原來越位可以咁解嫁？:lol:
突然諗到好多屈機既FREEKICK戰術:D
咁有時旁證咪要走出球場先睇到邊個近底線多d？:lol:
過癮、過癮！:D [/quote]
唔係咁解咁係點解？:confused:
球例唔通有兩種解法？:confused::confused: [quote]Originally posted by [i]Edgar_Davids[/i] at 2008-6-10 01:09 PM:
唔係咁解咁係點解？:confused:
球例唔通有兩種解法？:confused::confused: [/quote]
無，咁解實在太過癮:P 原來冇球証許可出左場都計包Offside
防守球員真係難做勒 [quote]Originally posted by [i]自由神[/i] at 10-6-2008 13:13:
無，咁解實在太過癮:P [/quote]
[b]越位呢個東西根本存在灰色地帶架啦...:haha::haha:[/b]
[b][color=Red]如果你話雲佬越位,
咁以後個個守方頂完角球都跳左出場扮傷架啦,
實吹攻方越位無死架喎...:giveup::giveup:[/color][/b]
[b][color=Blue]如果你話雲佬無越位,
咁攻方因為守方意外受傷而入波又勝之不武喎...:giveup::giveup:[/color][/b] 太可惜了....因為要返工....無睇到依場波呀......><
希望黎緊果 d波都可以精彩 d啦.... Italian Refereeing Chief: Van Nistelrooy Goal Legitimate
The president of the Italian referee association (AIA), Cesare Gussoni, believes that Ruud Van Nistelrooy’s opener was legitimate despite a massive claim for offside.
The Real Madrid striker pounced on a razor sharp cross from Sneijder to tap in from close range.
Replay’s can clearly show the player in an offside position but Italy defender Christian Panucci was deemed by the linesman to have played Van Nistelrooy onside even though the stopper was off the pitch and down on the touchline with what seemed like an injury.
Nevertheless, the goal stood and Gussoni believes it was legitimate despite the whole of Italy going berzerk when it was allowed to stand.
“The linesman applied UEFA’s ruling 100 per cent,” said Gussoni.
“He evaluated Panucci’s position as the player who kept Van Nistelrooy onside.
“I thought it was offside but the replay showed Panucci off the pitch.”
The rules specify on whether or not a player leaves the field voluntarily or involuntarily in an attempt to play the striker offside.
But, in Panucci’s case, it is impossible to tell whether he left the pitch voluntarily or vice-versa.
“The sense of the rule is to avoid players leaving the pitch on purpose in an attempt to gain an advantage from playing the other player offside,” said Gussoni.
[url]http://goal.com/en/articolo.aspx?contenutoid=729918[/url]
alot of people still think otherwise though. 唔需要再討論第一球係咪offside
唔計呢一個, 我都相信荷蘭會技術性擊到意大利
有冇巴打可以介紹
Engelaar係乜水, 點解可以踢到咁勁.. 鄧納東尼排錯陣,搞到意大利輸咁多... [quote]Originally posted by [i]自由神[/i] at 2008-6-10 10:48 AM:
:D睇大家點睇啦
大家可能而家好睇好... [/quote]
如困無第一球既越位,我諗意大利就唔會出現第二及第三個亂晒大籠既入球,就算分勝負,都只會係1球定生死,或打和完場
:crybye: [quote]Originally posted by [i]費事高[/i] at 2008-6-10 05:09 PM:
如困無第一球既越位,我諗意大利就唔會出現第二及第三個亂晒大籠既入球,就算分勝負,都只會係1球定生死,或打和完場
:crybye: [/quote]
輸波地就硬..:D
不如快D諗下點改善下你地前中後三線好過啦
尋日既意大利根本就唔係真正既意大利:haha:
荷蘭的確打得好 對意大利最失望唔係輸波
而係冇波入
連埋門都唔多...
東尼入拜仁溫室太耐喇
睇下老鬼迪比阿路,一出黎好佢幾多 [quote]Originally posted by [i]奇[/i] at 2008-6-10 04:54 AM:
荷蘭進攻一向有計,不過意大利第一球唔抵,明明越位... [/quote]
he said no offside...
