The head of the Austrian refereeing commission produced some pretty spurious evidence to try and support the decision not to penalise Ruud van Nistelrooy for offside when he scored the first Dutch goal against Italy tonight.
To what was the gentlement referring when he said the decision was brilliant and that the defender - injured and prostrate off the field of play after colliding with his goalkeeper - was trying to trick the linesman into giving offside?
Rubbish - Go to the FIFA website and in the bottom left hand corner you'll see Laws of the Game. Look up Law 11. Nothing to help you. Then go to the end of the laws for the Additional Instructions for Referees, which touches on tonight's events, also under Law 11.
Nowhere do these instructions say that a linesman can refuse to give offside because an injured defender off the field counts as a second lasr defender.
Bad decision and an even worse attempt to justify it. It was a mistake.
Otherwise it was a great match and a real pleasure to see the Dutch live up to their potential.
3 comments:
I believe Keith Hackett also came out in support of this decision to award the goal. It's a tricky call I admit and I can see it 2 ways but if the player colided with his own goalkeeper why should the attacking side be penalised? The player surely needs permission to leave the field of play which he hadn't received. If he had of just stepped off the field he'd have been cautioned too I guess.
There's been loads of debate about this but I still believe the goal should not have stood. I'm surprised that it's apparently known by all refs that a player off the pitch like that is still involved in play for offside purposes. It's not in my LOAF!
Don't think all refs know it but every now and again we have to seek guidance from the powers that be on issues like this and what they say goes I'm afraid no matter how much it surprises us all.
Post a Comment