Rovers V Everton Preview

[philipl]

A week today at Arsenal.

[Flopsy]

so a while then?

[AggyBlue]

Offside or Not? When the ball was 1st played up, Johnson was OFFSIDE, therefore as it was the same attack it was offside as he became active, following an OFFSIDE position in the same passage of play.

At no point in that passage of play was Johnson offside IMO. Forget the 'Offside' laws as they used to be, under the new interpretations the goal should have been allowed.

Having said that, it's only through seeing a succession of replays on TV that I could be sure. From the BBE I hadn't a clue what had happened.

[den]

At no point in that passage of play was Johnson offside IMO.

Like Hughesy said, the first time the ball was played forward, Johnson knew he was offside and was coming back onside.

[CAPT KAYOS]

4-5-1 – Is it negative? Not really because Bentley was there to play more like a 2nd striker, just abit deeper

Derbyshire – upfront or on the wing, is not YET good enough. All the local fans who want to see a local lad do well, I don’t blame you, but fact is that he is not good enough to play ahead of McCarthy or Roberts. On the wing he is too easy to knock of the ball, he doesn’t put everything in to 50/50 challenges either.

Upfront he is good when played through. Other than that he isn’t yet good enough. He doesn’t have a clue where Santa is going to flick the ball onto and his positional play isn’t the best.

Again he is too soft on the ball. Im not denying he tries hard, and im not denying he should be given a chance, but at the moment he isn’t of a level where he can command a place in a team with top 6 ambitions. Il probably get slated, but that’s a fact.

Benni’s could have been as he lost balance following the tug on his shirt.

Midfield – Bentley HAS to play on the right wing, where he usually links well with Emerton. Pedersen unfortunately is out of form, however at the moment we have no cover available (Peter still injured?!). Once Peter is back then Pedersen will return.

Main objective is not to lose to your rivals, which so far we haven’t done too bad with!!

Think you need to make your mind up on Derbyshire Hughesy -a bit like your namesake as you contradict yourself here

yes - 451 is negative especially at home and is only useful if you have the players who can play it - not when you have a winger so out of form and one that is not a winger at all

Don't think anybody is saying he should maybe start ahead of McCarthy, but on recent McCarthy showings he should have been given the extended chance up front. Easy to knock of the ball - on the wing maybe but not from what I have seen , I think he does pretty well and given more starting appearances would only go as to 'toughening' him up - same as it was for Duff.

Upfront - yes he is good because that is where he should be playing - and as for positional sense - how is he supposed to know for knock ons when he is being played out wide - do you see Bentley doing the same beacuse I certainly don't.

As you say - Bentley has to play on the right wing as we all know, where we certainly offer more threat when he does - so IMO should not be in the middle.

Thought I was the only one that saw the tug on McCarthy's shirt - had a good game also when he came on and probably warrnted a starting place for our next game.

Sorry - IMO the main objective should be in winning the game , regardless of who they are and we should be playing to our strengths - not worrying about the opposition.

[AggyBlue]

Like Hughesy said, the first time the ball was played forward, Johnson knew he was offside and was coming back onside.

That's no longer deemed 'offside' though, he is said to be 'not active' because the ball wasn't played anywhere near Johnson.

[CAPT KAYOS]

I would have to say Man City at home as long ago as the 2nd of September.

I thought we were poor in the second half against Reading after going in at the break three up.

In fact, imo we've only played two really good games at home this season, Arsenal and City in the opening two home fixtures.

Three and a half if you include the Chelsea game and the second half against Arsenal in the Carling Cup.

Agree with the Reading game Rev but I thought we did well against Liverpool also until the last 15 mins when we switched off.

[den]

That's no longer deemed 'offside' though, he is said to be 'not active' because the ball wasn't played anywhere near Johnson.

That's where the argument is though, isn't it - first phase, second phase etc. I'm simply pointing out that he WAS offside early in the move.

[CAPT KAYOS]

That's no longer deemed 'offside' though, he is said to be 'not active' because the ball wasn't played anywhere near Johnson.

If that's the case Aggy - why was McCarthy flagged offside straight away for similar not so long before the one for Everton?

[AggyBlue]

That's where the argument is though, isn't it - first phase, second phase etc. I'm simply pointing out that he WAS offside early in the move.

Only offside under the old interpretation of the rule. You keep judging the incident as it was when we played, it's not the same anymore.

If that's the case Aggy - why was McCarthy flagged offside straight away for similar not so long before the one for Everton?

Dodgy lino

[philipl]

so fairdos both sides.

Two dodgy linos penalising both teams.

[tchocky]

Please can we have Bentley's (not Betnley ) name spelt right in the poll this week? It's a tad disrespectful to keep spelling it wrong week after week.

Yes. What's the point, anyway? See how many people notice?

[Claytons Left Boot]

The offside law has been made too complicated for its own good. Everton's disallowed 'goal' has been done to death on here and no doubt on their own messageboards and yet, with the benefit of several tv replays, slow motion, tv 'experts' no one can say for definite if it was offside.

Whilst I accept the ref had a stinker, how the hell can he be expected to get it right and make a correct decision in a fraction of a second?

