Offside la Raducioiu.

Ridiculous offside. A child could call this better. But they did the same with Todorov's goal in Bucharest the previous year.

Initial si eu am zis ca dvs. Am citit apoi si am aflat că, in conformitate cu regulamentului in vigoare la momentul desfasurarii partidei, care spunea ca daca un jucator nu se afla in pozitie regulamentara se dicteaza offside indiferent daca acel jucator a influentat sau nu faza, este offside acordat corect fiindca Raducioiu, chiar daca nu joaca mingea, se afla in offside. Cred ca de acelasi tip de offside am beneficiat si noi in 94, cand pa meciul cu Elvetia este anulat primul gol al lui Sutter (de care nu isi mai aduce nimeni aminte) cu toate ca Sutter era in pozitie corecta. Diferenta e ca Sutter a mai inscris apoi, in timp ce Sabau nu..

​@@user-dg4qk1rj4zI initially also thought that it was wrong. Later, upon reading, I found out that according to the rules in force at the time of the match, it stated that if a player is not in a regular position, offside is called regardless of whether that player influenced the play or not. Therefore, the offside was correctly awarded because even though Raducioiu didn't play the ball, he was in an offside position. I believe a similar situation may have occurred with Todorov's goal (although I don't remember it, I suspect this could be the explanation).

@@codrutcroitoru I see. There was a change in rules maybe in 1990s. So called passive offside which wasn't called, meaning it had been called earlier.