The infamous goal. Nothing wrong with it. Brown takes it on himself after he intercepts the ball. Terrible commentary from Barry Davies, should have been sacked.
You can see how the linesman made a mistake because he must have thought that after the initial contact by the intercepting player, the ball was headed to the player in the offside position. It was a mistake I could easily have made. The ref got it completely right in overrulling him. Leeds got it wrong by playing to the flag and not the whistle.
This is so painful to watch as a Leeds fan….. particularly because there is nothing wrong with the goal…I watched it again and hoped the scoring pass was offside… but looks like he ran from behind…. gutted as this was a turning point in the season
Yes, there was a player in an offside position. Yes, the linesman was correct to flag it. But it was up to the referee to decide whether he was interfering with play or seeking an advantage. Clearly he was doing neither. Play to the whistle.
In 1971, this was a controversial decision. In that situation, off side was normally given as interfering with play was interpreted differently back then. Too many offside decisions were called back then, but Barry Davis was 100% correct with his assessment – for me, I'm glad the goal stood and possibly paved the way for sense to prevail in deciding interference.
Every right to go mad! No, they didn't, they should have played to the whistle. That said, it was unbelievable incompetence from the refereree. It was so blatantly offside that even a blind man.could have called it, fffs!
Given the rules of the time in regard to offside ,it was offside. As many used to say if your not interfering with play what the hell are you on the pitch for. Others on here either hated Leeds or are looking at it from the the overly complex offside rule of today. Others are of the view that Suggett was not offside because Brown only intercepted the ball, and then kept possession. However Suggett was active and ready to participate. The ball travelled quite a long way towards Suggett. Anyone with any ounce of cultural awareness will realise and fully understand that Suggett was definitely offside. The offside rule then was totally totally different, it was not up to interpretation. Any referee on here suggesting otherwise , has his mind confused by what came later. They are putting interpretations on time honoured matters and they have no right to do so.
1971 laws: "if a player is seeking to gain an advantage by being in an offside position". That's a strange phrase, but Colin Suggett clearly started trying to get down the field, so he did seem be taking advantage of his location. I am old, and I remember far too many goals being disallowed for this technicality. The current laws are a big improvement.
A couple of things that were in newspaper reports, but are offscreen here: the linesman had stopped, with his flag up- he wasn't trying to keep up with play. And the Leeds players also saw the referee lifting his whistle to his mouth…but no sound came. They were wrong to stop, but you can see their point.
I don't know what the offside rule was back then but Brown carried on after making the interception which indicates the referee probably got it right. I don't know for certain though.
It's offside from the first interception. Suggett is offside and immediately turns to support the attack. You see it in the replay. Under the old rules that's offside as he's clearly gaining an advantage.
Looked onside even by old rules. Brown was the next player to touch the ball after his own interception. Also, we can't see Suggett's position relative to the Leeds defence at the time of the interception.
Rule no1 in football always play to the whistle in boxing protect yourself at all time. Basic rules I do feel Leeds pain though as it was a messy goal with some confusion in the moment that cost them the title
If you push the ball forward and run into it you can’t be offside (even then) For me the issue is when he passed it to Astel (offside or not), it should have been flagged at that point because it became a new pattern of play I think the only way a goal should have stood is if the player who intercepted it (and pushed it forward) had finished it (naturally with no other WBA touching the ball)
As a lad I attended many league games both before and after 1971, and I can confirm that it was common practice for referees, when officiating situations like that shown, to judge them as ‘offside’.
What’s more, it was also extremely uncommon for a referee to ‘over-rule’ a lineman in that way, especially over a seemingly ‘clear-cut’ decision.
So it was no surprise that both teams stopped when the linesman’s flag was raised, as their expectation would have been for the referee to blow his whistle for a free-kick to Leeds and so ‘end-of’!
