Well we are only Seventeen days into the New Year and already referees are taking the centre stage to the biggest talking points. Today I’m going to talk about the incident that took place between Newcastle & Manchester City last Sunday, involving referee Mike Jones. As we all know Mike disallowed a Newcastle goal, bringing up the great debate about the offside rule again.
Cheik Tiote demonstrating after goal is chalked off |
Ex Players said the goal should have stood, ex managers said the goal should have stood and even the refereeing fraternity are split 50/50 on Mr. Jones decision. I for one, am of the firm opinion he called it 100% correct, although a very brave man to call it. Let us have a look at it again, there is no doubt about it Tiote,s shot was brilliant from outside the box and if Goufran had not been standing where he was, the goal would have stood. As a former FIFA assistant myself, I did feel for the assistant who was in an near impossible position. When I first saw the incident I thought Goufran was offside and interfering with play. Now that is the magic word in an offside call “Interfering” and Goufran surely was. Let me try and explain. When Tiote shot, his team mate was clearly in an offside position in the six yard box. A lot of the pundits and former players, referees and assistants said although he was offside he was not interfering with play. Well I am sorry guys he was interfering and let me lay it out as plain as I can. When Goufran ducked to get out of the way of the ball he was in my mind interfering with play. How I can hear you all say?. Well in my opinion if he had not ducked out of the way of the flight of the ball it would have hit him. So with him ducking out of the way he interfered with the flight of the ball and in doing so put himself in an offside position. This is the reason Mike Jones called offside and I agree with his decision.
No comments:
Post a Comment