: Mon May 18, 2009 12:22 pm  

Andy Gilder wrote:

Except he wouldn't.

Once McGuire retrieves the ball, the relative position of any Cas player tackling him to where Sherwin last touched it is irrelevant. It wasn't from a kick, he doesn't have to give the Leeds player 10 metres if he's in front of the last of his team to touch the ball.

Course there was always the chance that he could have either timed it wrong and taken McGuire early (which risked giving away a penalty try) or missed the tackle and McGuire scores making the kick irrelevant.

While none of that would have most likely gone through his mind, the snap judgement he made to play the ball was entirely the right one in the circumstances.

According to my Cas supporting colleague who is also a referee, he'd have still been offside if he'd not have retreated behind where Sherwin knocked on.

: Mon May 18, 2009 12:33 pm  

Lord_Percy wrote:

According to my Cas supporting colleague who is also a referee, he'd have still been offside if he'd not have retreated behind where Sherwin knocked on.

Well whaddya know, having just looked it up he's right - section 14 of the laws says a player is offside if the ball touches, is touched, held or kicked by a team-mate behind him.

I thought that only applied to kicks, but apparently not. He'd have had to give McGuire ten metres unless he had retired behind Sherwin first.

: Mon May 18, 2009 2:12 pm  

Andy Gilder wrote:

Well whaddya know, having just looked it up he's right - section 14 of the laws says a player is offside if the ball touches, is touched, held or kicked by a team-mate behind him.

I thought that only applied to kicks, but apparently not. He'd have had to give McGuire ten metres unless he had retired behind Sherwin first.

There didn't seem to be 10 metres behind Sherwin for Shenton to have gone unless he fancied standing with us and then going back in to the field of play.

: Mon May 18, 2009 2:21 pm  

Dead Man Walking wrote:

There didn't seem to be 10 metres behind Sherwin for Shenton to have gone unless he fancied standing with us and then going back in to the field of play.

You can't be offside in your own in-goal, so presumably had he stood on the goal-line he would not have been treated as being inside the ten.

: Mon May 18, 2009 2:21 pm  

Andy Gilder wrote:

You can't be offside in your own in-goal, so presumably had he stood on the goal-line he would not have been treated as being inside the ten.

McGuire must have known this, so drifted the ball stopping just short of the in goal area

: Mon May 18, 2009 2:26 pm  

leicester_rhino wrote:

McGuire must have known this, so drifted the ball stopping just short of the in goal area

You mean controlled it with the invisible tractor beams that shoot from his eyes, surely?

: Mon May 18, 2009 2:39 pm  

Andy Gilder wrote:

You mean controlled it with the invisible tractor beams that shoot from his eyes, surely?

My mistake

: Mon May 18, 2009 2:44 pm  

Andy Gilder wrote:

You can't be offside in your own in-goal, so presumably had he stood on the goal-line he would not have been treated as being inside the ten.

Surely it would have been sufficient for Shenton to retreat behind the point that Sherwin lost contact with the ball to be back onside. He wouldn't have needed (for example) to get behind the still sliding Sherwin (has he stopped yet.)

Sherwin caught the ball well within the playing area so Shenton could have placed himself back onside while remaining within the field of play.

Re: Sinny's face : Mon May 18, 2009 3:51 pm  

LEEDSLEADS. wrote:

Could it be more that out of respect to Cas he didn't jump and down like a loon in Shaun Long fashion rubbing it in?

Yet McGuire did

Re: Sinny's face : Mon May 18, 2009 3:56 pm  

phil webbo wrote:

Yet McGuire did

The title of the thread should give you a clue.