GMS was Offside

**MB62** · 16-10-2017 07:32 AM

Didn't think this at the game, thought it was just a very good goal, but having watched the highlights on Sportscene, and did the old 'freeze frame' thing, I reckon there is a good chance the Dons goal was offside.
Admittedly it is very close, and there is a case for the attacking player to get the advantage, but the assistant ref (linesman) was about a yard or more in front of the play and had no chance of even guessing if it was or not. His job is to be level with the last defender, he was nowhere near Lewis, so couldn't possibly tell.

**Blaster** · 16-10-2017 08:01 AM

I thought at the game it was offside. However the problem with your argument is that Stevenson was not the last defender. One or both centre halfs were behind him

**HibbySpurs** · 16-10-2017 08:02 AM

I didn't think he was offside to be fair. Haven't seen the highlights though.

**MB62** · 16-10-2017 08:11 AM

Originally Posted by Blaster

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

I thought at the game it was offside. However the problem with your argument is that Stevenson was not the last defender. One or both centre halfs were behind him

No they weren't Paul Hanlon was in no mans land further up the pitch and Efe was also on his way back,(as was Whittaker) so neither centre half was the last man, it WAS LEWIS.

I am taking my opinion on the cut of the grass, of course if that is not straight then who knows?

**Blaster** · 16-10-2017 08:18 AM

Originally Posted by MB62

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

No they weren't Paul Hanlon was in no mans land further up the pitch and Efe was also on his way back,(as was Whittaker) so neither centre half was the last man, it WAS LEWIS.

I am taking my opinion on the cut of the grass, of course if that is not straight then who knows?

You are right about hanlon but just watched it again and I reckon ambrose is 4cm behind Lewis 😄

***Danderhall Hibs*** · 16-10-2017 08:19 AM

Going by LS' reaction he thought it was onside and he knew he'd made a mistake.

***Keith_M*** · 16-10-2017 09:13 AM

**JeMeSouviens** · 16-10-2017 09:43 AM

***Bishop Hibee*** · 16-10-2017 09:51 AM

Looks marginally offside although I can’t blame the linesman as I thought he was onside at the time. Imagine we had decent highlights coverage like the EPL where they can clear up decisions like this 🤔

**JeMeSouviens** · 16-10-2017 09:58 AM

Originally Posted by Bishop Hibee

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Looks marginally offside although I can’t blame the linesman as I thought he was onside at the time. Imagine we had decent highlights coverage like the EPL where they can clear up decisions like this 🤔

If he's offside, it's by a bawhair. Lewis is caught on his heels and trying to turn while Mackay-Steven is running full tilt. The attacker should get the benefit of the doubt anyway.

**Michael** · 16-10-2017 10:07 AM

Who cares? We couldn't even score so doesn't matter much.

***Bishop Hibee*** · 16-10-2017 10:08 AM

If you look at the linesman he’s not in line. His angle would be more likely to give McKay-Stevens onside.

**RoYO!** · 16-10-2017 10:27 AM

Originally Posted by Michael

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Who cares? We couldn't even score so doesn't matter much.

Well given they only scored one, if it had been ruled out we'd have got two very good points back to back.

That said, looks like efe is playing him on, even if he isn't judged to be in line with Lewis.

***Danderhall Hibs*** · 16-10-2017 10:29 AM

Originally Posted by Bishop Hibee

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Looks marginally offside although I can’t blame the linesman as I thought he was onside at the time. Imagine we had decent highlights coverage like the EPL where they can clear up decisions like this 🤔

Both Stevenson and Ambrose look in line with him.

**MB62** · 16-10-2017 10:29 AM

Originally Posted by Bishop Hibee

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

If you look at the linesman he’s not in line. His angle would be more likely to give McKay-Stevens onside.

And that's the point. The ref has been, quite rightly, getting pelters for his performance, but on THE major decision of the game, the linesman is unable to give the decision because he is ahead of play, not even looking for offside.

To answer another question, the difference is, IF he is offside, we get a point rather than nothing.
There's boxes of straws get grasped at at fitba games around the world every week. Seeing the still frame confirms it was extremely close, and therefore, IMO, worth debate? It cost us a point and gave Aberdeen something to fight for and to hold on to.

**~~Tornadoes70~~** · 16-10-2017 10:53 AM

Originally Posted by MB62

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Didn't think this at the game, thought it was just a very good goal, but having watched the highlights on Sportscene, and did the old 'freeze frame' thing, I reckon there is a good chance the Dons goal was offside.
Admittedly it is very close, and there is a case for the attacking player to get the advantage, but the assistant ref (linesman) was about a yard or more in front of the play and had no chance of even guessing if it was or not. His job is to be level with the last defender, he was nowhere near Lewis, so couldn't possibly tell.

If that is the case it should have been incumbent for him to raise his flag for offside. The ghost hearts goal against i think it was Partick should never been given by a referee who similarly couldn't possibly tell from the position he was in that the ball had crossed the line.

Remember Leigh's goal that crossed the line by around two feet that wasn't given.

These incidents change games.

GGTTH

***Keith_M*** · 16-10-2017 11:26 AM

The game moves very quickly and the officials shouldn't be judged on a possible offside where the attacker may have been a couple of inches ahead of the defender. It's not humanly possible to judge these things with such a fine degree of accuracy, so I think the goal was fair enough.

What made a much bigger impact on the game was the reluctance of the Ref to actually penalise the Aberdeen players making blatant professional fouls.

Almost every decent break Hibs made forward was dealt with by the player being hauled or hacked down, with cards few and far between (for them, at least). The second half saw a clear red card incident but not even a yellow was shown. Even their manager knew it, hence the immediate substitution.

***Baldy Foghorn*** · 16-10-2017 11:57 AM

Originally Posted by JeMeSouviens

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Onside.

**MB62** · 16-10-2017 12:34 PM

Originally Posted by Baldy Foghorn

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Onside.

Not for me it's not, fractionally offside IMO.

**Michael** · 16-10-2017 01:35 PM

Originally Posted by MB62

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Not for me it's not, fractionally offside IMO.

Stevenson's hand is playing him on I reckon.

**StevieCowan** · 16-10-2017 01:48 PM

Originally Posted by Michael

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Stevenson's hand is playing him on I reckon.

Hands can’t play anyone onside 😂

**Michael** · 16-10-2017 01:50 PM

Originally Posted by StevieCowan

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Hands can’t play anyone onside 😂

How not? It's a body part.

**NadeAteMyLunch!** · 16-10-2017 01:52 PM

Originally Posted by Michael

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

How not? It's a body part.

Not a body part that can be used to make any contact with the ball(for an outfield player) so doesn't count.

**Michael** · 16-10-2017 01:57 PM

Originally Posted by NadeAteMyLunch!

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Not a body part that can be used to make any contact with the ball(for an outfield player) so doesn't count.

It can under certain circumstances.

**lyonhibs** · 16-10-2017 01:59 PM

Not legitimately it can't. I don't think he's offside but the rule re: body parts is that it has to be a body part that can play the ball (and thus score) in open play - i.e. not hands

**Michael** · 16-10-2017 02:04 PM

Originally Posted by lyonhibs

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Not legitimately it can't. I don't think he's offside but the rule re: body parts is that it has to be a body part that can play the ball (and thus score) in open play - i.e. not hands

I'd like to see the rule written down. But I don't see why hands would be exempt, because they can still legally influence the game.