FORUMS > St. Helens > Clear up the offside rule? |
|
Rank | Posts | Team |
Player Coach | 16963 | No Team Selected |
Joined | Service | Reputation |
Mar 2009 | 16 years | |
Online | Last Post | Last Page |
Nov 2017 | Oct 2017 | LINK |
Milestone Posts |
|
Milestone Years |
|
Location |
|
Signature |
TO BE FIXED |
|
| Quote: sgtwilko "The offical rule for on side off side from a kick is the players feet have to be behind the ball. Not the kickers foot but the ball. That is what Bentham ruled on. it was very close but you can see why it was give espceially when the rules state benifit of the doubt should always go with the attacking team in try scoring review.'"
But benifit of the doubt wasn't ruled.
I've not seen the the replay of the game yet but it looked offside on the big screen but it's hard to tell for sure on big screen.
At the end of the day it was giving and Leeds won so it's end of story for me.
|
|
|
Rank | Posts | Team |
Player Coach | 7069 | |
Joined | Service | Reputation |
Apr 2006 | 19 years | |
Online | Last Post | Last Page |
Aug 2023 | Dec 2019 | LINK |
Milestone Posts |
|
Milestone Years |
|
Location |
|
Signature |
TO BE FIXED |
|
| Quote: St pete "But benifit of the doubt wasn't ruled.
I've not seen the the replay of the game yet but it looked offside on the big screen but it's hard to tell for sure on big screen.
At the end of the day it was giving and Leeds won so it's end of story for me.'" I thought it looked off side too in the ground,
|
|
|
Rank | Posts | Team |
Player Coach | 16963 | No Team Selected |
Joined | Service | Reputation |
Mar 2009 | 16 years | |
Online | Last Post | Last Page |
Nov 2017 | Oct 2017 | LINK |
Milestone Posts |
|
Milestone Years |
|
Location |
|
Signature |
TO BE FIXED |
|
| Quote: sgtwilko "I thought it looked off side too in the ground,'"
People I've spoke to about it (not saints fans) said it was offside. In fact I've not heard anyone say it's onside.
No point in banging on about it like bulls did with the joynt tackle.
It's gone now
|
|
|
Rank | Posts | Team |
Club Owner | 5848 | No Team Selected |
Joined | Service | Reputation |
Apr 2004 | 21 years | |
Online | Last Post | Last Page |
Oct 2017 | Mar 2017 | LINK |
Milestone Posts |
|
Milestone Years |
|
Location |
|
Signature |
TO BE FIXED |
|
| Quote: St pete "People I've spoke to about it (not saints fans) said it was offside. In fact I've not heard anyone say it's onside.
'"
I have heard the only person that matters...... and he said ON side T_R_Y
HTH
|
|
|
|
Rank | Posts | Team |
Player Coach | 16963 | No Team Selected |
Joined | Service | Reputation |
Mar 2009 | 16 years | |
Online | Last Post | Last Page |
Nov 2017 | Oct 2017 | LINK |
Milestone Posts |
|
Milestone Years |
|
Location |
|
Signature |
TO BE FIXED |
|
| Quote: DoubleAone "I have heard the only person that matters...... and he said ON side T_R_Y
HTH
|
|
|
|
Rank | Posts | Team |
International Chairman | 35189 | No Team Selected |
Joined | Service | Reputation |
Feb 2002 | 23 years | |
Online | Last Post | Last Page |
Jun 2023 | Jun 2023 | LINK |
Milestone Posts |
|
Milestone Years |
|
Location |
|
Signature |
TO BE FIXED |
|
| Quote: St pete "Always 1 (STOP THR FOUL LANGUAGE, THIS IS A FAMILY WEBSITE) idiot that trys to be funny.
Like I've said it's been and gone so who cares.'"
He has a point
Bentham went with the rules
I was sceptical last night, Ive seen the replay a few times and its very close call which could have gone either
|
|
|
Rank | Posts | Team |
Player Coach | 6767 | No Team Selected |
Joined | Service | Reputation |
Oct 2007 | 17 years | |
Online | Last Post | Last Page |
Jul 2024 | Apr 2024 | LINK |
Milestone Posts |
|
Milestone Years |
|
Location |
|
Signature |
TO BE FIXED |
|
| Quote: sgtwilko "The offical rule for on side off side from a kick is the players feet have to be behind the ball. Not the kickers foot but the ball. That is what Bentham ruled on. it was very close but you can see why it was give espceially when the rules state benifit of the doubt should always go with the attacking team in try scoring review.'"
The RFL and International rules for offside is that the chasing player has to be behind the kicker and not the ball. Unless they have changed the rules and not told anybody.
|
|
|
|
Rank | Posts | Team |
Player Coach | 3241 | No Team Selected |
Joined | Service | Reputation |
Apr 2006 | 19 years | |
Online | Last Post | Last Page |
Jun 2011 | Dec 2010 | LINK |
Milestone Posts |
|
Milestone Years |
|
Location |
|
Signature |
TO BE FIXED |
|
| Now, my thoughts on this is well known, I may well be biased as a saints fan, but from each Angle shown on the big screen Lee Smith was offside.
I said to everyone around me that, he can't give this and as each replay angle was shown it backed me up. When Bentham gave it i couldnt believe it.
