娛樂滿紛 26FUN - Powered by Discuz! Board

標題: J.cole 入 3:1 果球 , 好明顯係越位 [打印本頁]

作者: wai0818 時間: 2005-10-6 03:42 PM 標題: J.cole 入 3:1 果球 , 好明顯係越位

當隊友傳球離腳一刻,接應的隊員前面少於2名對手(防守兩名球員不一定其中一名是守門員)
即offside...
好明顯 J.cole 執雞果陣前面得一個希比亞 .....
都唔明 d 評述重大大聲聲講希比亞包左越位 ....

作者: shaqkobe 時間: 2005-10-6 03:49 PM

Originally posted by wai0818 at 2005-10-6 15:42:
當隊友傳球離腳一刻,接應的隊員前面少...

咁龍門呢？

作者: SPACE2007 時間: 2005-10-6 03:58 PM

你講的球例絕對正確, 而那時龍門的位置又真係後過J.Cole, 但我仲未有機會再睇場波, 到底仲有冇球員係J.Cole前面, 而且大家即時真係想唔起條球例, 只係見到希比亞係前面就當冇越位, 踢波就係有咁多人為因素, 冇辦法, 但咁樣先有趣

作者: super168 時間: 2005-10-6 04:01 PM

球証擺明幫車仔
係咪有線d評述呀,佢地正一廢柴,同Peter Wong 一樣
好懷念何輝同江忠德

作者: wai0818 時間: 2005-10-6 04:10 PM

Originally posted by super168 at 2005-10-6 16:01:
球証擺明幫車仔
係咪有線d評述呀,佢地正一廢柴,同Peter Wong 一樣
好懷念何輝同江忠德

我鐘意馬啟仁同丁偉杰 ... 唔知馬啟仁去左邊呢 ??

作者: abc123aa 時間: 2005-10-6 04:25 PM

呢條例有幾多人知都成問題啦.......
基本上係球場係唔會將呢球當成越位,雖然係有呢條例係度

作者: abc123aa 時間: 2005-10-6 04:26 PM

Originally posted by shaqkobe at 2005-10-6 03:49 PM:

咁龍門呢？

龍門走左出去樸波,基本上好多球員都未必知呢條例,就算連球証都係

作者: lolohang1171 時間: 2005-10-6 04:35 PM

不過紅軍今年既入球率都真係麻麻...

作者: ahho319 時間: 2005-10-6 04:48 PM

keeper 係出左黎
但佢後面仲有兩個人...一個係希比亞
另一個係鏡頭下面(唔記得邊個囉 )....

作者: shaqkobe 時間: 2005-10-6 04:53 PM

點都係要睇返段片先至知。有無人有？

作者: abc123aa 時間: 2005-10-6 05:18 PM

Originally posted by ahho319 at 2005-10-6 04:48 PM:
keeper 係出左黎
但佢後面仲有兩個人...一個係希比亞
另一個係鏡頭下面(唔記得邊個囉 )....

我記得好似得一個希比亞= ="

作者: shaqkobe 時間: 2005-10-6 05:22 PM

Originally posted by abc123aa at 2005-10-6 17:18:

我記得好似得一個希比亞= ="

咁者係真係越位啦喎

作者: abc123aa 時間: 2005-10-6 05:26 PM

Originally posted by shaqkobe at 2005-10-6 05:22 PM:

咁者係真係越位啦喎

照返呢條例黎睇就係,但球証知唔知有呢條例先,利物浦教練同球員都冇投訴,可能真係人為因素影響啦,始終現場咁激好難即時記得

作者: wai0818 時間: 2005-10-6 06:25 PM

評述錯都無咁大問題 , 問題係球証都出錯先係一個大問題 , 身為國際球証 , 果晚聽評述講 , 話佢重係代表英格蘭出任 06世界杯既其中一個球証添 =.="

咁死得啦 .......

作者: bigfish 時間: 2005-10-6 06:56 PM

除左前面有希比亞, 鏡頭下方仲有另一位球員包左越位, 請細心睇下啦

作者: bigfish 時間: 2005-10-6 06:58 PM

Originally posted by abc123aa at 2005-10-6 04:26 PM:

龍門走左出去樸波,基本上好多球員都未必知呢條例,就算連球証都係

呢條例唔係咩特別球例, 你唔好當d 球證同球員廢先得架...
我小學o個陣都知呢條例啦, 老豆同我講o既

作者: abc123aa 時間: 2005-10-6 07:08 PM

Originally posted by wai0818 at 2005-10-6 06:25 PM:
評述錯都無咁大問題 , 問題係球証都出...

