Bournemouth second goal gamesmanship

[sonny]

There is a real issue with the gamesmanship on this one. Focusing on the scorer being marginally offside is missing the point a bit. The stunt they pulled was to have a man standing 5 yards offside as the free kick was taken. This was bound to distract the linesman. As well as having to look along the line he has to see if this player moves back onside. It makes his job even more difficult. It is clever but cynical exploitation of the 'new' rules. I believe Ibrahimovich does it all the time. It looks like a ploy to unsettle the defence, which I am sure it partly us, but it is also about distracting the official. The freeze frame suggests that as the kick is taken the linesman was not in line with the last Town defender as he should have been but somewhere between him and the offside Bournemouth player.

The relaxation of the offside rule was intended to prevent disallowing goals when a player was inadvertently offside but not affecting play. It is being manipulated in a way to gain advantage that is not in the spirit of the game. The FA should look at it but they won't because proving intent is tricky.

Wish we had thought of it. Our set pieces are woeful.

Anyone else remember 'no bug lining'? Worked on our rec.

[Hammy (still in Golcar)]

Totally agree the more I see it the more it annoys me. Hope we stuff them at out place.

[Deleted]

Just shows what managers will do to try and gain an advantage. I think the main think away from home is our mentality. Swansea were dreadful but we gave our collective worst performance. Wagner needs to get the selection right away from home and then try and get them believing they can draw and score.

[saintlyterrier]

Those of you who were at Bournemouth may have seen Begovic criticise the chief steward after he had kicked the ball back to him at a goal kick. Bournemouth were then 4-0 up. The keeper swore at him on two occasions, presumably to the effect that he would have preferred to have wasted time.

I then spoke with the steward, who had been uncertain as to how to react to Begovic. I persuaded him to report him to the club and to the FA.

Great keeper (one save in the first half was excellent) but a c***.

[kes]

sure the law states deliberately standing offside to gain an advantage should be deemed offside. ref got it wrong.

[Deleted]

forget the law. anyone standing deliberately offside as a distraction (as seen a lot this season to be fair) is taking the defenders mind off the player they should be watching - ergo interfering with play.

Technicality can lick my arse. Offside is offside.

[gledholt terrier]

Nov 20, 2017 10:34:51 GMT 1 @pruneface said:

forget the law. anyone standing deliberately offside as a distraction (as seen a lot this season to be fair) is taking the defenders mind off the player they should be watching - ergo interfering with play.

Technicality can lick my arse. Offside is offside.

And should be booked for ungentalmanly conduct (does that exist anymore?)

Edit - probably not given it’s a bastard to spell

[Deleted]

Nov 19, 2017 17:17:39 GMT 1 saintlyterrier said:

Those of you who were at Bournemouth may have seen Begovic criticise the chief steward after he had kicked the ball back to him at a goal kick. Bournemouth were then 4-0 up. The keeper swore at him on two occasions, presumably to the effect that he would have preferred to have wasted time.

I then spoke with the steward, who had been uncertain as to how to react to Begovic. I persuaded him to report him to the club and to the FA.

Great keeper (one save in the first half was excellent) but a c***.

you really think the steward is going to make himself mr popular,by reporting one of there own players?

[saintlyterrier]

Nov 20, 2017 10:39:09 GMT 1 @imaginarymartin said:

Nov 19, 2017 17:17:39 GMT 1 saintlyterrier said:

Those of you who were at Bournemouth may have seen Begovic criticise the chief steward after he had kicked the ball back to him at a goal kick. Bournemouth were then 4-0 up. The keeper swore at him on two occasions, presumably to the effect that he would have preferred to have wasted time.

I then spoke with the steward, who had been uncertain as to how to react to Begovic. I persuaded him to report him to the club and to the FA.

Great keeper (one save in the first half was excellent) but a c***.

you really think the steward is going to make himself mr popular,by reporting one of there own players?

I may be naive, but I'm honest. The steward was fuming.

[Deleted]

if it was the other way round,we would be saying how clever we are,like someone on there forum says,we should be more concerned about losing the second half 2-0 against ten men

[upthetown]

Was it Brentford, first game of last season, that were doing this too? Standing someone miles offside right in front of the keeper to obstruct his view on free kicks. Referee let them do it all game.

[Deleted]

Nov 19, 2017 10:25:30 GMT 1 sonny said:

There is a real issue with the gamesmanship on this one. Focusing on the scorer being marginally offside is missing the point a bit. The stunt they pulled was to have a man standing 5 yards offside as the free kick was taken. This was bound to distract the linesman. As well as having to look along the line he has to see if this player moves back onside. It makes his job even more difficult. It is clever but cynical exploitation of the 'new' rules. I believe Ibrahimovich does it all the time. It looks like a ploy to unsettle the defence, which I am sure it partly us, but it is also about distracting the official. The freeze frame suggests that as the kick is taken the linesman was not in line with the last Town defender as he should have been but somewhere between him and the offside Bournemouth player.

