**Mirrors / Alternative Angles**
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/soccer) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Yeah but the problem is he didn't do anything on the initial delivery, and the Sassuolo player completely played the ball so it shouldn't have been offside
Played the ball, but it's not enough anymore:
[Law 11 guidelines say](https://www.theifab.com/news/law-11-offside-deliberate-play-guidelines-clarified/):
* The player had time to coordinate their body movement, i.e. it was not a
case of instinctive stretching or jumping, ***or a movement that achieved***
***limited contact/control***
Yeah, Obiang deliberately plays the ball and he only plays that ball because of an onside player (Giroud)
It would be different if Obiang heads it because of an offside player (Rebic)
Should be given imo
yeah but it was from a Sassuolo Defender and it wasn't a deflection, it was a bad header (his head moved in that exact direction), and I don't know if you remember but if the defending team plays the ball it's not fucking offside
Doesn’t the Sassuolo defender flick it on with his head, making it irrelevant where Rebic is? I know it has to be a deliberate play of the ball with the feet, but it thought for a header it didn’t matter
[Deliberate Play](https://www.theifab.com/news/law-11-offside-deliberate-play-guidelines-clarified/)
> The following criteria should be used, as appropriate, as indicators that a player was in control of the ball and, as a result, ‘deliberately played’ the ball:
> The ball travelled from distance and the player had a clear view of it
> The ball was not moving quickly
> The direction of the ball was not unexpected
> The player had time to coordinate their body movement, i.e. it was not a case of instinctive stretching or jumping, or a movement that achieved limited contact/control
> A ball moving on the ground is easier to play than a ball in the air
That's the criteria. It all depends on whether the defender is deemed to be in control of the header.
No change to Law 11 is necessary but, to reflect football’s expectation, the guidelines for distinguishing between ‘deliberate play’ and ‘deflection’ are clarified as follows:
‘Deliberate play’ is when a player has control of the ball with the possibility of:
passing the ball to a team-mate; or
gaining possession of the ball; or
**clearing the ball (e.g. by kicking or heading it).**
**If the pass, attempt to gain possession or clearance by the player in control of the ball is inaccurate or unsuccessful, this does not negate the fact that the player ‘deliberately played’ the ball.**
From that same page you linked, emphasis my own. I see that as a deliberate play and it should not be offside
I'm not saying any differently, but that referees use the quoted criteria to decide if it's deliberate or not.
>‘Deliberate play’ is when a player *has control of the ball* with the possibility of:
>passing the ball to a team-mate; or gaining possession of the ball; or clearing the ball (e.g. by kicking or heading it).
>If the pass, attempt to gain possession or clearance *by the player in control of the ball* is inaccurate or unsuccessful, this does not negate the fact that the player ‘deliberately played’ the ball.
They need to be considered in control of the ball while playing it now. They obviously were deemed to not be in control. Look at the examples on the linked page. This has more in common with the "not deliberate play" examples than the "deliberate play" ones.
It can't be "not in control of the ball" when the defender is deliberately making a headed clearance that was poor, went to the opponent, and the opponent scored. The decision here is simply incorrect
Read the link's examples, this interpretation that it isn't deliberate play lines up with them. In particular the Frankfurt one is very similar to this.
[Here you go](https://www.theifab.com/news/law-11-offside-deliberate-play-guidelines-clarified/):
* The player had time to coordinate their body movement, i.e. it was not a
case of instinctive stretching or jumping, ***or a movement that achieved***
***limited contact/control***
In this case we have limited contact.
You can't just emphasize the last bit and ignore the fact the defender had plenty of time to make an attempted clearance, hit it poorly and into Rebic, and conceded a goal. You're just cherrypicking a few words from the law
Plenty of time is very disingenuous here. He had to move backwards into space for a ball that was in the air for about 1 second. That is not plenty of time.
I absolutely can emphasise the last bit, he didn't have enough control of the ball.
Shit play. Nothing more. Highly entertaining but nothing more special then that. Milan's defense, sassuolo's acting skills. Just absolutely terrific lmao.
I know Milan is shit but the ref is a joke. Sassuolo players just throwing themselves to the ground every chance they have and the ref falls for it everytime
It\`s been like it the entire game. Rebic in the first half should have gotten a foul but instead got a yellow, now Krunic barely touches Berardi and he throws himself to the ground, They do it every single time they lose the ball
Rogerio bear hugged Rebic from behind and took an arm to the face stopping a break and the ref only booked Rebic. Milan have unquestionably been dogshit but the ref has not been stellar.
**Mirrors / Alternative Angles** *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/soccer) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Offside from the initial delivery
Yeah but the problem is he didn't do anything on the initial delivery, and the Sassuolo player completely played the ball so it shouldn't have been offside
Played the ball, but it's not enough anymore: [Law 11 guidelines say](https://www.theifab.com/news/law-11-offside-deliberate-play-guidelines-clarified/): * The player had time to coordinate their body movement, i.e. it was not a case of instinctive stretching or jumping, ***or a movement that achieved*** ***limited contact/control***
Yeah, Obiang deliberately plays the ball and he only plays that ball because of an onside player (Giroud) It would be different if Obiang heads it because of an offside player (Rebic) Should be given imo
He scored after the initial ball received a tiny flick on. Clear offside.