呢d情況好多時都有嫁啦= ="
家下問題係究竟有冇第二位球員而佢係冇入到鏡呢= ="

作者: abc123aa 時間: 2005-10-6 07:08 PM

Originally posted by bigfish at 2005-10-6 06:58 PM:

呢條例唔係咩特別球例, 你唔好當d 球證同球員廢先得架...
我小學o個陣都知呢條例啦, 老豆同我講o既

咁如果真係冇第二位球員既話點解唔吹越位同唔投訴呢???
既然你老豆咁醒目知道既,點解d講波佬唔知既

睇黎d講波佬要讀下d球例

作者: brightlee 時間: 2005-10-6 07:30 PM

I remember when I was watching this match in Sydney, they show THIS OFFISDE situation in replay, and some of the Liverpool players were complaining.. but not much.....
Well, that's why I like to watch English version in soccer (not Australian commentators, they were from BBC)
The commentators clearly said that's Offside........

but for referee point of view, it's normal he couldn't see that incident... remmeber he's running at the back of the players.. not on the same line as the players.....

[ Last edited by brightlee on 2005-10-6 at 09:33 PM ]

作者: shaqkobe 時間: 2005-10-6 07:31 PM

Originally posted by abc123aa at 2005-10-6 19:08:

咁如果真係冇第二位球員既話點解唔吹越位同唔投訴呢???
既然你老豆咁醒目知道既,點解d講波佬唔知既
睇黎d講波佬要讀下d球例

可能講波佬呃飯食吧。

作者: abc123aa 時間: 2005-10-6 07:32 PM

Originally posted by shaqkobe at 2005-10-6 07:31 PM:

可能講波佬呃飯食吧。

係呀

作者: abc123aa 時間: 2005-10-6 07:35 PM

Originally posted by brightlee at 2005-10-6 07:30 PM:
I remember when I was watching this...

你係唔係話果度既講波佬話明顯係越位???
咁球証同利物浦班職球員都幾好野下.....

作者: bigfish 時間: 2005-10-6 07:59 PM

Originally posted by abc123aa at 2005-10-6 07:08 PM:

咁如果真係冇第二位球員既話點解唔吹越位同唔投訴呢???
既然你老豆咁醒目知道既,點解d講波佬唔知既
睇黎d講波佬要讀下d球例

先多謝你讚家嚴, 佢解釋呢條例俾我係因為當時正進行 90 世界盃, 有個類似咁o既情況, 我記得當時d 講波佬都有講過 (唔知係咪陳譚)
呢d 係普通球例, 我意思係話知道條例都冇咩大不了, 而且所有球證一定會知 (因為有會員話呢個情況 - 龍門前過兩個後衛 - 比較少見, 連球證都未必知)
反而講波佬我覺得未必會知, 因為佢地真係冇讀過d 球例, 而且出錯o既機會都幾多, 千祈唔好當佢地係權威就得 la

作者: wer 時間: 2005-10-6 08:01 PM

Originally posted by shaqkobe at 2005-10-6 19:31:

可能講波佬呃飯食吧。

帶到氣氛就得

作者: abc123aa 時間: 2005-10-6 08:03 PM

Originally posted by bigfish at 2005-10-6 07:59 PM:
先多謝你讚家嚴, 佢解釋呢條例俾我係因為當時正進行 90 世界盃, 有個類似咁o既情況, 我記得當時d 講波佬都有講過 (唔知係咪陳譚)
呢d 係普通球例, 我意思係話知道條例都冇咩大不了, 而且所有球證一定會知 (因為有會員話呢個情況 - 龍門前過兩個後衛 - 比較少見, 連球證都未必知)
反而講波佬我覺得未必會知, 因為佢地真係冇讀過d 球例, 而且出錯o既機會都幾多, 千祈唔好當佢地係權威就得 la

唔洗客氣

我同意你講唔好當d講波佬係權威呢個論點
依家既情況係如果真係冇第二個球員係前過祖高爾既話,啫係越位啦,
因為希比亞既角色變左係龍門,同普通單刀越位既道理一樣,
我見有時呢d通常球証都唔吹越位,所以我唔知球証知唔知呢條例,但應該會知囉
可能真係比較少見同埋可能冇咩案例參考,其實呢球同謝列美入果球一樣,只不過係謝列美後上咁解

唔知紅字果度講得啱唔啱呢,唔啱既話指教下

作者: abc123aa 時間: 2005-10-6 08:07 PM

Originally posted by wer at 2005-10-6 08:01 PM:

帶到氣氛就得

基本上講解到場波就ok
如果場波係馬啟仁講既話佢可能知,因為之前亨利快開罰球佢都講到出黎係咩事

作者: bigfish 時間: 2005-10-6 10:09 PM

Originally posted by abc123aa at 2005-10-6 08:03 PM:

唔洗客氣
我同意你講唔好當d講波...

