Fulham 1-2 Tottenham

  • Thread starter Thread starter BBC Sport
  • Start date Start date
  • Replies Replies 11
  • Views Views 838
B

BBC Sport

BBC Sport News Headlines
Joined
Aug 23, 2006
Messages
8,519
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Tottenham end Fulham's unbeaten start in the league with a come-from-behind win sealed with a goal that is very disallowed for offside.

More...
 
I swear every game that Hughes dosen't win he goes mad at the officials haha love it.

---------- Post added at 10:52 PM ---------- Previous post was at 08:44 PM ----------

Dempsey done well to pull the defence with him to leave Kamara in space.
 
http://www.fifa.com/mm/document/affederation/generic/81/42/36/lawsofthegame_2010_11_e.pdf

On page 100, it says:
"...'interfering with an opponent' means preventing an opponent from playing or being able to play the ball by clearly obstructing the opponent’s line of vision or movements or making a gesture or movement which, in the opinion of the referee, deceives or distracts an opponent..."

It's that last bit: "...or making a gesture or movement which, in the opinion of the referee, deceives or distracts an opponent..." that Alan Shearer completely forgot to mention when pontificating so arrogantly about yesterday's decision and pretending he knew all there was to know about offside. How can a player who actually tries to toe-poke the ball right in front of the keeper not be seen to be deceiving or distracting the keeper?

Just thought I'd clear that up, however Kamara's inability to convert simple chances ultimately lost us the game.
 
Jack Fulham said:
http://www.fifa.com/mm/document/affederation/generic/81/42/36/lawsofthegame_2010_11_e.pdf

On page 100, it says:
"...'interfering with an opponent' means preventing an opponent from playing or being able to play the ball by clearly obstructing the opponent’s line of vision or movements or making a gesture or movement which, in the opinion of the referee, deceives or distracts an opponent..."

It's that last bit: "...or making a gesture or movement which, in the opinion of the referee, deceives or distracts an opponent..." that Alan Shearer completely forgot to mention when pontificating so arrogantly about yesterday's decision and pretending he knew all there was to know about offside. How can a player who actually tries to toe-poke the ball right in front of the keeper not be seen to be deceiving or distracting the keeper?

Just thought I'd clear that up, however Kamara's inability to convert simple chances ultimately lost us the game.
Click to expand...

This.

Exactly what I was thinking, he may not have touched it, or been in Schwarzer's line of vision, but it's certainly a distraction.

Still not sure he would have saved it anyway though tbh.
 
Joss said:
This.

Exactly what I was thinking, he may not have touched it, or been in Schwarzer's line of vision, but it's certainly a distraction.

Still not sure he would have saved it anyway though tbh.
Click to expand...


Whether he would have saved it or not is a different matter really ... well **** happens, unlucky for Fulham, they really need Zamora back
 
Good result for Spurs. Fulham has always been a hard place for us but yesterday with a little luck we got the three points.
 
Last edited:
Schwarzer was nowhere near the shot anyway, supposed "distraction" or not. Gallas played no part in that goal. I watched it during the game and on MOTD, and that ball is in the back of the net regardless of whether one of our players is standing there or not.

Well played Tommy Tank. :wub:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

FMBase

Beta

Resources

Back
Top