The relaxation of the offside rule was intended to prevent disallowing goals when a player was inadvertently offside but not affecting play. It is being manipulated in a way to gain advantage that is not in the spirit of the game. The FA should look at it but they won't because proving intent is tricky.

Wish we had thought of it. Our set pieces are woeful.

Anyone else remember 'no bug lining'? Worked on our rec.

OF Course it is manipulated its pro football believe me anything to get a advantage will be used just that some or more apt at it than others

[afcbdave]

I'm amazed anyone should suggest Daniels could be booked for ungentlemanly conduct! If what he does is not against the laws of the game, why on earth should he not try it? I've seen players at most teams do something similar and of course it's an attempt to cause a distraction. Rather than grumble about this ploy, maybe Mr Wagner should be looking at ways for your team to try it next week! Until the laws are changed, it's just a part of the game.

I'm saying this nicely but dig1 has it right, your concern should be aimed at the second half, losing 2-0 to ten men.

[Deleted]

Agree with the OP. This was a very cynical exploitation of the new rule, and it worked in so far as it distracted the linesman. The actual scorer was still offside but, more than that, this type of sheistery is not within the spirit of the game.

[Deleted]

Nov 20, 2017 11:30:47 GMT 1 afcbdave said:

I'm amazed anyone should suggest Daniels could be booked for ungentlemanly conduct! If what he does is not against the laws of the game, why on earth should he not try it? I've seen players at most teams do something similar and of course it's an attempt to cause a distraction. Rather than grumble about this ploy, maybe Mr Wagner should be looking at ways for your team to try it next week! Until the laws are changed, it's just a part of the game.

I'm saying this nicely but dig1 has it right, your concern should be aimed at the second half, losing 2-0 to ten men.

well we were playing 1-4-5 so I think we can understand that one. Plus we were never playing against less than 11 men.

[space hardware]

The ref made a mistake for the first goal, the linesman made a mistake for the second goal. We had 45 minutes against 10 men to try to rectify the situation, something that shouldn't have been beyond the realms of possibility, but somehow we ended up conceding two more goals and scoring none.

Whether it's "in the spirit of the laws" or not (does such a thing even exist these days?), the fact that we are as soft as shit away from home and rarely, if ever, come back when going behind is of more pressing concern.

[Deleted]

Nov 20, 2017 11:30:47 GMT 1 afcbdave said:

I'm amazed anyone should suggest Daniels could be booked for ungentlemanly conduct! If what he does is not against the laws of the game, why on earth should he not try it? I've seen players at most teams do something similar and of course it's an attempt to cause a distraction. Rather than grumble about this ploy, maybe Mr Wagner should be looking at ways for your team to try it next week! Until the laws are changed, it's just a part of the game.

I'm saying this nicely but dig1 has it right, your concern should be aimed at the second half, losing 2-0 to ten men.

Years ago they used to say a cynical foul by the last man was good professionalism & think they used the term professional foul. That terminology has long since gone because they know it wasn't professional at all, it was just plain old cynical cheating. Every team used that tactic as the way of trading a yellow card for not allowing your opponents a goal, or at the very least a great goalscoring opportunity. That behaviour has changed nowadays given the last man ruling, so it's very rare you see any obvious hacks down by defenders in this situation.

Maybe with all this stretching of the offside rules, something will be done eventually to make sure anyone who is 'active' in an offside position is offside, so 'plays' like this wouldn't stand...

It may surprise you that there's a fair bunch of Town fans who as much as we're enjoying this journey, also prefer the spirit of the game to be upheld. Years of FIFA meddling has seen the values being eroded to the point that clubs will be employing tactics that will sit within the boundaries of the laws of the game, but in a gentlemanly conduct scenario are just plain old cheating...

Town have always played a high line at these free kicks, more often than not it's been successful, as it was on Saturday. Your lad was drifting to the point he dragged the linesman out of position such that his view across 'the line' was then not linear across the pitch, it was angled & probably why his brain thought the other 2 players were in an onside position - they would have been onside had the pitch been in the shape of a parallelogram...

I'm not sure what the laws are in this regard, whether the lino should stay with the mist forward attacking player or the last defender. If it's not clear, then maybe they should just be told to sit with the last line of defence, so that they will always have a linear view across the pitch...

2-0 within such a short space of time & with such contentious decisions will always change the complexion of the game...

Answer this honestly, had the boot been on the other foot, would you be a little bit pissed off? Give me an answer as a fan, not another soundbite analysis...