新浪體育訊 意大利0-3輸給荷蘭，血淋淋的比分背後，卻有著諸多隱情。比賽中的第一個丟球，來自一個容易引起爭議的判罰(視頻)，但從專業的角度來看，這個進球的確是沒有疑問的。
讓我們回放一下當時的場景：荷蘭隊開出角球，布馮將皮球擊出的同時，也把隊友帕努奇撞在了底線之外，荷蘭隊拿到第二點後回敲，斯內德禁區前遠射，范尼在門前輕輕一碰，皮球變向入網。這一過程發生在電光火石之間，其間帕努奇一直躺在底線外沒有起來，而在斯內德遠射瞬間，范尼的面前只有布馮一名防守隊員，這一球是否越位？意大利很多球員向來自瑞典的主裁判弗洛菲爾特提出了疑問。
這個球是否越位？歐洲盃裁判執委會的回答是「百分之百沒有越位」，發言人卡普爾表示：「按照規則，當進攻方面對的對方最後兩名防守隊員其中之一離開場地的情況下，不算越位。」實際上這是有案例可循的，上賽季切爾西3-2戰勝維岡競技的比賽中，博拉魯斯在爭頂中摔出底線，對方遠射，門前處於面對切爾西最後一名防守隊員(切赫)位置上的球員折射破門，當時那粒進球就算為有效，切爾西方面也沒有太大的爭議。
但毫無疑問，這個看似有些問題的丟球，影響了意大利隊員的心情，球員們沒有及時調整過來，於是很快出現了第二個丟球。
隱情還有第二個，那就是賽場上的大屏幕，賽後，隨隊的足協官員阿爾貝蒂尼指出了這一點。按照規則，賽場大屏幕不許播放本場比賽的鏡頭，但在意大利丟球後，大屏幕開始連續播放這一進球的過程，或許清楚的看到了進球的過程，加重了球員們對此球的質疑，從而影響到了意大利隊員的比賽心情。
阿爾貝蒂尼說：「在第一個丟球上，激怒球員們的是看到了體育場的大屏幕上對此球的回放，這增加了球員的競爭情緒，可能也影響到了裁判。托尼因為指著屏幕向裁判解釋而吃到了黃牌，我們不知道這是否會在後面的比賽中對我們有潛在的影響。」
對於本場的比分，阿爾貝蒂尼說：「我們的表現的確配不上贏得這場比賽，但場面也沒有像最後的比分那麼誇張。」
-
[url]http://www.needagoal.com/phpbb3/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=28581&p=318144#p318144[/url] [quote]Originally posted by [i]goodtime[/i] at 2008-6-10 04:21 PM:
唔需要再討論第一球係咪offside
唔計呢一個, 我都相信荷蘭會技術性擊到意大利
有冇巴打可以介紹
Engelaar係乜水, 點解可以踢到咁勁.. [/quote]
......who is Engelaar..... [quote]Originally posted by [i]slwong3[/i] at 10-6-2008 19:40:
......who is Engelaar..... [/quote]
[b][color=Blue]Have you watched the match last night :confused:
He played quite well and commentators talked about his name quite a few of time...:haha::haha:
Besides Kuyt and Sneijder, I think he was the best player last night...:good::good:[/color][/b] [quote]Originally posted by [i]goodtime[/i] at 10-6-2008 16:21:
唔需要再討論第一球係咪offside
唔計呢一個, 我都相信荷蘭會技術性擊到意大利
有冇巴打可以介紹
[b][color=Red]Engelaar係乜水, 點解可以踢到咁勁..[/color][/b] [/quote]
[color=Blue][b]Orlando Engelaar, 28 years old, player and captain of Twente.
2006 left Genk to Twente due to his impressive performance in Belgium...
In 07-08 season, Twente was the first runner-up and even KO Ajax for a ECL Qualifier position...
No doubts that Twente did that simply because of him...:good::good:
He is 196cm tall, that makes him one of the tallest players in the Eredivisie. Previously he was a center-forward, but being found that his aerial and passing abilities, he then being moved to attacking midfield and left wing, sometimes even defending midfield like last night. In spite of his size, he is very attack-minded.
[color=Green]In a nutshell, he has advantages below:
1. Height & Size
2. Passing abilities
3. Attack-Minded[/color][/b][/color]
:good::good::good::good::good: My point of view:
NO OFFSIDE.
The critical parts are:
Did Panucci fell due to foul? NO
Did he get injury that referee "called" him to leave the field? NO
Panucci didn't get any intention to leave the field to prevent offside situation. That's why he didn't get yellow card in this case.