The other point here is that this was an absolutely massive match for the referee to make such an untypical and controversial call. This was no Sunday ‘kick-around’ in a park. The defeat effectively ruined Leeds’ chance of winning the title that year, which was instead narrowly won by Arsenal in what was for them a ‘double’ winning year.
I can play that again and again and again, always get a thrill shiver! Who do I support? Northampton Town and whoever Manchester United are playing, except Leeds.
Absolutely brilliant. Never offside. Well played Albion. Nothing special about Leeds here they messed up play to the referees whistle.loved that era growing up. Proper football no messing around.
… even the commentator does not understand the outside rule. The player in the offside position is only 'offside' if the ball is passed forward to him … which it wasn't and it was against Dirty Don's Dirty Leeds so happy days 😂
It was a perfectly good goal, and the leaat the cheating bastards of Leeds deserved. Brown was onside. The Leeds players should have played to the whistle – just as we're all taught as young kids.
To paraphrase Jack Hawkins in The League of Gentlemen (1960) … "We football authorities will always give the Germans, the Russians, the Japanese, or even the Egyptians the benefit of the doubt, but NEVER Leeds."
48 Comments
Schoolboy error they should have played to the whistle and not the flag !
You can see how the linesman made a mistake because he must have thought that after the initial contact by the intercepting player, the ball was headed to the player in the offside position. It was a mistake I could easily have made. The ref got it completely right in overrulling him. Leeds got it wrong by playing to the flag and not the whistle.
We all fucking hate Leeds
correct decision, Sugget in-active in move, no whistle, no need for Leeds players to stop. Barry Davis GOT IT WRONG.
This still makes me laugh even today. Leeds didn't deserve anybody's sympathy, a bunch of animals in football kit…
Perfectly valid goal, whether to today's rules or the interpretation back then.
nobody gives a toss about Leeds anyway
Var would have let that go too😂😂
This is so painful to watch as a Leeds fan….. particularly because there is nothing wrong with the goal…I watched it again and hoped the scoring pass was offside… but looks like he ran from behind…. gutted as this was a turning point in the season
Barry Davies was always the most appalling commentator.
Yes, there was a player in an offside position. Yes, the linesman was correct to flag it.
But it was up to the referee to decide whether he was interfering with play or seeking an advantage.
Clearly he was doing neither.
Play to the whistle.
Wrong decision Astle the goalscorer was offside !
Dirty leeds and Crooked Don getting a taste of their own medicine. 😀
In 1971, this was a controversial decision. In that situation, off side was normally given as interfering with play was interpreted differently back then. Too many offside decisions were called back then, but Barry Davis was 100% correct with his assessment – for me, I'm glad the goal stood and possibly paved the way for sense to prevail in deciding interference.
Nothing to see here
Every right to go mad! No, they didn't, they should have played to the whistle. That said, it was unbelievable incompetence from the refereree. It was so blatantly offside that even a blind man.could have called it, fffs!
Serves dirty Leeds right!!😅
Given the rules of the time in regard to offside ,it was offside. As many used to say if your not interfering with play what the hell are you on the pitch for. Others on here either hated Leeds or are looking at it from the the overly complex offside rule of today. Others are of the view that Suggett was not offside because Brown only intercepted the ball, and then kept possession. However Suggett was active and ready to participate. The ball travelled quite a long way towards Suggett. Anyone with any ounce of cultural awareness will realise and fully understand that Suggett was definitely offside. The offside rule then was totally totally different, it was not up to interpretation. Any referee on here suggesting otherwise , has his mind confused by what came later. They are putting interpretations on time honoured matters and they have no right to do so.
The goal was given .
2022 laws: clearly no offence.
1971 laws: "if a player is seeking to gain an advantage by being in an offside position". That's a strange phrase, but Colin Suggett clearly started trying to get down the field, so he did seem be taking advantage of his location. I am old, and I remember far too many goals being disallowed for this technicality. The current laws are a big improvement.