其實我覺得呢球波真係冇越到位, 因為真係有兩個球員 (希比亞加埋另一個後衛)o係祖高爾前面 when 杜奧巴射門一刻
我都好肯定球證係百分之一百清楚呢條例o既運作, 睇唔睇到就靠對眼, 同對球例認知無關

作者: 艾力克 時間: 2005-10-6 10:16 PM

係咪即係攻方射門時,如果前過對方兩個守衛時,就等於offside呀?

作者: ciger 時間: 2005-10-6 10:24 PM

Originally posted by shaqkobe at 2005-10-6 19:31:

可能講波佬呃飯食吧。

我要為班講波佬申冤,當晚有一個講波佬係有講過這個問題,我親耳聽到,至於球證唔吹有可能係佢認為當時另一個防守球員(唔係希比亞)同祖高爾平排,事實上真係好近,我地都要慢鏡先睇到,球證可能睇錯

作者: bigfish 時間: 2005-10-6 10:24 PM

Originally posted by 艾力克 at 2005-10-6 10:16 PM:
係咪即係攻方射門時,如果前過對方兩個守衛時,就等於offside呀?

非也, 係某球員傳球時, 接應o既隊友前面 or 平排o既守方球員少於兩名就構成越位

作者: ciger 時間: 2005-10-6 10:26 PM

Originally posted by abc123aa at 2005-10-6 20:03:

唔洗客氣
我同意你講唔好當d講波...

希比亞既角色變左係龍門,咁佢咪可以用手?唔應該咁講

作者: 艾力克 時間: 2005-10-6 10:29 PM

Originally posted by bigfish at 2005-10-6 10:24 PM:

非也, 係某球員傳球時, 接應o既隊友前面 or 平排o既守方球員少於兩名就構成越位

基本上我明,只係覺得有d complicated

學abc話..
如果將hyppia當keeper,會易理解好多

作者: bigfish 時間: 2005-10-6 10:31 PM

Originally posted by 艾力克 at 2005-10-6 10:29 PM:

基本上我明,只係覺得有d complicated

學abc話..
如果將hyppia當keeper,會易理解好多

理解得到就好 la

即係有d 人會將 keeper 當"其中一名守衛"咁去理解一樣

作者: ciger 時間: 2005-10-6 10:32 PM

Originally posted by abc123aa at 2005-10-6 16:25:
呢條例有幾多人知都成問題啦.......
基本上係球場係唔會將呢球當成越位,雖然係有呢條例係度

我睇左廿年波,都係見過一次咁嘅情況,90年世界杯季軍戰意大利對英格蘭,巴治奧就有1球波係咁,我唔係好記得,不過應該係有吹越位,當年tvb搵陳譚新上黎講波,我都係果陣先知咁都係越位

作者: ciger 時間: 2005-10-6 10:36 PM

Originally posted by 艾力克 at 2005-10-6 22:29:

基本上我明,只係覺得有d complicated

學abc話..
如果將hyppia當keeper,會易理解好多

其實好簡單,唔好將龍門當係龍門,當係普通球員就得,咁前面有2個對方球員咪冇越位囉

作者: abc123aa 時間: 2005-10-6 10:55 PM

Originally posted by bigfish at 2005-10-6 10:09 PM:

其實我覺得呢球波真係冇越到位, 因...

祖高爾前面好似得一個利物浦球員,其他位有冇就唔知= ="

作者: abc123aa 時間: 2005-10-6 10:55 PM

Originally posted by ciger at 2005-10-6 10:26 PM:

希比亞既角色變左係龍門,咁佢咪可以用手?唔應該咁講

冇話佢變左係龍門,呢個只係理解球例既一個比喻

作者: abc123aa 時間: 2005-10-6 10:56 PM

Originally posted by bigfish at 2005-10-6 10:24 PM:

非也, 係某球員傳球時, 接應o既隊友前面 or 平排o既守方球員少於兩名就構成越位

平排都當???

