent the defender from playing the ball or directly challenge for the ball? I think not. Was the defender's touch deliberate? I think it was. Therefore, by the tightest of definitions of Law 11, was an offside offence committed? No

AR had 50% of the info, Ref had 50% of the info. There is no way Aidy Holmes could have seen the defender's touch on the ball.
 
#18
Interfering with an opponent is closely defined and jst as with gaining an advantage, the definition is not what is expected in everyday language
View attachment 3253
Did Sterling prevent the defender from playing the ball or directly challenge for the ball? I think not. Was the defender's touch deliberate? I think it was. Therefore, by the tightest of definitions of Law 11, was an offside offence committed? No

AR had 50% of the info, Ref had 50% of the info. There is no way Aidy Holmes could have seen the defender's touch on the ball.
Surely, surely, surely this is the very definition of challenging for a ball????
 
#20
Did Sterling prevent the defender from playing the ball or directly challenge for the ball?
Prevent the defender from playing the ball, no. But directly challenge for the ball - absolutely and definitively, yes. Sterling and the defender went in to play the ball at exactly the same time and in the same physical location. They both play the ball, Sterling just gets there a split-second later. That is, by any reasonable definition that I can think of, a challenge for the ball.
 
Top