A couple of things that were in newspaper reports, but are offscreen here: the linesman had stopped, with his flag up- he wasn't trying to keep up with play. And the Leeds players also saw the referee lifting his whistle to his mouth…but no sound came. They were wrong to stop, but you can see their point.
I don't know what the offside rule was back then but Brown carried on after making the interception which indicates the referee probably got it right. I don't know for certain though.
Forget the shenanigans at the half way line, isn't Astle offside when that forward pass is played to him in the box??
It's offside from the first interception. Suggett is offside and immediately turns to support the attack. You see it in the replay. Under the old rules that's offside as he's clearly gaining an advantage.
"Leeds have every right to go mad, Leeds have every justification to go mad"..disgracefully biased commentary and incorrect.
Hunter was entirely responsible not an ounce of skill now he has a stand named after him no wonder Leeds are going down
Like yesterday.Brilliant.
And here is why you should always play to the whistle
Play to the whistle.(first rule of football)😕
Looked onside even by old rules. Brown was the next player to touch the ball after his own interception.
Also, we can't see Suggett's position relative to the Leeds defence at the time of the interception.
Rule no1 in football always play to the whistle in boxing protect yourself at all time. Basic rules I do feel Leeds pain though as it was a messy goal with some confusion in the moment that cost them the title
‘We’ve every right to go mad you know’
Leeds had great team back then but apart from Alan Clarke they were dirty so and so's!!
The ref subsequently retired to run his own coach company on Barry island called Dave's Coaches.
If you push the ball forward and run into it you can’t be offside (even then)
For me the issue is when he passed it to Astel (offside or not), it should have been flagged at that point because it became a new pattern of play
I think the only way a goal should have stood is if the player who intercepted it (and pushed it forward) had finished it (naturally with no other WBA touching the ball)
As a lad I attended many league games both before and after 1971, and I can confirm that it was common practice for referees, when officiating situations like that shown, to judge them as ‘offside’.
What’s more, it was also extremely uncommon for a referee to ‘over-rule’ a lineman in that way, especially over a seemingly ‘clear-cut’ decision.
So it was no surprise that both teams stopped when the linesman’s flag was raised, as their expectation would have been for the referee to blow his whistle for a free-kick to Leeds and so ‘end-of’!
The other point here is that this was an absolutely massive match for the referee to make such an untypical and controversial call. This was no Sunday ‘kick-around’ in a park. The defeat effectively ruined Leeds’ chance of winning the title that year, which was instead narrowly won by Arsenal in what was for them a ‘double’ winning year.
I can play that again and again and again, always get a thrill shiver! Who do I support? Northampton Town and whoever Manchester United are playing, except Leeds.
He was definitely offside, off side was offside in those days
Absolutely brilliant. Never offside. Well played Albion. Nothing special about Leeds here they messed up play to the referees whistle.loved that era growing up. Proper football no messing around.
As a lifelong Albion fan whenever I am feeling down and needing cheering up I watch this wonderfully uplifting video
Geoff Astley wasn't offside its the bloke in front you stop it and look
… even the commentator does not understand the outside rule. The player in the offside position is only 'offside' if the ball is passed forward to him … which it wasn't and it was against Dirty Don's Dirty Leeds so happy days 😂
coyb! Ian Collard? loved him.❤
It was a perfectly good goal, and the leaat the cheating bastards of Leeds deserved. Brown was onside. The Leeds players should have played to the whistle – just as we're all taught as young kids.
wtf, onside by a mile, should have stopped whinging and crying and fought back into the game like propper men
It wasn't a pass he kept the thus the other player was not offside
Note Suggett running sideways to make sure all the Leeds players noticed him.
To paraphrase Jack Hawkins in The League of Gentlemen (1960) …
"We football authorities will always give the Germans, the Russians, the Japanese, or even the Egyptians the benefit of the doubt, but NEVER Leeds."
Poor Stevie Gerrard didn't have the consolation of a creative referee, in his fateful screw-up in a very similar position to Hunter's.