I was pretty sure about myself when it came to the rules of the football. (I know, I know, it’s lame that everybody is talking about the World Cup, but I’m not living in a cave, so…). It happens though, that I was kind of wrong about the off-side rule. Not that I would’ve fail a test of choosing the off-side moments from the not off-side ones, just that I would’ve used a wrong definition, and eventually I would’ve got it wrong… 
I was always thinking that the line of the last defender is the thing that decides were the side actually is, and who isn’t on it (’cause it’s off). Well, it isn’t. It’s more like the line of the second last player of the other team. Yes, in more than 99% of the cases that guy is the last defender, since the goalkeeper is usually the last resort. But not always! Here’s the example which made me realize the whole thing (at 1:00) :
Cool, huh? Did you had the right definition? If not, who’s fault it is? 
Tags: football, off-side, off-side rule, soccer, world cup
2010/06/12 at 17:30 |
Hey Karoly, to me this rule is more then logical. I don’t watch football much but I did watch this game with my father who consider himself a football expert (by watching all the games of Champion’s League). And that point of the match he started making a scene and screaming that goal is regular and everybody lies! Then I said: “Look where the goalkeeper is and look where the last defender is. But now positions have changed: last defender is now considered as goalkeeper and vice versa.” I was somehow right, right?
I hate the sound of vuvuzelas.
2010/06/13 at 15:03 |
Oh yeah, I wasn’t the only one, it’s so good to know…
), but it is a right one. Lifelong learning rulzzz! 
You’re logic is also special (changing the goalkeeper, girls…
And yep, the sound of vuvuzela does suck, but maybe there’s some drug in it if you blow it, ’cause those people seemed pretty happy about it…