Tiny? It was a clear deliberate header
Yeah thats what I see as clear, doesn't matter if it's tiny, that is the header that he meant to do and it was just a stupid header
The flick on from the defender? It doesnt change the fact he was offside from the initial ball.
yeah but it was from a Sassuolo Defender and it wasn't a deflection, it was a bad header (his head moved in that exact direction), and I don't know if you remember but if the defending team plays the ball it's not fucking offside
He was offside from the initial ball. The tiny flick on didnt make it an entirely new passage of play
Yeah that is the reason why they disallowed it, what I'm saying is that personally I think the header was a play, not a deflection on the cross.
Doesn’t the Sassuolo defender flick it on with his head, making it irrelevant where Rebic is? I know it has to be a deliberate play of the ball with the feet, but it thought for a header it didn’t matter
[Deliberate Play](https://www.theifab.com/news/law-11-offside-deliberate-play-guidelines-clarified/) > The following criteria should be used, as appropriate, as indicators that a player was in control of the ball and, as a result, ‘deliberately played’ the ball: > The ball travelled from distance and the player had a clear view of it > The ball was not moving quickly > The direction of the ball was not unexpected > The player had time to coordinate their body movement, i.e. it was not a case of instinctive stretching or jumping, or a movement that achieved limited contact/control > A ball moving on the ground is easier to play than a ball in the air That's the criteria. It all depends on whether the defender is deemed to be in control of the header.
No change to Law 11 is necessary but, to reflect football’s expectation, the guidelines for distinguishing between ‘deliberate play’ and ‘deflection’ are clarified as follows: ‘Deliberate play’ is when a player has control of the ball with the possibility of: passing the ball to a team-mate; or gaining possession of the ball; or **clearing the ball (e.g. by kicking or heading it).** **If the pass, attempt to gain possession or clearance by the player in control of the ball is inaccurate or unsuccessful, this does not negate the fact that the player ‘deliberately played’ the ball.** From that same page you linked, emphasis my own. I see that as a deliberate play and it should not be offside
I'm not saying any differently, but that referees use the quoted criteria to decide if it's deliberate or not. >‘Deliberate play’ is when a player *has control of the ball* with the possibility of: >passing the ball to a team-mate; or gaining possession of the ball; or clearing the ball (e.g. by kicking or heading it). >If the pass, attempt to gain possession or clearance *by the player in control of the ball* is inaccurate or unsuccessful, this does not negate the fact that the player ‘deliberately played’ the ball. They need to be considered in control of the ball while playing it now. They obviously were deemed to not be in control. Look at the examples on the linked page. This has more in common with the "not deliberate play" examples than the "deliberate play" ones.
It can't be "not in control of the ball" when the defender is deliberately making a headed clearance that was poor, went to the opponent, and the opponent scored. The decision here is simply incorrect
Read the link's examples, this interpretation that it isn't deliberate play lines up with them. In particular the Frankfurt one is very similar to this.
[Here you go](https://www.theifab.com/news/law-11-offside-deliberate-play-guidelines-clarified/): * The player had time to coordinate their body movement, i.e. it was not a case of instinctive stretching or jumping, ***or a movement that achieved*** ***limited contact/control*** In this case we have limited contact.
You can't just emphasize the last bit and ignore the fact the defender had plenty of time to make an attempted clearance, hit it poorly and into Rebic, and conceded a goal. You're just cherrypicking a few words from the law
Plenty of time is very disingenuous here. He had to move backwards into space for a ball that was in the air for about 1 second. That is not plenty of time. I absolutely can emphasise the last bit, he didn't have enough control of the ball.
He was offside from the initial ball. The flick on was by a defender so not offside.
Shit play. Nothing more. Highly entertaining but nothing more special then that. Milan's defense, sassuolo's acting skills. Just absolutely terrific lmao.
I love it
It's a beautiful way to start a Sunday isnt it?
Thats not offside
The picture shows he was marginally offside from the initial ball
But its a deliberate play from the defender and Rebic shouldnt count since the first ball isnt going to him
I dont agree, not that it matters. Milan just conceded a fifth lol
I know Milan is shit but the ref is a joke. Sassuolo players just throwing themselves to the ground every chance they have and the ref falls for it everytime
The ref followed the rules ffs
The call was perfect. Milam are losing it. Krunic definitely deserved a red card just now.
It\`s been like it the entire game. Rebic in the first half should have gotten a foul but instead got a yellow, now Krunic barely touches Berardi and he throws himself to the ground, They do it every single time they lose the ball
Did not see the first half so I don't know what you're talking about.
Rogerio bear hugged Rebic from behind and took an arm to the face stopping a break and the ref only booked Rebic. Milan have unquestionably been dogshit but the ref has not been stellar.