Skip
repetitive navigational links
L-Soft  -  Home of  the  LISTSERV  mailing list  manager LISTSERV(R) 14.3
Skip repetitive navigational links
Previous messageNext messagePrevious in topicNext in topicPrevious by same authorNext by same authorPrevious page (December 2005, week 3)Back to main SOCREF-L pageJoin or leave SOCREF-LReplyPost a new messageSearchProportional fontNon-proportional fontLog in
Date:         Tue, 20 Dec 2005 11:32:27 -0500
Reply-To:     Discussion of Topics for Soccer Referees
              <[log in to unmask]>
Sender:       Discussion of Topics for Soccer Referees
              <[log in to unmask]>
From:         phil rogers <[log in to unmask]>
Subject:      Re: Offside discussion
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"

Come on guys - make a distinction between the officials and the BBC reporters who have it WRONG. The jock sniffers provide empirical evidence that they are no smarter than the washed up players we see and hear on U.S. TV. That said I STILL occasionally get to work (Federation play) with guys who assert and enforce a policy that any off-side position is "OFFSIDE" and requires a signal for stoppage of play and IFK to the defense - an appalling policy that I find lazy and which many parents accept as gospel. ----- Original Message ----- From: Ferenc & Sandy Korompai Sent: Tuesday, December 20, 2005 10:49 AM To: [log in to unmask] Subject: Fw: Offside discussion HORRIBILE DICTU! The birthplace of the Laws is in confusion about something that has been clear in print for over several decades. In the article it says you cannot be offside if...the ball comes off the a defender. WRONG! That provision was dropped from the Laws in 1978, though in typical FIFA style the diagrams were not changed until 1979. Ferenc ----- Original Message ----- From: Bill Liedtke<mailto:[log in to unmask]> To: [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]> Sent: Tuesday, December 20, 2005 8:47 AM Subject: Re: Offside discussion Unfortunate choice of words in example scenario 4. Although the pictures clearly show that there is no offside, the text implies that a deflection of the through pass by a defender might cause an attacker to be put onside by the opposition. Words and picture don't match, but the verbage could be misleading. Bill Liedtke OKC OK 07 -----Original Message----- From: Discussion of Topics for Soccer Referees [mailto:[log in to unmask]]On Behalf Of The Geissmans Sent: Tuesday, December 20, 2005 8:14 AM To: [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]> Subject: Offside discussion Take this link to a story about a particular non-goal in the recent Arsenal-Chelsea match http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/teams/a/arsenal/4544544.stm<http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/teams/a/arsenal/4544544.stm> and follow the Analysis link within it. At the bottom of that, there's a further link to some example scenarios.


Back to: Top of message | Previous page | Main SOCREF-L page

LISTSERV.URI.EDU CataList email list search Powered by LISTSERV email list manager