Erm, I might be being blind and I might not know the rules clearly. However, doesn't their player head the ball away? this would beat the offside trap and the fact nobody is interfering, it means a perfectly brilliant goal as been ruled out.

Man that's harsh.

I don't think there was a header (after the shot), however if it had been the case the defender has to have gained "control and possession" of the ball for the attacker to be back onside.

 

This one was disallowed due to the final attacker supposedly having interfered with Hart's line-of-sight, effectively putting him off.

are we sure it does not touch or catch the other player, its hard to tell but looks a perfectly good goal.

I don't think there was a header (after the shot), however if it had been the case the defender has to have gained "control and possession" of the ball for the attacker to be back onside.

 

This one was disallowed due to the final attacker supposedly having interfered with Hart's line-of-sight, effectively putting him off.

really? crazy! i have seen bart handled and pushed, this player does nothing. :/

This was analysed in great detail on match of the day and it is definitely not offside the only players obscuring the goalkeepers vision is his own players. The ref got it wrong no wonder Pardew was incensed.

Having said that, who would be a ref, he has a split second to decide if he gets it wrong it is analysed in minute detail from umpteen camera angles and he is castigated on national television.

goal if they want see a goal that was offside with a player interfering with play the goal man s**tty scored against blackburn there player was right in front of paul robinson blatent offside.

The referee wasn't given a game this weekend which says a lot. The goal should have stood. He also should have sent off the player for that tackle on Nasri. It was vicious to say the least. Nasri is out for 8 weeks because of it. 

I'm going to be controversial and say offside, he's in the penalty area looking for a touch and the goalie is going to be aware he's there and is in his eyeline therefore interfering.

I still swear a blue shirt made a clearance which would mean (unless I am mistaken), the offside rule wouldn't apply but the fact the ref disallowed the goal because their keeper was supposedly 'blocked' it's daft.

As @tonyhateley says,this was analysed in great detail on MotD The problem is the interpretation of the law.In this case the goalies view was not obscured by opposition players but I agree with @jurgenpie as their is an attacker a couple of yards away from the goalie which surely is a distraction.If this goal had been allowed against Derby I would have been furious on the other hand if it had been allowed for Derby I would have been delighted.The rule needs looking at or there will be further controversy!

As 'tonyhateley says,this was analysed in great detail on MotD The problem is the interpretation of the law.In this case the goalies view was not obscured by opposition players but I agree with @jurgenpie as their is an attacker a couple of yards away from the goalie which surely is a distraction.If this goal had been allowed against Derby I would have been furious on the other hand if it had been allowed for Derby I would have been delighted.The rule needs looking at or there will be further controversy!

things like this happen all the time in the lower leagues and most of the goals count.

teams are now obstructing a keeper or trying to put them off, esp decent ones like bart. i think they need to revise the ruling and cut out this player tactic infront of the keeper but in the above highlight i do not see anything wrong with it.

I agree,@liampie after all this happened directly after a corner kick and the attackers nearest the goalie are moving away.

it also seemed to happen so quick, so its another reason it seems harsh. how does the player get a way when its a few seconds before the player takes a pop at goal?

silly officials really.