[Deleted]

Nov 20, 2017 11:40:56 GMT 1 @londontown said:

Agree with the OP. This was a very cynical exploitation of the new rule, and it worked in so far as it distracted the linesman. The actual scorer was still offside but, more than that, this type of sheistery is not within the spirit of the game.

SPIRIT of the game? When you are in the pro game you try anything to get a result ie delaying throw ins goal kicks going down injured when you arnt especially if you are trying to see the game out. all teams do it and anyone who thinks differently are very nieve football wise .ITS a ruthless sport and dog eat dog no sentiment in this game

[Deleted]

I agree with some that the rule should be changed so that players doing this are classed as interfering with play, but I don't agree that the Bournemouth player should be booked are frowned upon for gamesmanship.

Rules are rules and if there's a way to gain an advantage by using the rules then fair play to them for doing it. If it had been us doing it, it would have been another genius tactic by Wagner. Was it within the spirit of the game when ourselves and Barnsley ran the clock down to relegate Peterborough? Of course not, but I doubt anyone on here cared.

[H7]

Nov 20, 2017 11:30:47 GMT 1 afcbdave said:

I'm amazed anyone should suggest Daniels could be booked for ungentlemanly conduct! If what he does is not against the laws of the game, why on earth should he not try it? I've seen players at most teams do something similar and of course it's an attempt to cause a distraction. Rather than grumble about this ploy, maybe Mr Wagner should be looking at ways for your team to try it next week! Until the laws are changed, it's just a part of the game.

I'm saying this nicely but dig1 has it right, your concern should be aimed at the second half, losing 2-0 to ten men.

Whilst I agree with the viewpoint that Daniels did nothing wrong and if you can gain an advantage for your team you have to use it, so fair play as far as I am concerned. The annoying thing is that we conceded the goal based on an official making a mistake which is totally out of our control and Wagner has a valid point against the officiating, not the tactics used by AFCB.

As far as losing 2-0 in the second half goes, it's a bit of an irrelevant point as we were leaving ourselves open whilst trying to get back in the game so were playing completely differently than if for example we were trying to hold on to a lead. We've shown this season that when a lead needs to be protected its well within our capability.

Good luck for the rest of the season.

[Mastercracker]

I couldn't give two fucks where Daniels is stood tbh. The offside law is garbage and off course he's interfering with play stood there but garbage rules are still rules and he's within his rights.

What is galling is the bloke who scored also being a yard offside along with someone else, especially when we had an onside 'winner' chalked off against Leicester. Newcastle also scored a perfectly legal onside goal early doors vs Bournemouth last time out that was chalked off. Added to the foul in the first plus being down to 10 for the corner that's more rub of the green in about 120 minutes of football than we've had in 12 matches. We haven't had a game changing decision go our way yet.

But yeah don't worry it all evens out zzzzzzzz.

[upthetown]

Nov 20, 2017 11:30:47 GMT 1 afcbdave said:

I'm amazed anyone should suggest Daniels could be booked for ungentlemanly conduct! If what he does is not against the laws of the game, why on earth should he not try it? I've seen players at most teams do something similar and of course it's an attempt to cause a distraction. Rather than grumble about this ploy, maybe Mr Wagner should be looking at ways for your team to try it next week! Until the laws are changed, it's just a part of the game.

I'm saying this nicely but dig1 has it right, your concern should be aimed at the second half, losing 2-0 to ten men.

You mean second half when it was 11v11?

Ungentlemanly conduct is to cover stuff like that, which isn't technically against the rules. It stops instantly if they just give offside when someone is clearly trying to gain an advantage, from being a bit of a knob. Not interfering with play was not intended to allow nonsense like that. And clearly he was interfering with play as the linesman was watching him instead of where our defensive line were.

But, the original foul and the offside are both against the rules. Difficult when such obvious decisions go against us, when playing well and on top.

I'm sure the next time someone dives to get a penalty against you, or a series of increasingly crap decisions cost you a game, your first thought will be "oh well, we should have defended better".

And it certainly isn't just moaning because we lost. We beat West Brom the other week, despite another disgraceful refereeing performance.

[detox]

What I see, in every game I watch on TV, is free kicks into the penalty box there are always 2 or 3 forwards stood in offside positions as the ball is to be kicked, relying on the defensive line dropping back...which they do, every time. I accept Saturday was slightly different given where their guy was stood, but it's fine margins. The problem with the 'new' rule is the 'interfering with play ' aspect. Who was it said if a player isn't interfering with play he should be off the pitch ?

[bournemouthfan]

Can i ask why you guys think it was 11v11 in the second half when Probert ignored a clear yellow card foul by one of you players and a probably red when Wilson was hauled down from behind on the edge of your box when about to shoot? 

