TennesseeJed
Footballguy
It wasn't a foul - but it did mean he was involved in the play, from an offside position. Harsh. But, fair.He didn't move into Colwill though from what I saw. He just stood there and was "in the way". Don't know if you can call a foul on a player for holding their ground. I could be wrong too... Football rules seem like differential equations sometimes.for such a long time follower of the sport, I still don't know the basic rules sometimes.I think the call isn't a foul. They said they were checking a possible offsides. I think it was ruled that he interfered with the play while starting in an offsides position, which I agree with. I don't think he committed a foul and if he had started onsides, the goal would've stood.My issue with this call, after watching the replays, is 2-fold.There's no consistency at all on what "passive" means. Endo being offside probably isn't a problem if he's standing with his back to the Chelsea players -- IMO it wouldn't have been called. It's that he eyed up the player marking VvD and then set a pick. Probably should have been chalked off for a foul rather then the offside, just to keep things consistent.I never know the rules in regards to passive offside
1) We see AGGRESSIVE holding/shirt pulling/arms up on corners and free kicks that should be called and never is. If Endo had done any of that, then I could see the call. He stood there and the defender made zero effort to go by and could have.
2) If that call was made on the field, I could see it holding up.
I don't know the exact letter of the rules, so if his action was against it, then so be it.
So from what you are saying setting a pick (as he even brought his arms up to create more contact), is legal and the play would have stood if he was not starting offside?
I know there is non stop pulling and tugging and holding on every free kick but that is usually when players are going for the ball. Endo seemed to have no care about the ball, he simply was playing the man.