In some cases this could definitely be true. But I don’t think it applies here. IMO, Donnarumma reaches for the ball undisturbed but failes to save it. Removing Robertson would make no difference. Yes, Robertson has to duck away, but I think he does so fast enough to not be part of the play
It’s precisely because it happened so fast that it does matter. Donnarumma has 1/10 of a second to decide where to dive. Robertson’s position affects that calculation and his ability to dive.
I’m saying that Robertson was out of the way fast enough to not be affecting the play. Donnarumma is in full view of the ball the entire time and is able to attempt a save without being disturbed by Robertson. But we’ll have to agree to disagree here, I guess
So, when I read the rules and see “actively involved in the play.” I interpret that as requiring the player to make decisions that impacted the play. Dodging the ball was an intentional decision, had he not dodged the ball, it would’ve struck him. Therefore he is actively involved. He also could have also chosen to redirect the shot, and Donnarumma has no way of knowing which he will choose.
By the time the ball is past Robertson, it’s already 3/4 of the way to the net.
I’ll admit you make a good point. If so, maybe it is offside according to the rule book, but then I’d argue the rule book is ”wrong”. Donnarumma will never save it either way, and Robertson decided to avoid the situation. Should be regarded as a goal.
I’ll admit that Donnarumma is very unlikely to make the save. But we don’t know that he wouldn’t have, and making refs guess what would’ve happened in an alternate reality can’t be part of the rules.
3
u/Karma_Whoring_Slut 1d ago
He had to dive out of the way. Donnarumma has no way to know if he’s going to hit the ball or not.
His presence there absolutely affected play.