By all means feel hard done by over the 2nd goal but he had your backs the whole of the second half. Nothing he did helped us score our 2 goals. 

[Gag_N_Bone_Man]

Nov 20, 2017 11:05:52 GMT 1 upthetown said:

Was it Brentford, first game of last season, that were doing this too? Standing someone miles offside right in front of the keeper to obstruct his view on free kicks. Referee let them do it all game.

It was . I'd also say if he's not interfering with play he's stealing a living. Anyone on the pitch is interfering in some way as someone's job is to know where they are,

[Deleted]

Nov 20, 2017 16:12:53 GMT 1 detox said:

What I see, in every game I watch on TV, is free kicks into the penalty box there are always 2 or 3 forwards stood in offside positions as the ball is to be kicked, relying on the defensive line dropping back...which they do, every time. I accept Saturday was slightly different given where their guy was stood, but it's fine margins. The problem with the 'new' rule is the 'interfering with play ' aspect. Who was it said if a player isn't interfering with play he should be off the pitch ?

A quote attributed to both Bill Shankly and Brian Clough.

[Tanzanian Terrier]

Nov 19, 2017 10:25:30 GMT 1 sonny said:

There is a real issue with the gamesmanship on this one. Focusing on the scorer being marginally offside is missing the point a bit. The stunt they pulled was to have a man standing 5 yards offside as the free kick was taken. This was bound to distract the linesman. As well as having to look along the line he has to see if this player moves back onside. It makes his job even more difficult. It is clever but cynical exploitation of the 'new' rules. I believe Ibrahimovich does it all the time. It looks like a ploy to unsettle the defence, which I am sure it partly us, but it is also about distracting the official. The freeze frame suggests that as the kick is taken the linesman was not in line with the last Town defender as he should have been but somewhere between him and the offside Bournemouth player.

The relaxation of the offside rule was intended to prevent disallowing goals when a player was inadvertently offside but not affecting play. It is being manipulated in a way to gain advantage that is not in the spirit of the game. The FA should look at it but they won't because proving intent is tricky.

Wish we had thought of it. Our set pieces are woeful.

Anyone else remember 'no bug lining'? Worked on our rec.

Is Gamesmanship like cheating?

Unfortunately we have paid the price for what has happened. It is unlikely to be successful again with opposition sides aware of the ploy BUT more importantly officials aware of the exploitation.

[gledholt terrier]

Nov 20, 2017 17:12:17 GMT 1 bournemouthfan said:

Can i ask why you guys think it was 11v11 in the second half when Probert ignored a clear yellow card foul by one of you players and a probably red when Wilson was hauled down from behind on the edge of your box when about to shoot? 

By all means feel hard done by over the 2nd goal but he had your backs the whole of the second half. Nothing he did helped us score our 2 goals. 

This really isn’t hard. His poor decisions against you didn’t alter the course of the game. The shocking non decision when Hadergjonaj was taken out and the offside goal gave you the points (you may have got them anyway, but it is hard to argue that Probert and assistant completely halted our momentum)

[RickDangerous]

Nov 20, 2017 11:30:47 GMT 1 afcbdave said:

I'm amazed anyone should suggest Daniels could be booked for ungentlemanly conduct! If what he does is not against the laws of the game, why on earth should he not try it? I've seen players at most teams do something similar and of course it's an attempt to cause a distraction. Rather than grumble about this ploy, maybe Mr Wagner should be looking at ways for your team to try it next week! Until the laws are changed, it's just a part of the game.

I'm saying this nicely but dig1 has it right, your concern should be aimed at the second half, losing 2-0 to ten men.

Our club has professionalism at its core so we wont be exploiting the offside distraction nonsense. We actually got promoted without smashing the FFP rules too!

[bournemouthfan]

Nov 20, 2017 18:13:45 GMT 1 RickDangerous said:

Nov 20, 2017 11:30:47 GMT 1 afcbdave said:

I'm amazed anyone should suggest Daniels could be booked for ungentlemanly conduct! If what he does is not against the laws of the game, why on earth should he not try it? I've seen players at most teams do something similar and of course it's an attempt to cause a distraction. Rather than grumble about this ploy, maybe Mr Wagner should be looking at ways for your team to try it next week! Until the laws are changed, it's just a part of the game.

I'm saying this nicely but dig1 has it right, your concern should be aimed at the second half, losing 2-0 to ten men.

Our club has professionalism at its core so we wont be exploiting the offside distraction nonsense. We actually got promoted without smashing the FFP rules too!

2nd lowest spend on players in the league. We bought players for the Prem within the FFP window on the Championship even though we had secured promotion.

If that makes you holier than though and us the evil nasty guys so be it.