Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity
On Twitter: SoccerInsider and PostSports  |  Facebook  |  Sports e-mail alerts  |  RSS

FC Dallas equalizes in final seconds, extends MLS unbeaten streak to 16 matches with 2-2 draw

Was it offside?
Get Microsoft Silverlight

By Steve Goff  | September 22, 2010; 10:37 PM ET
Categories:  MLS  | Tags:  MLS  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: American midfielder Benny Feilhaber scores three goals for Aarhus in Danish Cup match
Next: Video: Sensational goal in U-17 Women's World Cup

Comments

Clearly.

Posted by: grabowcp | September 22, 2010 10:43 PM | Report abuse

I think he was offside. Incredibly close, but offside.

Posted by: LovetheGoffer | September 22, 2010 10:44 PM | Report abuse

Didn't seem that close to me.

Posted by: jake77 | September 22, 2010 10:47 PM | Report abuse

He's even with the ball on the last touch. Onside.

Posted by: richcadieux1 | September 22, 2010 10:51 PM | Report abuse

Here's a screengrab.
http://img844.imageshack.us/f/dallasgoal.jpg/

To me, not as clearly off as it looked live, but still off.

Posted by: LovetheGoffer | September 22, 2010 10:53 PM | Report abuse

First of all the AR is not in the correct position. However when I freeze it when the ball is played it appears that he is even with the ball which would mean onside. The angle is a little deceiving which is why it's hard to tell. Cunningham looks like he is about one yard outside the goal area and the ball looks like it's in just about the same position. Benefit of the doubt to the attackers.

Posted by: fedssocr | September 22, 2010 10:59 PM | Report abuse

He's even with the ball on the last touch. Onside.

Posted by: richcadieux1 | September 22, 2010 10:51 PM
--------

+1

Posted by: benonthehill | September 22, 2010 11:18 PM | Report abuse

He's even with the ball on the last touch. Onside.

Posted by: richcadieux1 | September 22, 2010 10:51 PM
--------

+1

Posted by: benonthehill | September 22, 2010 11:18 PM |

+2

Posted by: grubbsbl | September 22, 2010 11:39 PM | Report abuse

He's not offside, but he is offsides.

Irregardless.

Posted by: Rand-al-Thor | September 22, 2010 11:40 PM | Report abuse

It's not as clear as one might think. As some have noted, in this particular instance, you can't look at Cunningham's position relative to the other Dallas player. We can agree he's in an offside position relative to that player. Here, though, you do have to look at Cunningham's position relative to the ball, which is moving towards the goal when it's finally struck. I think if you're looking at his feet, he appears onside. If you're looking at his body lean, I think he's offside. FIFA says body lean decides it.

Posted by: fischy | September 22, 2010 11:41 PM | Report abuse

I vote for "No way to give a definitive answer from that angle."

Posted by: BooThisMan | September 23, 2010 1:42 AM | Report abuse

Seems to fit the "if it is that close, it is onside" paradigm shift that was made when "even is on" became the law of the land.

Posted by: billq1 | September 23, 2010 6:07 AM | Report abuse

Handball

Posted by: I-270Exit1 | September 23, 2010 6:27 AM | Report abuse

Claro que si

Posted by: GeneWells | September 23, 2010 8:36 AM | Report abuse

To be offside, the player must be in front of the ball when touched (not obvious on video) AND there must be fewer than two opposing players between him and the goal line. It seems clear on the video that only one opposing player (golakeeper) was ahead of him, and thus he was in offside position.

Posted by: marcool | September 23, 2010 8:47 AM | Report abuse

marcool,

as you quoted the law, it says you must be BOTH in front of the ball AND there must be fewer than 2 opposing players between the offensive player and the goal. In this case since only one of these occurred(less than 2 defenders between JC9 and the goal). JC9 was clearly behind the ball when it was played by Ferreria so he was in an onside position and the call was correct.

Posted by: misu38 | September 23, 2010 10:03 AM | Report abuse

He was out of balance.

Posted by: Reignking | September 23, 2010 10:16 AM | Report abuse

It counted, so he was onside. I agree with the ruling that a tie goes to the attacker. I don't even think it was a tie though, he was behind the ball when played. That was a beautiful goal. I am happy for it to stand.

Posted by: SeanWG | September 23, 2010 10:29 AM | Report abuse

Post a Comment

We encourage users to analyze, comment on and even challenge washingtonpost.com's articles, blogs, reviews and multimedia features.

User reviews and comments that include profanity or personal attacks or other inappropriate comments or material will be removed from the site. Additionally, entries that are unsigned or contain "signatures" by someone other than the actual author will be removed. Finally, we will take steps to block users who violate any of our posting standards, terms of use or privacy policies or any other policies governing this site. Please review the full rules governing commentaries and discussions.




characters remaining

 
 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company