this post was submitted on 21 Jun 2024

11 points (92.3% liked)

Football (Soccer fútbol fußball 足球 )

5667 readers

3 users here now

Here for discussion of all things association football/soccer!

Rules

No bigotry - including racism, sexism, ableism, homophobia, transphobia, or xenophobia.
Be respectful, especially when disagreeing. Everyone should feel welcome here.
No porn.
No Ads / Spamming.
No piracy

Other Football/Soccer Related Communities

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

MushroomMan89@lemmy.world

skipseagull@lemmy.world

FootballBot@lemmy.world

ReadyUser31@lemmy.world

UndercoverUlrikHD@programming.dev

FootballAutoMod@lemmy.world

[Match thread] Netherlands vs France (Leipzig, 21:00) (reddthat.com)

submitted 4 months ago by Blaze@reddthat.com to c/football@lemmy.world

15 comments fedilink hide all child comments

all 19 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old

[–] roserose56@lemmy.ca 4 points 4 months ago (1 children)

Boring game.......

[–] UndercoverUlrikHD@programming.dev 2 points 4 months ago (1 children)

Fair call, but the keeper would have never saved it

[+] FlorianSimon@sh.itjust.works 1 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 days ago) (1 children)

[deleted]

[–] UndercoverUlrikHD@programming.dev 2 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (1 children)

I don't think it would have mattered honestly, but it obviously has to be called for offside regardless.

[–] johan@feddit.nl 1 points 4 months ago (2 children)

I'm biased but just to play devil's advocate: where is the limit?

Imagine everyone is on one half of the pitch except for three players: an attacker with the ball 40 meters from goal, the goalie who is 25 meters from goal, and another attacker who is right next to the goalkeeper, blocking the goalie's path to the goal.

The attacker with the ball shoots the ball through the air into the empty goal, with not even a tiny chance the goalkeeper could ever make it. Is it offside?

I would argue it isn't and I think almost no referee would say it's offside simply because the goalkeeper didn't stand a chance to get anywhere close to the ball.

This is an extreme case, but I feel like today Maignon also would never have gotten that ball.

It's difficult because you can't always know if a goalkeeper would have been able to reach the ball without any interference, but there's gotta be some sort of line between true interference and irrelevant interference that would never change the outcome of what is about to happen.

I probably agree it's offside. As a Dutch person I'm frustrated now, but if I were French I'd be annoyed if the goal had been allowed.

[–] kameecoding@lemmy.world 1 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

I think if dumfries took a step forward (as in towards his own goal and away from the french goal and maignan), it should have been given, where he stood didn't exactly line up with the path of the save, but it was close enough to block the dive.

[–] UndercoverUlrikHD@programming.dev 1 points 4 months ago (1 children)

and another attacker who is right next to the goalkeeper, blocking the goalie's path to the goal.

The attacker with the ball shoots the ball through the air into the empty goal, with not even a tiny chance the goalkeeper could ever make it. Is it offside?

It's always context dependent, your version is fairly extreme in that the GK wouldn't be in a position to jump and use his hands to maybe make a theoretical save, but a player in offside position would be interfering with the play. It would be up the ref team to make a subjective call.

Maignan was pointing towards Dumfries almost before the ball had hit the net, it was clear interference even if the GK didn't stand a chance.

[–] johan@feddit.nl 1 points 4 months ago

I agree, my example and this situation don't compare. I was just wondering about where the line is. At what point does actual interference matter?

Honestly I think the biggest controversy about this was how long the VAR took. They spent multiple minutes to make this decision which seems a bit crazy.

[–] sanguinepar@lemmy.world 2 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (1 children)

UK commentators criticising that offside call, but I think it was right. You can't have someone standing right next to the keeper but not interfering with play in some way.

[–] kameecoding@lemmy.world 2 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (1 children)

you can argue that maignan is never getting there, but that's then giving the ref the duty to assess a subjective thing like whether he thinks the GK has the ability to save it, which would become a disaster really quickly.

Objectively Dumfries physically prevents Maignan from diving for the ball, and thus it's offside and the correct call, whether Maignan "could/would/should" have saved it is irrelevant.

[–] sanguinepar@lemmy.world 1 points 4 months ago

Exactly.

[–] Jackthelad@lemmy.world 2 points 4 months ago (2 children)

England and France were apparently joint favourites and yet they've both been dreadful so far.

France haven't even scored a goal in their first two matches!

[–] kameecoding@lemmy.world 1 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

I never thought England were favorites, on paper? sure. but with Southgate? no way.

I told my friend before it started that Germany was winning it, last tournament for Kroos and likely Muller, host nation, redemption and fuck you bayern arc for Nagelsmann. it's lazy script writing, but compelling.

[–] UndercoverUlrikHD@programming.dev 1 points 4 months ago

England is always favourites in the eyes of British media though...

France is lacking the player they've built a team around so I wouldn't be too harsh on them today, it's not like they had to win.

[–] xc2215x@lemmy.world 1 points 4 months ago (1 children)

Hoping the Netherlands can win.

[–] sasquash@sopuli.xyz 1 points 4 months ago

hope the 2nd half will be like the beginning.