[Hasta]

The good old offside law. Lets have a look.

The first part of the law states that "It is not an offence in itself to be in an offside position"

Then it says

"A player in an offside position is only penalised if, at the moment the ball touches or is played by one of his team, he is, in the opinion of the referee, involved in active play by:

• Interfering with play

• Interfering with an opponent

• Gaining an advantage by being in that position"

The question is whether AJ was gaining an advantage. Had he ran clear of the defence and scored there might be an argument. However he actually backtracked to behind Zurab to get himself onside. In cae there's any doubt the law also states:-

Gaining an advantage by being in that position means playing a ball that rebounds to him off a post or the crossbar having been in an offside position or playing a ball that rebounds to him off an opponent having been in an offside position.

Under the current law there is no way Evertons goal should have been chalked off for offside.

[Claytons Left Boot]

....... in the opinion of the referee..........

Therein lies the problem, Hasta. The law is based on opinion, rather than fact. The opinion of one ref can differ from another and with play being so fast these days it is made more difficult in only having a split second to get it right........or wrong..........

[OscarRaven]

A lot of fortune for us in this game;

Dunn should have been sent off

They should have had a penalty

Thier chalked off goal was a goal as the rule stands

The only way it could have been sweeter is if we had got a penalty for Benni's spectacular slip.

Maybe luck does even itself out over a season after all?

[AggyBlue]

Maybe luck does even itself out over a season after all?

We had a major slice of it at the weekend, doesn't bode well for getting any at the Emirates then.

[Hasta]

Probably right CLB.

Personally I'd make it so that inside then penalty box the offside rule is as it used to be. You're offside whether you're judged to be interfering with play or not. That would stop a set number of contentious decisions and would also stop the ridiculour situations when shots from outside the box are scored past keepers who are having their views impeded by opposition players stood 'offside' infront of them.

However I think the Everton goal should have stood. Under the current rules it should definitely have stood. It would be good to know whether the linesman did flag for Johnson being offside from Vaughns flick on (the debate) or whether he's made a bigger balls up and flagged for when the ball was knocked to Johnson. However, like in all these situations, we'll never know.

[waggy]

writing this before i read the rest off the thread,once again we get out off jail at home.

13 goals at home this season is just not good enough

playing one man up front is not good enough

having everyone back for corners,is too negative.everton nearly scored from one off our corners by leaving johnson upfront!!!

thank god for inconsistent ref's,everton denied a penalty and a good goal

[Fife Rover]

Well i think the concensus now is that taking the game all round, we (collectively) should be having a whip round to buy Mr Wiley a pint next time he comes to Ewood.

[roversmum]

Why do we keep banging on about the offside? The Lino thought it was offside and so with the regulating official Wilkey who spoke to Alan Yardley after the game about it - there would be more reason to discuss it endlessly if it was against us surely.

Well said, Waggy.

[CircoWill]

The good old offside law. Lets have a look.

The first part of the law states that "It is not an offence in itself to be in an offside position"

Then it says

"A player in an offside position is only penalised if, at the moment the ball touches or is played by one of his team, he is, in the opinion of the referee, involved in active play by:

• Interfering with play

• Interfering with an opponent

• Gaining an advantage by being in that position"

The question is whether AJ was gaining an advantage. Had he ran clear of the defence and scored there might be an argument. However he actually backtracked to behind Zurab to get himself onside. In cae there's any doubt the law also states:-

Gaining an advantage by being in that position means playing a ball that rebounds to him off a post or the crossbar having been in an offside position or playing a ball that rebounds to him off an opponent having been in an offside position.

Under the current law there is no way Evertons goal should have been chalked off for offside.

But surely AJ is gaining an advantage if he's in an offside position in the first place as our defence either leave him to stray offside or are facing the other way watching play? Defenders can't have 360 degree vision.

[Hughesy]

5pts off 5th, unbeaten in 7, whilst playing against City, Villa & Everton who are all above us.

Id say we are doing alright. The most important part of our season is going to be if we can or cant beat the sides below us.

[Exiled in Toronto]

Probably right CLB.

Personally I'd make it so that inside then penalty box the offside rule is as it used to be. You're offside whether you're judged to be interfering with play or not. That would stop a set number of contentious decisions and would also stop the ridiculour situations when shots from outside the box are scored past keepers who are having their views impeded by opposition players stood 'offside' infront of them.

'Boro's equaliser at Newcastle had 2 players clearly offside charging towards the cross near the 6 yard line, being marked, getting in the way and so on. the fact that the goal was scored by the one Boro player who was not offside to me is irrelevant.

Far from making the game more 'exciting', the wooly interpretations of offside are making it a joke.

[waggy]

read the thread now and most posters seem to agree we lost on points,for years i was slated for saying GIVE THE YOUNG ONES A GO.well with a million pound a place i won't be banging that drum this season.i am at a loss why gamst gets in the team,he misses arsenal,so brener will play when off course it should be peter/treacy.derbyshire on the wing is another baffling decision,almost sounessque.the guys a natural finisher,not bloody johnny price,sparky's 2nd love child is back for the arse match------THE AXE