JFK-1 1,693 Posted December 11, 2016 Share Posted December 11, 2016 Which was cowie was off the pitch but came back on to score ? Yep. Which made him offside taking into account a rule I wasn't even aware of and i'm now wondering if the ref and linesman were actually applying this rule or if they thought Wallace was playing him offside. A section from Law 11 An attacking player may step or stay off the field of play not to be involved in active play. If the player re-enters from the goal line and becomes involved in play before the next stoppage in play, or the defending team has played the ball towards the halfway line and it is outside their penalty area, the player shall be considered to be positioned on the goal line for the purposes of offside. So applying that rule Cowie was standing on the goal line which makes him offside. And not only that a second player of theirs who was involved in the build up to it was standing off the pitch when the goal was scored. You can see him over on the right of this clip. [video=youtube;038OR--MYgM] 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pete 2,499 Posted December 11, 2016 Author Share Posted December 11, 2016 Yes he came back on to the field which is illegal. The goal was correctly knocked off. Interesting to see what the sportscene pundits say. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scott7 6,009 Posted December 11, 2016 Share Posted December 11, 2016 Interesting to hear from BH. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
MacK1950 2,378 Posted December 11, 2016 Share Posted December 11, 2016 It will depend on what commentary they add to the clips taken from outside there coverage,no doubt it will be the usual biassed BBC format. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
colinstein 294 Posted December 12, 2016 Share Posted December 12, 2016 Yes he came back on to the field which is illegal. The goal was correctly knocked off. Interesting to see what the sportscene pundits say. surely it would depend on whether the player deliberately left the field to avoid being offside or whether his momentum carried him over the line which looks to be the case in the above clip. to complicate it further, it also looks like the player stayed over the line once he was off field probably so that he wasn't offside. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
JFK-1 1,693 Posted December 12, 2016 Share Posted December 12, 2016 surely it would depend on whether the player deliberately left the field to avoid being offside or whether his momentum carried him over the line which looks to be the case in the above clip.to complicate it further, it also looks like the player stayed over the line once he was off field probably so that he wasn't offside. I couldn't say for sure but i'm guessing he was indeed offside by any definition of the law as stated. It makes no provisions for any running off accidentally etc. Simply says if you're off the pitch and re-enter before a break in play then you're on the goal line for offside purposes. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ian1964 10,724 Posted December 12, 2016 Share Posted December 12, 2016 (edited) IGOR ROSSI insists John Beaton’s decision to chalk off Don Cowie’s first half goal at Ibrox changed the course of the match and denied Hearts the chance to get the Ian Cathro era off to a flyer. The Jambos’ Brazilian centre half thought Cowie had given new boss Cathro a dream start when he poked home from close range after 16 minutes - but after a nine second delay, linesman Stuart Stevenson raised his flag and after consulting with ref Beaton, the goal was disallowed. Rangers went on to win 2-0 but Rossi believes it would have been a different story if the goal had stood. He said: “In the first half there were Rangers chances and Hearts chances and the Hearts ‘goal’ wasn’t offside. “If it goes to 1-0, then it is another game. I looked at it afterwards on the video and for me it wasn’t offside. “After Rangers got the opening goal, at their home ground in front of these fans, it becomes so much more difficult. At 1-0 Hearts it would have been a different game: Rangers would have to have become more offensive and Hearts could keep their defensive line which was good and hit them on the counter attack. If Hearts had scored first it would definitely have been another game. “I don’t know why it took so long - about 10 or 15 seconds after the goal was given, he gave in to the Rangers pressure and gave it offside. But that is football, sometimes the goal is onside, sometimes it is offside. “ The defender believes Hearts played well but admitted there is more to come under Cathro, who stunned him by speaking in fluent Portuguese on his first day in the job on Tuesday. He added: “I think we were good at Ibrox but I think the players can be better still. Last week against Rangers at Tynecastle for instance we played a much better game. “The coach has only been here for one week, and we have talked every day, but Ian needs more time to give his opinions on the team. http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/didnt-deserve-beaton-hearts-igor-9439357 Edited December 12, 2016 by ian1964 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
JFK-1 1,693 Posted December 12, 2016 Share Posted December 12, 2016 IGOR ROSSI insists John Beaton’s decision to chalk off Don Cowie’s first half goal at Ibrox changed the course of the match and denied Hearts the chance to get the Ian Cathro era off to a flyer. The Jambos’ Brazilian centre half thought Cowie had given new boss Cathro a dream start when he poked home from close range after 16 minutes - but after a nine second delay, linesman Stuart Stevenson raised his flag and after consulting with ref Beaton, the goal was disallowed. Rangers went on to win 2-0 but Rossi believes it would have been a different story if the goal had stood. He said: “In the first half there were Rangers chances and Hearts chances and the Hearts ‘goal’ wasn’t offside. “If it goes to 1-0, then it is another game. I looked at it afterwards on the video and for me it wasn’t offside. “After Rangers got the opening goal, at their home ground in front of these fans, it becomes so much more difficult. At 1-0 Hearts it would have been a different game: Rangers would have to have become more offensive and Hearts could keep their defensive line which was good and hit them on the counter attack. If Hearts had scored first it would definitely have been another game. “I don’t know why it took so long - about 10 or 15 seconds after the goal was given, he gave in to the Rangers pressure and gave it offside. But that is football, sometimes the goal is onside, sometimes it is offside. “ The defender believes Hearts played well but admitted there is more to come under Cathro, who stunned him by speaking in fluent Portuguese on his first day in the job on Tuesday. He added: “I think we were good at Ibrox but I think the players can be better still. Last week against Rangers at Tynecastle for instance we played a much better game. “The coach has only been here for one week, and we have talked every day, but Ian needs more time to give his opinions on the team. http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/didnt-deserve-beaton-hearts-igor-9439357 What in the world is he talking about? He said: “In the first half there were Rangers chances and Hearts chances" No there weren't, in the first half Hearts had A chance not 'chances' and they missed it and in fact that was the only shot they had on target the entire match far less the first half. End of story. And even that chance was against the run of play. and the Hearts ‘goal’ wasn't offside Yes it was, we have the clip of it right here in this thread slowed right down and we have the relevant rule declaring him to be offside. Again, end of story. He added: “I think we were good at Ibrox Excellent, if that's them good i'm going to love what happens to them when they're not so good. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
der Berliner 3,744 Posted December 12, 2016 Share Posted December 12, 2016 (edited) Yes, Igor. You were "good at Ibrox". In 30 second spells spread all over the game. And the course of events might have changed had you got the opener, as you would have dug in more sternly than you already did. Snapping at our heels and getting people back. (You know, the funny (let's say lunatic) bit here is, that you answer to people who will never ever read this ) IMHO, we did play better football because Hearts, as opposed to many other teams we have faced, tried to play some football and thus were more open. As it happened last season, when opponents opened up to get a goal back from 75 mins onwards, they were wide open at the back and it could, nay, should have become a rout. I do assume that the next game at Hamilton will again be far more frustrating to watch. Edited December 12, 2016 by der Berliner 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frankie 8,562 Posted December 12, 2016 Share Posted December 12, 2016 Must admit I thoroughly enjoyed the game. The only disappointment was that we didn't score more goals with Miller and Waghorn guilty of missing another four good chances but I can't argue with the overall commitment and quality of every player on the pitch. That's the standard they're capable of and we need to find it in every game - home or away. There is simply no excuse not to deliver the same intensity and work-rate in every game. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.