Its a shame that in my opinion, a game that was so evenly poised was decided by a poor refereeing decision, but it was not to be for us.
|
|
|
Rank | Posts | Team |
Club Coach | 8642 | No Team Selected |
Joined | Service | Reputation |
Feb 2005 | 20 years | |
Online | Last Post | Last Page |
Nov 2024 | Nov 2024 | LINK |
Milestone Posts |
|
Milestone Years |
|
Location |
|
Signature |
TO BE FIXED |
|
| in laymens term it was off side..smith was in front of the kicker.by an inch...tbh im glad you lot were robbed
|
|
|
Rank | Posts | Team |
Player Coach | 197 | No Team Selected |
Joined | Service | Reputation |
May 2009 | 15 years | |
Online | Last Post | Last Page |
Feb 2014 | Nov 2013 | LINK |
Milestone Posts |
|
Milestone Years |
|
Location |
|
Signature |
TO BE FIXED |
|
| Quote: Judder Man "The RFL and International rules for offside is that the chasing player has to be behind the kicker and not the ball. Unless they have changed the rules and not told anybody.'"
I thought the same as you, that the player had to be behind the kicker. But everyone (as in watching it back on sky and seeing the BBC highlights) has only mentioned that both feet of the chasing player have to be behind the ball, and not the man kicking it. BBC used a good graphic on the super league show today (like the line used in football matches to show onside/offside - why can't this be used in sky's RL coverage?) that proved Lee Smith's foot on the floor was level with McGuire's standing leg.
Either everyone's just assumed offside was called for being in front of the man and not the ball, or this is another of those rules that are different in super league compared to international rules. (anyone remember the kick from the 20 meter restart that was given as a scrum to the defence and then changed the very next year to bring super league in line with international rules?)
|
|
|
Rank | Posts | Team |
International Board Member | 1293 | No Team Selected |
Joined | Service | Reputation |
Apr 2003 | 22 years | |
Online | Last Post | Last Page |
Aug 2020 | Aug 2020 | LINK |
Milestone Posts |
|
Milestone Years |
|
Location |
|
Signature |
TO BE FIXED |
|
| From my point of view and after watching the TV Lee Smiths planted foot (he only had one on the ground and that is where the ref will look at it from - not his head or his hands or any other part of his body but the furthest most foot from his own try line that is in contact with the floor - that I am certain on) was ahead of Maquires planted foot but behind the ball - so it was actually between the 2.
If the rules state that offside is judged from the position of the ball then there are no qualms about it Smith was onside. If the rule states that the 2 players planted feet are where the relative positions are taken from then he was infront and offside.
My problem is that I cannot find the rule that tells you where it should be judged from - I know where Bentham took it from and that was the ball - if thats the rule (and I would hope that he does know it to be so) then I just want to know and where he got it from as I cannot find it anywhere in the rulebook - not saying he is right or wrong as that is completely academic - I want to know so that in future I will know the rule or the interpretation of it and why offside is judged from a different point (the ball) to the 40/20 which is the planted foot
|
|
|
Rank | Posts | Team |
Club Owner | 5848 | No Team Selected |
Joined | Service | Reputation |
Apr 2004 | 21 years | |
Online | Last Post | Last Page |
Oct 2017 | Mar 2017 | LINK |
Milestone Posts |
|
Milestone Years |
|
Location |
|
Signature |
TO BE FIXED |
|
| Quote: St. Etrigan "From my point of view and after watching the TV Lee Smiths planted foot (he only had one on the ground and that is where the ref will look at it from - not his head or his hands or any other part of his body but the furthest most foot from his own try line that is in contact with the floor - that I am certain on) was ahead of Maquires planted foot but behind the ball - so it was actually between the 2.
If the rules state that offside is judged from the position of the ball then there are no qualms about it Smith was onside. If the rule states that the 2 players planted feet are where the relative positions are taken from then he was infront and offside.
My problem is that I cannot find the rule that tells you where it should be judged from - I know where Bentham took it from and that was the ball - if thats the rule (and I would hope that he does know it to be so) then I just want to know and where he got it from as I cannot find it anywhere in the rulebook - not saying he is right or wrong as that is completely academic - I want to know so that in future I will know the rule or the interpretation of it and why offside is judged from a different point (the ball) to the 40/20 which is the planted foot'"
Maybe because a 40/20 kick only has reference to a single player ie the kicker so there has to be a point of reference and the only one available is the field markings
The OFFSIDE interpretation obviously involves two players so therefore the reference is the relative positions between the receiver and the ball.
HTH
|
|
|
Rank | Posts | Team |
International Board Member | 1293 | No Team Selected |
Joined | Service | Reputation |
Apr 2003 | 22 years | |
Online | Last Post | Last Page |
Aug 2020 | Aug 2020 | LINK |
Milestone Posts |
|
Milestone Years |
|
Location |
|
Signature |
TO BE FIXED |
|
| Quote: DoubleAone "Maybe because a 40/20 kick only has reference to a single player ie the kicker so there has to be a point of reference and the only one available is the field markings
The OFFSIDE interpretation obviously involves two players so therefore the reference is the relative positions between the receiver and the ball.
HTH'"
I can see your point but you would imagine that the same reference point would be used for both rulings - one against the line markings - the other against a fixed point on the runner.
I dont know the answer but I would love somebody to explain it - there must be refs out there who can guide me in this.
|
|
|
Rank | Posts | Team |
Player Coach | 5193 | No Team Selected |
Joined | Service | Reputation |
Jan 2006 | 19 years | |
Online | Last Post | Last Page |
Aug 2024 | Mar 2024 | LINK |
Milestone Posts |
|
Milestone Years |
|
Location |
|
Signature |
TO BE FIXED |
|
| Coming from a Wigan fan Lee Smith seemed to be offside IMO.
|
|
|
|
|
|