There would be Offside ages ago in this situation. But people may never notice it the rules have been changed.
Some critical decisions that can help us to know the rules more and let the players "wake up".
During in these 4 years, there'd be 3 critical incidents that every player will remember it and do want to break it again.
1) Tim Cahill was taking off 1/2 way of his jersey and got booked, as he got his 2nd yellow card of that game, he got sent off (yellow for unsporting behaviour)
2) Javier Mascherano got his yellow card as he was keep talking to referee and questioning the decision of referee during first half vs Man Utd. As he got his 2nd yellow card in that incident, he should be sending off (yellow card for dissent word/action)
3) The goal was allowed by the European Cup, The Netherlands vs Italy, when Panucci was out of field and he'd be letting Van Nistelrooy onside in this situation.
I am asking some senior referees in my referee ass. and some of them are giving me same answer.. they think there'd be a great decision from Assistant Referee!
Official answer, from UEFA, 10/6/2008
BASEL, June 10 (Reuters) - Netherlands' controversial first goal in Monday's 3-0 Group C victory over world champions Italy at Euro 2008 was correctly awarded despite many observers believing it was offside, organisers UEFA said on Tuesday.UEFA general secretary David Taylor told a news conference the officials correctly interpreted Law 11 which relates to offside when Ruud van Nistelrooy scored after 26 minutes.
He stated that Christian Panucci played him onside although the Italian defender was off the pitch at the time.
'The goal was correctly awarded. Not many people, even in the game, and I include the players, know this interpretation (of Law 11),' Taylor said.
He conceded, however: 'The Law itself does not deal with this situation directly at all,' but said that referees universally interpreted it in the way that the officials did on Monday night.
He said he had every sympathy with the wider footballing public for believing the officials called it wrong but said that Swedish referee Peter Frojdfeldt and his assistant Stefan Wittberg were absolutely correct in their interpretation.
Taylor told reporters: 'Even though the Italian defender (Christian Panucci) was off the field because of his momentum, he is still deemed to be part of the game and is therefore taken into considersation as one of the last two defending players.
'As a result Ruud Van Nistelrooy was not nearer the opponents' goalline than the second last defender and therefore could not be in an offside position.'
'This is a widely known interpretation of the offside law among referees but is not generally known by the wider footballing public and indeed many people in football,' he said.
'That is understandable because incidents like this are very unusual.
'However, there was a similar incident in a Swiss League match about a month ago between Sion and FC Basel and after a TV commentator initially suggested the referee had made a mistake, he later apologised publicly and congratulations to him.'
The goal caused confusion among both the Italian and Dutch players too, a number of whom looked astonished when the goal was awarded.
It also provoked some angry reaction among the Italian fans when it was replayed on the giant screens inside the Stade de Suisse stadium and led to Luca Toni being booked for dissent for protesting.
Taylor said his yellow card would stand and that goals would still be replayed on the screens throughout the tournament.
The International Football Association Board, the guardian of the game's laws, had the prerogative to examine the law if they thought the wording needed to be clarified or a loophole existed, Taylor said. 如果咁樣唔越位
遲d攻方走去龍門後面唔越位之後大腳ban過去出番黎接波咪單刀都得 樓主：昨晚嚴格黎講，主攻既係意大利，反擊的是荷蘭
個人意見：荷蘭真係打得好好，意大利條中場食晒屎，完全冇活力完全截唔倒波，唔明點解要出呢三個，今年米蘭己經証明左呢三條友冇活力既失敗，今場意大利踢主攻，出呢三件即係自殺。有條咁既中場，往往荷蘭一打反擊時就係直接攻擊意大利對中堅，但問題係個球場咁大，你叫對中堅點守？兩件慢到hihi既中堅緊逼對方攻擊球員又跟唔倒，包位又太空包左等於隱型.....
總之昨晚意大利最大敗筆係條中場，一切都由中場起，派路表面上踢得幾好，但佢其實係意大利條中場防守上既最大漏洞，三人中場線根本就唔應該用派路........
No bad words please!!!!
:nogood::nogood::nogood::nogood::nogood::nogood::nogood:
:fight::fight::fight::fight::fight::fight:
:gun::gun::gun::gun::gun:
[[i] Last edited by brightlee on 2008-6-11 at 09:44 AM [/i]]