作者: abc123aa 時間: 2005-10-6 10:57 PM

Originally posted by ciger at 2005-10-6 10:32 PM:

我睇左廿年波,都係見過一次咁嘅情況...

我之前都睇過有關既文章,但係都唔明,到依家先明

作者: ciger 時間: 2005-10-6 11:04 PM

Originally posted by abc123aa at 2005-10-6 22:56:

平排都當???

平排一定當啦

作者: scorerhk 時間: 2005-10-6 11:07 PM

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

作者: abc123aa 時間: 2005-10-6 11:11 PM

Originally posted by ciger at 2005-10-6 11:04 PM:

平排一定當啦

唔係下話.....= ="

作者: abc123aa 時間: 2005-10-6 11:13 PM

Originally posted by scorerhk at 2005-10-6 11:07 PM:
越位條例其實幾易明,但是要講哂所有會...

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

作者: bigfish 時間: 2005-10-7 12:30 AM

Originally posted by abc123aa at 2005-10-6 10:56 PM:

平排都當???

冇錯, 只要祖高爾同加歷查係平排, 咁佢就冇越位

作者: abc123aa 時間: 2005-10-7 12:36 AM

Originally posted by bigfish 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

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?

作者: sonyguy 時間: 2005-10-7 01:01 AM

Originally posted by scorerhk at 2005-10-6 11:07 PM:
越位條例其實幾易明,但是要講哂所有會...

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...~~)

作者: ciger 時間: 2005-10-7 01:04 AM

Originally posted by sonyguy at 2005-10-7 01:01:

Sure they all know the rules la...

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

作者: raymenxpug 時間: 2005-10-7 01:23 AM

CAP 圖一張 ... 即係有越位定冇越位呀 ?

圖片附件: Offside.JPG (2005-10-7 01:23 AM, 37.3 KB) / 下載次數 6
http://26fun.com/bbs/attachment.php?aid=593181&k=23931bb11a169dbe117ceb77197d9ed2&t=1730883405&sid=X8K8ZC

作者: ciger 時間: 2005-10-7 01:27 AM

Originally posted by raymenxpug at 2005-10-7 01:23:
CAP 圖一張 ... 即係有越位定冇越位呀 ?

好難講喎,角度唔同加上波又未離腳,祖高爾又跑緊向前

作者: raymenxpug 時間: 2005-10-7 01:31 AM

Originally posted by ciger 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

個下係出腳之時...

作者: ciger 時間: 2005-10-7 01:36 AM

Originally posted by raymenxpug at 2005-10-7 01:31:

個下係出腳之時...

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

作者: chicken 時間: 2005-10-7 02:07 AM

Originally posted by ciger 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

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.

作者: abc123aa 時間: 2005-10-7 02:19 AM

Originally posted by ciger 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

加歷查最多同祖高爾平排

作者: abc123aa 時間: 2005-10-7 02:20 AM

Originally posted by ciger 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

係呀,3比1果時成隊利記已經散晒= ="

作者: wai0818 時間: 2005-10-7 02:26 AM

Originally posted by ciger 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

agree ~~ 2:1 同 3:1 係兩件事 , 何況當時係下半場中段

作者: bigfish 時間: 2005-10-7 02:44 AM

Originally posted by wai0818 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

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

作者: abc123aa 時間: 2005-10-7 04:12 AM

Originally posted by bigfish 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

冇計呀,希比亞病左都要落場.....

作者: 事但 時間: 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.

作者: kakeidevil 時間: 2005-10-7 10:09 AM

Originally posted by 事但 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.

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

作者: ahho319 時間: 2005-10-7 10:53 AM

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

作者: Beckham4072 時間: 2005-10-7 11:57 AM

Originally posted by wai0818 at 2005-10-6 04:10 PM:

我鐘意馬啟仁同丁偉杰 ... 唔知馬啟仁去左邊呢 ??

馬啟仁未係有線囉
聽得佢地多反而鍾意聽下64班嘩鬼大頭仔阿鵬大力
有時好似大班朋友睇波咁.....最衰係冇粗口

[ Last edited by Beckham4072 on 2005-10-7 at 12:00 PM ]

作者: 事但 時間: 2005-10-7 12:04 PM

Originally posted by ahho319 at 2005-10-7 10:53 AM:
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

幅圖都見唔到祖高爾係邊.......
你點可以知佢一定冇越位?

加歷查好似仲企得前過reina喎,
點包越位?

