Jump to content

The Offside Rule


Fugazi
 Share

Recommended Posts

Quite a bit of chat about this in the other thread, just wondering what people's opinions are on the current definitions of the offside rule?

 

Obviously inteferrence and phases are the current buzzwords, and when one phase finishes and another starts.

 

A player is in an offside position if he is nearer to his opponents’ goal-line than the ball and the second last opponent (usually the last defender), unless he is in his own half. If the attacker is level, he is onside.

 

Most people also realise that a player cannot be offside from a goal kick, a throw-in or a corner, so now all we need to do is define when the offside position becomes an offence:

 

It is when, in the referee’s opinion, at the moment the ball is played or touches one of his team, a player is either interfering with play or an opponent, or gaining an advantage by being in that position.

 

The interpretation of those three points led to misunderstanding and inconsistent application and so the International FA Board made decisions which defined those criteria. They decreed that:

 

* Interfering with play means playing or touching the ball passed or touched by a team-mate.

 

* Interfering with an opponent means preventing an opponent from playing or being able to play the ball by clearly obstructing the opponent’s line of vision or movements or making a gesture or movement which, in the opinion of the referee, deceives or distracts an opponent.

 

* Gaining an advantage by being in that position means playing a ball that rebounds to him off a goal-post or the crossbar having been in an offside position or playing the ball that rebounds to him off an opponent having been in an offside position.

 

So, unless a player touches the ball he is not interfering with play. It’s that simple and whether referees or assistants agree with that definition is irrelevant, they have to apply the law. Moreover, whether you or managers or pundits like it, that is how FIFA insist the offside law is applied.

 

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-1239310/The-offside-rule-explained-Alan-Hansen-Mick-McCarthy-rest-us.html#ixzz0eVaNBTxX

Link to post
Share on other sites

Don't see a problem with it at all. I remember a goal for us at Liverpool a few years ago where Kluivert was standing ahead of all the defenders by a good 5-10 yards, the ball was played out wide to Bowyer, and then Kluivert was onside when Bowyer pulled the ball back to him from the byline. The commentators etc, criticised the goal, when really it was just damn clever from Kluivert.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Don't see a problem with it at all. I remember a goal for us at Liverpool a few years ago where Kluivert was standing ahead of all the defenders by a good 5-10 yards, the ball was played out wide to Bowyer, and then Kluivert was onside when Bowyer pulled the ball back to him from the byline. The commentators etc, criticised the goal, when really it was just damn clever from Kluivert.

 

I remeber Van Nistelrooy being a master at that for Man Utd.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Don't see a problem with it at all. I remember a goal for us at Liverpool a few years ago where Kluivert was standing ahead of all the defenders by a good 5-10 yards, the ball was played out wide to Bowyer, and then Kluivert was onside when Bowyer pulled the ball back to him from the byline. The commentators etc, criticised the goal, when really it was just damn clever from Kluivert.

 

I remeber Van Nistelrooy being a master at that for Man Utd.

 

Aye he was the first i saw manipulating the new rule like so many do nower days. Its made for poachers of goals but there are very few of them in the game nowadays.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest Geordiesned

Did anyone see the goal Everton (Fellani) had disallowed at the weekend? It was onside under any of the definitions there's been of the rule. Cahill played the ball square and Fellani coming from behind him tapped it in. Yes he was ahead of the last defender but he was clearly behind the ball. Looked like the linesman didn't know the rules to me.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest guinness_fiend

It's an easy enough rule to figure out, so I say keep it.

 

Lord only knows how footballers would cope with sports such as ice hockey, American football and basketball, with each one having a set of rules being infinitely more complex than football (not to mention playbooks).

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest firetotheworks

The problem is that far too much of the current law is logical to a fault. The fault being that the game moves too fast to be able to implement it accurately. There's too many decisions that are ruled offside and it's all 'it was the original ball' and then ones that are ruled onside and it's all 'that was a different phase'

 

It's too much, just have offside is offside as it was, it was never broken.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It's an easy enough rule to figure out, so I say keep it.

 

Exactly. But managers won't for some reason, probably to use as an excuse.

 

Refs sometimes get decisions wrong in all situations, even the ball hitting the back of the net and coming back out. Not because they don't know the rules but because people make mistakes.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Don't see a problem with it at all. I remember a goal for us at Liverpool a few years ago where Kluivert was standing ahead of all the defenders by a good 5-10 yards, the ball was played out wide to Bowyer, and then Kluivert was onside when Bowyer pulled the ball back to him from the byline. The commentators etc, criticised the goal, when really it was just damn clever from Kluivert.

 

No problem with that at all.

 

A player is in an offside position if he is nearer to his opponents’ goal-line than the ball and the second last opponent (usually the last defender)

 

The offside decision resets each time the offensive team plays the ball.  Once Bowyer, who is onside, plays the ball, as long as it backward towards Kluivert  - Kluivert cannot be offside.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

It is when, in the referee’s opinion, at the moment the ball is played or touches one of his team, a player is either interfering with play or an opponent, or gaining an advantage by being in that position.

 

Disagree with the "or Touches one of his team" statement. An unintentional deflection caused by a bad pass by the defenders does not make a player in an offside position offside.

 

edit - of course.. ITOOTR applies.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think it should be left as it is, this version of the rule is better than the old one, as it used to be really dull when whenever a ball was played forward the defence just stepped up and caught someone, anyone, offside. Now at least they have to catch someone vaguely near the ball offside. People seem to be looking back through rose tinted glasses, the officials have and always will make mistakes, whatever the rules are, if you exclude the bad decisions then it's clear which version of the rule is the best.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 months later...

It's the best it's ever going to be at the minute, managers and players just cry when it goes against them.

 

I agree. It may have a few more intricacies but it also allows linesmen to take a little extra time to make decisions depending on who the ball goes to. As long as common sense is the driving force then it's all good.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...