BuzzerBeater Forums

To me that's a penalty: the defender moves the body towards the ball and does not remove the hand on time. So body goes right and arm goes left and the ball ends up hitting the arm and not the chest. You can be sure of this as the ball goes directly down instead of right as it would have happened if it hit the chest.

If he didn't move towards the ball you could make the case that it's not voluntary, but as it happens, he clearly tried to stop the ball, but he was too late to stop it with the chest, so he stopped it with the arm. In Italy and here that's a penalty, no question, and the referee was Italian.

Vidal shot the ball in the stands anyway so it did not affect the result in the end.



Also don't butcher Sheed's immortal words. If you don't know, you don't need to quote incorrectly.

Ball don't lie....

Last edited by Lemonshine at 5/3/2017 8:11:27 AM

he didn't touched the ball or had any effect on the game.

It was not an offside, simple as that. Football rules.

Ignorance is a bliss. 20 years ago, like today that's offside 100%. This is the rule:
Offside position
A player is in an offside position if:
• he is nearer to his opponents’ goal line than both the ball and the
second-last opponent

A player is not in an offside position if:
• he is in his own half of the field of play or
• he is level with the second-last opponent or
• he is level with the last two opponents

Now the rule is INTERPRETED in a way that if the referee deems the player to not participate in the action before another pass is made or the other team touches the ball, he can decide not to call it. It's left to what the referee thinks and it's based on his personal opinion. It's called passive offside.

This was NOT the case here. On that first cross the referee should have definitely called offside (it was very obvious) as Ronaldo was offside and he was definitely participating in the action as the cross was directed to him. This was not a passive offside. After he made the mistake on the first cross there is obviously no offside on the second.

I like how you don't know the rules yourself, but bash others incorrectly:
If you still can't understand I suggest you look here as it explains it for you. Offside shouldn't be called only if the player offside is very far from where the ball is passed to or maybe he's running towards his own goal without drawing attention from any defender.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZxNbEyrumKg

Last edited by Lemonshine at 5/3/2017 8:31:02 AM

If we judge players by their playstyle, their elegance... Then Messi and CR are shit compared to Ronaldinho.

lol this is like the argument that Kobe was better than Jordan because he has a better looking jump shot. When all the rational arguments are pointing at the same result, homers resort in subjective measuring.

Barca fans saying that CR doesnt have talent like Messi because he doesnt do elegant moves... Thats why I made idiotic comparison.

But you can say whatever you want... Ronaldinho at prime > Messi at prime.
Ronaldinho was just amazing to watch. Noone can do shit like that with ball on grass (dont mix football with futsal please). And who said attacker must be GOAT? Maybe Cafu is actual goat?

PS: Kobe was shit compared to Jordan. Just look his stats. Terrible. You cant even talk about greatest player of all time when he wasnt even MVP in most finals he won... Shaq was, Shaq carried Kobe in 3 finals.
http://bleacherreport.com/articles/829579-kobe-bryant-wil...


Last edited by nebi at 5/3/2017 9:09:37 AM

Your source Youtube guy.
My source FIFA.com

- "Interfering with an opponent” means:
Preventing an opponent from playing or being able to
play the ball. For example, by clearly obstructing the
goalkeeper’s line of vision or movement.

- Making a gesture or movement which, in the opinion of
the referee, deceives or distracts an opponent.

Then go and watch the goal again, what did he do? Nothing of that, he had no influence on the game, on the keeper or on the defender.
But no, you know batter then fifa, batter then a referee, batter then specialized people over the world who say clearly that is not an offside.

Just give me one explanation, seriously, how does he participate in the action (1st cross).
He didn't touch the defender, he didn't touch the ball, he was not obstructing anyone on the field, it should be offside just because you don't like him or?

Now I see why some other Belgian users were irked by you.

One says Morata has been Real's most efficient striker in the league, you understand (or characterise my opinion as):

Morata is a better striker

Yes, it's a waste of time to argue with people who dismiss stats (which include also goals that shouldn't have counted), ignore wins and awards, don't know what the offside rules are and who can't objectively assess a handball in the box. Seem like a bunch of homers completely devoid of common sense and knowledge of stats and rules, who prefer to go by their own alternative truths.

A handball in the box is penalised unless it's judged unintentional by the referee. Now, you either believe the ball didn't hit his arm or you do. If you do (and the downward trajectory of the ball would have been impossible if it only hit his chest or shoulder) there is nothing natural in Carvajal's movement that suggests he was not trying to stop the ball and he hit it with the hand accidentally. He was to stop the ball and he recalled the arm to do just that. In real time it looked like he was trying to stop the ball and it stopped it with the arm and from the slow-mo it also looks the same.

But yeah no point in pointing out the obvious any further.

Last edited by Lemonshine at 5/3/2017 10:53:16 AM

lol dude just stop embarrassing yourself.

The cross is directed at him, he's directly behind the defender who cleared the ball and most notably he even jumps for it. If that's not interfering with the action and trying to play the ball I don't know what is.

Ronaldo homers could be theoretically be correct if he didn't try to make a play for the ball (ie ignoring the action while trying to get back into a onside position), but he did.

batter then specialized people over the world

Yeah right, there is only some referees (very few) trying to justify their colleague. Their line is that Atkinson's 'opinion' was that Ronaldo didn't try to play the ball and therefore he ruled correctly he was in a passive offside position. Nobody in his right mind would think that a player in the middle of the box 5m away from the keeper and checked by 2 defenders who goes for the ball is not active on a play. Except Ronaldo homers. Even former Real Madrid players said it's offside and Atletico took the unusual step to appeal to UEFA for that goal. lol good luck with that, Atletico.

In the UK every single newspaper says it was offside and some renamed Ronaldo the 'Offside King'...man, you gotta admire the fact he only gets great nicknames...we might need to add this to his achievements

Last edited by Lemonshine at 5/3/2017 11:19:57 AM