[ Last edited by 事但 on 2005-10-7 at 12:05 PM ]

作者: wai0818 時間: 2005-10-7 12:19 PM

Originally posted by Beckham4072 at 2005-10-7 11:57:

馬啟仁未係有線囉
聽得佢地多反而...

由今球季開始 , I-CABLE 已經未聽過馬啟仁把聲 .......

作者: chicken 時間: 2005-10-7 12:27 PM

Originally posted by 事但 at 2005-10-7 12:04 PM:

幅圖都見唔到祖高爾係邊.......
你點可以知佢一定冇越位?

加歷查好似仲企得前過reina喎,
點包越位?

[ Last edited by 事但 on 2005-10-7 at 12:05 PM ]

the most right side is not J.Cole?

作者: Beckham4072 時間: 2005-10-7 12:34 PM

Originally posted by wai0818 at 2005-10-7 12:19 PM:

由今球季開始 , I-CABLE 已經未聽過馬啟仁把聲 .......

@@"...下平時都見到佢做節目wo 係唔係高低眼果個

作者: Beckham4072 時間: 2005-10-7 12:35 PM

........唔知咁樣得唔得呢
大家點睇

圖片附件: eafn87.jpg (2005-10-7 12:35 PM, 45.1 KB) / 下載次數 29
http://26fun.com/bbs/attachment.php?aid=593510&k=3561a06b8b0977e734cc1dc33b356229&t=1730883405&sid=X8K8ZC

作者: wai0818 時間: 2005-10-7 12:36 PM

Originally posted by Beckham4072 at 2005-10-7 12:34:

@@"...下平時都見到佢做節目wo 係唔係高低眼果個

8 月開始無左喇

作者: wai0818 時間: 2005-10-7 12:39 PM

Originally posted by Beckham4072 at 2005-10-7 12:35:
........唔知咁樣得唔得呢
大家點睇

第二條線同小禁區條線好似唔多平衡喎 @@"

作者: 事但 時間: 2005-10-7 12:50 PM

Originally posted by chicken at 2005-10-7 12:27 PM:

the most right side is not J.Cole?

依..........
原來我冇拉大幅圖睇,
對唔住.

係幅圖入面,
祖高爾後希比亞後面,
不過一定前過reina,
而加歷查就應該同reina平排.

所以我都認為祖高爾係越位.

作者: kakeidevil 時間: 2005-10-7 12:51 PM

Originally posted by Beckham4072 at 2005-10-7 12:35 PM:
........唔知咁樣得唔得呢
大家點睇

總係覺得個鏡頭要同球員平排先睇到有冇越位

作者: 事但 時間: 2005-10-7 12:54 PM

Originally posted by Beckham4072 at 2005-10-7 12:35 PM:
........唔知咁樣得唔得呢
大家點睇

你劃個兩條白線同條底線/禁區線都唔平衡架喎.

如果你劃一條平衡線,你會見到祖高爾係企前左.

作者: shaqkobe 時間: 2005-10-7 02:36 PM

Originally posted by wai0818 at 2005-10-7 12:39:

第二條線同小禁區條線好似唔多平衡喎 @@"

就算平衡返都係越左位。

作者: Beckham4072 時間: 2005-10-7 03:38 PM

Originally posted by 事但 at 2005-10-7 12:54 PM:

你劃個兩條白線同條底線/禁區線都唔平衡架喎.

如果你劃一條平衡線,你會見到祖高爾係企前左.

=.=......冇工具冇法

作者: abc123aa 時間: 2005-10-7 04:25 PM

Originally posted by 事但 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.

我都覺得奇,平排點會越位= ="

作者: 20001160 時間: 2005-10-8 01:11 PM

我睇返
傳波果一下有兩個人係祖高爾前面
到左佢腳就得返一個希比亞姐係冇越到

作者: abc123aa 時間: 2005-10-8 01:11 PM

有冇片???

作者: abcde1918 時間: 2005-10-8 01:13 PM

Originally posted by abc123aa at 2005-10-8 01:11 PM:
有冇片???

我冇,唔知其他人有冇

作者: 20001160 時間: 2005-10-9 01:12 PM

我有但不懂cap
cap圖那位朋友
如果你係cap from 有線ga話佢有一個高度鏡頭睇得好清楚
傳波果刻(係離腳果刻) 祖高爾有一個希比亞係前面仲有一個人平排
一離腳後祖高爾前面得返希比亞我記得平排唔計越架ma

歡迎光臨娛樂滿紛 26FUN (http://26fun.com/bbs/)