Stoke City v Everton

[blargins]

Vic was offside.

[.Rimbo.]

Vic was offside.

Eureka! There it is!

[Ridge]

Are you considered interferring with play for obscuring a players view of the ball?

[.Rimbo.]

Are you considered interferring with play for obscuring a players view of the ball?

Obviously it depends. Considering it was the goalkeeper though, yes.

[Ridge]

Obviously it depends. Considering it was the goalkeeper though, yes.

I'm not convinced that has ever been used before. If you impeed or obstruct the keepers attempt to get the ball, then fair enough, free kick. But I can't remember too many teams getting an offside for less involvement than Anichebe in that move.

[.Rimbo.]

I'm not convinced that has ever been used before. If you impeed or obstruct the keepers attempt to get the ball, then fair enough, free kick. But I can't remember too many teams getting an offside for less involvement than Anichebe in that move.

It is the law though. It is just seldom applied.

It wasn't like Collina vs. Villareal or Clive Thomas/Graham Poll vs. "them".

[Ridge]

It is the law though. It is just seldom applied.

It wasn't like Collina vs. Villareal or Clive Thomas/Graham Poll vs. "them".

I'd agree with that, it was more marginal than wrong per se.

But Stoke got away with obstruction on the keeper several times early in the season. Seems a bit perverse that they should get a 'benefit of the doubt' type decision.