Wolves - v - Leeds United ***Matchday Thread***

[ozleeds]

"Of the body".....not shirt sleeve, hem of shorts etc.

What did I say didn't I say any part of the body those things aren't parts of the body are they.
We had one disallowed for a hand and one for a knee which constitutes the body.
The rules are clear are they right maybe not. Personally, I think the feet should be the focus point.

[ozleeds]

Not true. It’s been all over the place.

As of now it is supposedly any part of the body you can lawfully score with.

Except the addition of the stupid shirt sleeves bit, which is bobbins - no goal should ever be allowed for any arm part below the top of the shoulder.

And who said you can't score with any part as only the hands are off-limits than again Maradona was a master of that lol.
Again I stress the feet should be the rule as it is the only part of the body on the ground.
I hate Bamf he is causing so much controversy I can't take it I tell you lol.

[WTF11]

What did I say didn't I say any part of the body those things aren't parts of the body are they.
We had one disallowed for a hand and one for a knee which constitutes the body.
The rules are clear are they right maybe not. Personally, I think the feet should be the focus point.

No they (the shirt, shorts etc) aren't, but they HAVE been used to give a VAR offside decision, which is bullsh1t.

[Orgoner]

and who said you can't score with any part as only the hands are off-limits than again maradona was a master of that lol.
Again i stress the feet should be the rule as it is the only part of the body on the ground.
I hate bamf he is causing so much controversy i can't take it i tell you lol.

ifab

[WTF11]

And who said you can't score with any part as only the hands are off-limits than again Maradona was a master of that lol.
Again I stress the feet should be the rule as it is the only part of the body on the ground.
I hate Bamf he is causing so much controversy I can't take it I tell you lol.

Now THATS a good post, bit of controversy with a but of humour (need to be able to tell which is which!)

[Orgoner]

Bit short on accuracy though...

[Orgoner]

Bit short on accuracy though...

Much like the officials applying VAR...

[WTF11]

Much like the officials applying VAR...

Amen 😉

[Tichi1]

Their definition is fine (other than the stupid bit about including shirt sleeves), it just doesn’t always seem to be applied properly.

The biggest hole in your argument above would obviously be a well-timed diving header.

Still not bitter.

If it was a "well timed" diving header - he wouldn't be offside surely ...

My original point was that maybe they should write a NEW rule - stating only the feet should count as being offside - this in my opinion would then be a clear definition that takes all the above woolyness out of the argument.

[hopelesslyoptimistic]

If it was a "well timed" diving header - he wouldn't be offside surely ...

My original point was that maybe they should write a NEW rule - stating only the feet should count as being offside - this in my opinion would then be a clear definition that takes all the above woolyness out of the argument.

Makes sense and the simpler the rules (Assuming they are sensible) the better.

If a player arcs his run perfectly but uses arms for balance then that could potentially cause an offside if the arm is further up the pitch even though feet and torso judged to perfection.
With a header it would be judged offside from when the cross was made so again should be easy to judge as the point of heading would be later.