越位條例其實幾易明,但是要講哂所有會否越位的situation都幾複雜吓,
比賽電光火石間,球証睇漏都唔出其,話佢地唔知就有d侮辱左球証
我想佢地係快得滯睇唔到,多過唔知而無判
[quote]Originally posted by [i]ciger[/i] at 2005-10-6 11:04 PM:
平排一定當啦 [/quote]
唔係下話.....= ="
[quote]Originally posted by [i]scorerhk[/i] at 2005-10-6 11:07 PM:
越位條例其實幾易明,但是要講哂所有會... [/quote]
雖然你咁講都有你既理由,但係球証如果有懷疑應該問下旁證囉,除非連旁證都睇唔到啦
[quote]Originally posted by [i]abc123aa[/i] at 2005-10-6 10:56 PM:
平排都當??? [/quote]
冇錯, 只要祖高爾同加歷查係平排, 咁佢就冇越位
[quote]Originally posted by [i]bigfish[/i] at 2005-10-7 12:30 AM:
冇錯, 只要祖高爾同加歷查係平排, 咁佢就冇越位 [/quote]
哦,啫係如果平排係少於兩個利記球員就越位,相反就唔越位?
[quote]Originally posted by [i]scorerhk[/i] at 2005-10-6 11:07 PM:
越位條例其實幾易明,但是要講哂所有會... [/quote]
Sure they all know the rules la..
i think more than 90% ppl know this rules...(football fans la...)
anyway...even this goal is offside...the result wont change la...
Liverpool also will lose...
(P.S. i m Liverpool's fans...~~)
[quote]Originally posted by [i]sonyguy[/i] at 2005-10-7 01:01:
Sure they all know the rules la... [/quote]
講真咬住2:1真係唔敢講利物浦唔可以追和,但3:1就洩唒氣啦
CAP 圖一張 ... 即係有越位定冇越位呀 ?
[IMG]http://tinypic.com/eafn87.jpg[/IMG]
[quote]Originally posted by [i]raymenxpug[/i] at 2005-10-7 01:23:
CAP 圖一張 ... 即係有越位定冇越位呀 ?
[IMG]http://tinypic.com/eafn87.jpg[/IMG] [/quote]
好難講喎,角度唔同加上波又未離腳,祖高爾又跑緊向前
[quote]Originally posted by [i]ciger[/i] at 2005-10-7 01:27 AM:
好難講喎,角度唔同加上波又未離腳,祖高爾又跑緊向前 [/quote]
個下係出腳之時...
[quote]Originally posted by [i]raymenxpug[/i] at 2005-10-7 01:31:
個下係出腳之時... [/quote]
角度唔同呢,希比亞應該比祖高爾突出4,5個身位,但睇相就唔覺只可以肯定祖高爾前過龍門,但同加歷查比就唔敢講
[quote]Originally posted by [i]ciger[/i] at 2005-10-7 01:36 AM:
角度唔同呢,希比亞應該比祖高爾突出4,5個身位,但睇相就唔覺只可以肯定祖高爾前過龍門,但同加歷查比就唔敢講 [/quote]
I also agree your saying, and maybe the referee also cannot judge whether 加歷查 is behind or before j.cole, so...
Interest should give to attackers ==> no offside is a good judgement.
[quote]Originally posted by [i]ciger[/i] at 2005-10-7 01:27 AM:
好難講喎,角度唔同加上波又未離腳,祖高爾又跑緊向前 [/quote]
加歷查最多同祖高爾平排
[quote]Originally posted by [i]ciger[/i] at 2005-10-7 01:04 AM:
講真咬住2:1真係唔敢講利物浦唔可以追和,但3:1就洩唒氣啦 [/quote]
係呀,3比1果時成隊利記已經散晒= ="
[quote]Originally posted by [i]ciger[/i] at 2005-10-7 01:04:
講真咬住2:1真係唔敢講利物浦唔可以追和,但3:1就洩唒氣啦 [/quote]
agree ~~ 2:1 同 3:1 係兩件事 , 何況當時係下半場中段
[quote]Originally posted by [i]wai0818[/i] at 2005-10-7 02:26 AM:
agree ~~ 2:1 同 3:1 係兩件事 , 何況當時係下半場中段 [/quote]
不過單計3:1 之前o既攻勢, 車仔都係較值得贏波o個隊
其實杜奧巴多次洽住希比亞已經隱約露出利記敗象已呈
[quote]Originally posted by [i]bigfish[/i] at 2005-10-7 02:44 AM:
不過單計3:1 之前o既攻勢, 車仔都係較值得贏波o個隊
其實杜奧巴多次洽住希比亞已經隱約露出利記敗象已呈 [/quote]
冇計呀,希比亞病左都要落場.....:o
**** 作者被禁止或刪除 內容自動屏蔽 ****
[quote]Originally posted by [i]事但[/i] at 2005-10-7 09:30 AM:
幅圖都見唔到祖高爾當時係邊,
咁唔可以判定係唔係越位喎.
講多一點,而家球例,
平排已經唔係越位啦. [/quote]
好耐已經唔係la,
比波一刻接波既同對手平排一定唔係越位
但只要突出少少就一定係越位la
如果幅圖係o岩o岩比波joe cole...我覺得一定無越位~
係加歷查包番越位啦