- Aug 8, 2005
- 25,122
- 26,420
Why is it different when a goalkeeper parries the ball out to a player who was offside from the original shot?I should probably let this match go, but I want to add a couple more points.
One of the things that has been mentioned a lot is a "grey area" in the laws. The current interpretation has been designed to eliminate as much of the grey area as possible. The referee can't possibly get inside Lovren's head to determine what he meant to do or what he was thinking because Kane was near him. The law is written in a way that the referees only judge what actually happened. In this case, Lovren deliberately played the ball. The fact that he played the ball so poorly is not the referees problem. He gets paid 100,000 pounds a week to not play the ball poorly in that situation.
As for Kane interfering with an opponent. This goes back to asking the referee to read the defenders mind. That is something that cannot be done consistently. What is easiest to apply consistently is looking at how the offside player behaves. In this case, Kane made no sudden or deliberate move towards the ball. He did not block Lovren's path towards the ball. Kane just stood there. Of course Lovren probably knew he was there. Of course he probably tried to play the ball because Kane was there. But asking the referee to judge why a player did something instead of judging what he did is a slippery slope.
Lastly, lets compare the Kane PK to Salah's first goal. Lovern and Dier both deliberately played the ball and it went to player who was in an offside position. They had a similar amount of time to react. The difference is Dier successfully played the ball in the direction he intended and Lovren didn't. Why should Lovren be rewarded for doing his job worse than Dier?