Re: Interpretations : Wed Oct 05, 2016 8:31 am  

But you can touch a player in the air if you're both competing for the ball. It happens every week.

Re: Interpretations : Wed Oct 05, 2016 9:55 am  

Harry Pinner wrote:

But you can touch a player in the air if you're both competing for the ball. It happens every week.

But he wasn't, he never made any attempt to jump for the ball, Sarginson did.

Re: Interpretations : Wed Oct 05, 2016 11:55 am  

Harry Pinner wrote:

Also I'm not convinced about that offside thing. I don't think the defending player playing at the ball is relevant. Defenders will always try to play at the ball, they have to. The point is that players ahead of the kicker and within ten metres of the ball are automatically considered to be offside regardless of what the defenders do. They are deliberately in that position because they've moved up and the kicker has dropped back.

So if a half back is first receiver and steps back a metre from his supporting players then decides to do a delicate little chip over the defensive line within 10 metres gathers the ball then he's going to be offside, if so then that is negating skilful half back play.

Re: Interpretations : Wed Oct 05, 2016 11:27 pm  

Harry Pinner wrote:

But you can touch a player in the air if you're both competing for the ball. It happens every week.

That's what i told you,if you are both competing in the air it's fine,if one is in the air then you can't lay a finger on him.

Re: Interpretations : Fri Oct 07, 2016 7:19 am  

He didn't lay a finger on him sarginson landed on him. He was competing for the ball by running to where it was going to land while looking up at thd ball and putting his arms out to catch it.

Re: Interpretations : Sun Oct 09, 2016 3:41 pm  

Harry Pinner wrote:

He didn't lay a finger on him sarginson landed on him. He was competing for the ball by running to where it was going to land while looking up at thd ball and putting his arms out to catch it.

Are you doing this on purpose now ? i'm begining to think so.

Re: Interpretations : Sun Oct 09, 2016 4:22 pm  

Doing what? If you mean putting forward my point of view which you may or may not agree with and not just shutting up because you think I should, then yes.

Re: Interpretations : Sun Oct 09, 2016 6:29 pm  

Harry Pinner wrote:

Doing what? If you mean putting forward my point of view which you may or may not agree with and not just shutting up because you think I should, then yes.

I'm all for points of view and debate. But you just don't have an argument. It's as clear as day that Sarginson was in the air and the other player wasn't, there is no other result other than a penalty regardless of were he was looking or if he had his hands out trying to catch the ball. You can think it harsh,you can think it was competition for the ball,you can think anything you like. But as has been stated over and over if a player is in the air going for the ball then he can't be touched. Sarginson has every right to jump for the ball knowing that only another player jumping for the ball can touch him.

Re: Interpretations : Sun Oct 09, 2016 6:55 pm  

And my point is that I think it's wrong. This is a forum, people are allowed to express their opinion even if it's not the same as yours.