I have just seen the brief highlights on TV and obviously laughed at Keane. But what surprised me was the fact that Giggs' goal was offside. The reason it surprised me was the fact that nobody has commented about it on here and I haven't read about it on any of the news reports.

Giggs had a shot from the edge of the box. VN, who was standing in an offside position, ducked out of the way so it woudln't hit him. VN was obviously in the way of Shays view so must have been interfering with play.

-- Anonymous, September 17, 2001

Answers

I agree with you Kegsy, thought the same meself, still what does it matter eh?

-- Anonymous, September 17, 2001

And Andy Cole's shot crossed the line by a foot two seasons ago....blah blah blah

-- Anonymous, September 17, 2001

And I've never forgiven Kryswicki for bumping into McFaul either

-- Anonymous, September 17, 2001

Just adds to the glory of our victory, Kegs :-)

-- Anonymous, September 17, 2001

Andy Gray pointed it out on Monday Night Football. He said it would have been harsh, but RVN clearly ducked and could have changed the flight of the ball easily.

I also thought that Bellamy had a good case for a penalty, but I get nervous before penalties now.

-- Anonymous, September 17, 2001

If you look at Dabs goal there were a couple of players who could have been flagged as well. Personally, I think the less of this offside nonsense against other blokes the better. If the guy who puts it in the net is OK well that's alright by me. Silly bloody rule anyway.

-- Anonymous, September 17, 2001

I have the feeling that the England national side are perfecting this anomaly of a rule , from the basis of watching the games against GDR, Albania, suffice to say that the out of the two walking back and in the eyes of the ref not interfeering with play , never involved YMO, he is left to burst thro the defence, Really is a daft law, while it is fresh in our minds and for no other reason let`s consider Giggs goal on Saturday, RVN is in a offside position , makes no contact with the ball, goal, can anyone justify to me that Shay Given was unaware, unobstructed of the prescence of RVN, Make no mistake, interpretation of this rule will cause hassle during the lead up and actual WC.

-- Anonymous, September 17, 2001

I don't think anyone was offide for Dabizas' goal, there was a defender near the line playing them all on.

As for RVN, I would only have claimed offside if he had stuck away a rebound, otherwise I had no problem with him being there.

-- Anonymous, September 17, 2001

If you do not think RVN was influencing play, A) he should not have been on the pitch and B) try playing as keeper and then tell me again.

Any player in line with the flight of the ball who has to move to stop the ball hitting him in the six yd box is OFFSIDE. It does not matter now, however if we lose the title or a place in Europe by goal difference of 1 it will!

-- Anonymous, September 17, 2001

Absolutley Gus. He was in an offside position. He was standing on the 6 yard box in front of Shay Given. He had to duck out of the way to stop the ball hitting him.

He was interfering with play.

-- Anonymous, September 17, 2001

If he ducked out of the way surely he was trying very hard NOT to interfere with play. And I don't accept this age old line of "what was he doing in the pitch if he was not interfering." Some players have made a career out of not interfering with play - I've no doubt a list of such individuals who wore black and white could be compiled!

As I said before - bloody silly rule - always has been.

-- Anonymous, September 18, 2001

Jacko - he was blocking Shay's view - so he must have been interfering whether it was intentional or accidental is irrelevant.

Are you suggesting that it is okay for an opponent to stand in front of the goalkeeper and block the goalkeepers view as long as he doesn't touch the ball?

-- Anonymous, September 18, 2001

It's always been a grey area with "interfering with play" brought into the offside rule, but Giggs' shot wouldn't have been stopped regardless. We won the game, that's all that matters.

-- Anonymous, September 18, 2001

Kegsy - you're just being daft now! There is no way Horseyface was DELIBERATELY trying to get himself into an offside position. Standing in front of the goalkeeper as you suggest would, however, be deliberate. You must surely see the difference - or are you just rying to wind me up?!

I say again, I have never had it satisfactorily explained to me what benefit the offside rule ( particularly when applied to players not actively playing the ball) brings to football other than being the source of more contraversy than anything else.

-- Anonymous, September 18, 2001

Apart from Jacko, I think we now have general agreement that the score on Saturday was actually 4-2. QED.

-- Anonymous, September 18, 2001

I've just watched the match from MUTV (some Mackem my dad knows paid for it to watch one game and the subscription hadn't ran out yet so he taped it)

The commentators are atrocious. Not only are they biased, but they think that every Newcastle player should get booked for the slightest thing, and that everything Manure do wrong is excusible. I'm not surprised there are so many arrogant Manure fans with commentators like that brainwaching them.

And comments (at 3-3) like the game is there for United to win must be confusing for foreigners. What is the point of stating the obvious?

-- Anonymous, September 18, 2001

Oh, back to the point, offside decisions go against you sometimes, and sometimes they go for you, it seems to balance out over the season (although there was one with Shearer yesterday which even MUTV proved was onside and he was clean through on goal)

-- Anonymous, September 18, 2001

Sorry, that should be Saturday, not yesterday :)

-- Anonymous, September 18, 2001

But we still scored more than them. :-D

-- Anonymous, September 18, 2001

Great point Ciara :)

(or should that be three?)

-- Anonymous, September 18, 2001