FIFA Ponder Scrapping Offsides

[steve_69]

Don't fix it; it ain't broke.

 

It is broke but only since they introduced that wanky 'interfering with play' rule. No fucker knows what's going on, not even the referees.

They should just revert back to the old system - if you're offside, you're offside. Whistle blows, freekick, everybody's happy.

[matta]

good idea, lets add 2 bluelines, icing and playing behind the goal.

[Happy Face]

They've broken the best sport in the world with all this shite about giving the striker the advantage, players not interfering with play and only giving offside when you touch the ball.  It's all horseshit, just revert to the clear rule as it stood.

 

 

[Village Idiot]

Don't fix it; it ain't broke.

 

It is broke but only since they introduced that wanky 'interfering with play' rule. No f***er knows what's going on, not even the referees.

They should just revert back to the old system - if you're offside, you're offside. Whistle blows, freekick, everybody's happy.

 

Old rule ain't that great, I remember refs ruling out long range goals because some random guy was offside inside the box.

 

[Happy Face]

Don't fix it; it ain't broke.

 

It is broke but only since they introduced that wanky 'interfering with play' rule. No f***er knows what's going on, not even the referees.

They should just revert back to the old system - if you're offside, you're offside. Whistle blows, freekick, everybody's happy.

 

Old rule ain't that great, I remember refs ruling out long range goals because some random guy was offside inside the box.

 

 

As they should, the random bloke is offside.

 

If a random bloke decks one of your defenders off the ball before a shot goes in should the goal be allowed?  There's an art to defending which includes knowing when someone is offside and stepping out.  That has been ruined by selective application of the law which says you can only step out on the man that receives the ball eventually....how the fuck are you supposed to know that in advance of the ball being played?

[Foluwashola]

I would put money on it that the people wanting the old rule back will be the first ones to complain when they realise how crap it was. The current rule is fine, all that is needed is consistency.

 

[steve_69]

I would put money on it that the people wanting the old rule back will be the first ones to complain when they realise how crap it was. The current rule is fine, all that is needed is consistency.

 

 

Sadly, with the standard of refereeing in this country, that's pretty unlikely.

[gray]

Just play rush keeper and be done with it

[Exiled in Texas]

The old version of offside was terrible.  Right winger was a shade offside on the right touchline, but the ball is played up the left side with the left winger onside....PEEEP!!!!  Offside!!

 

The new version is must better - it just needs the commentators to understand the LOTG and the difference between interfering with play, interferring with a player and being in an offside position but not interfering

 

I'll say it again - the old offside was really crap.

[TRon]

The current rules are fine as they are, what we need is tv and radio pundits to shut up and fuck off tbh. I can't even listen to shows like 606 any more with their endless debates about controversial decisions and guest referees giving us their anal perspectives.

[Stifler]

Don't fix it; it ain't broke.

 

It is broke but only since they introduced that wanky 'interfering with play' rule. No f***er knows what's going on, not even the referees.

They should just revert back to the old system - if you're offside, you're offside. Whistle blows, freekick, everybody's happy.

 

Old rule ain't that great, I remember refs ruling out long range goals because some random guy was offside inside the box.

 

 

As they should, the random bloke is offside.

 

If a random bloke decks one of your defenders off the ball before a shot goes in should the goal be allowed?  There's an art to defending which includes knowing when someone is offside and stepping out.  That has been ruined by selective application of the law which says you can only step out on the man that receives the ball eventually....how the fuck are you supposed to know that in advance of the ball being played?

 

I'm sure at that point he would be interfearing with play by those actions, and play would be stopped for an off the ball foul.

 

This rule in my opinion is the best way to rule offside, it justs needs referee's and linesmen to rule it correctly.

[Guest Brummiemag]

Not sure if its a good idea or not, certainly worth a trial in the lower leagues.

 

Something needs to be done though, the vast majority of games I watch (and not just Newcastle) are as dull as dishwater, with no space or time and most of the players crammed into the middle third of the pitch. No doubt many of the games in the World Cup this year will be boring, cautious and without incident and its such a shame

 

I reckon only about 10% of games that I watch are entertaining and thats far too low. I'm glad to hear FIFA are considering ways to improve the game

[Stifler]

Not sure if its a good idea or not, certainly worth a trial in the lower leagues.

 

Something needs to be done though, the vast majority of games I watch (and not just Newcastle) are as dull as dishwater, with no space or time and most of the players crammed into the middle third of the pitch. No doubt many of the games in the World Cup this year will be boring, cautious and without incident and its such a shame

 

I reckon only about 10% of games that I watch are entertaining and thats far too low. I'm glad to hear FIFA are considering ways to improve the game

 

I'd rather have a few 0-0 games then alot more 5-4 games in which goals are scored by long balls, and goal munching.

[Guest Brummiemag]

Not sure if its a good idea or not, certainly worth a trial in the lower leagues.

 

Something needs to be done though, the vast majority of games I watch (and not just Newcastle) are as dull as dishwater, with no space or time and most of the players crammed into the middle third of the pitch. No doubt many of the games in the World Cup this year will be boring, cautious and without incident and its such a shame

 

I reckon only about 10% of games that I watch are entertaining and thats far too low. I'm glad to hear FIFA are considering ways to improve the game

 

I'd rather have a few 0-0 games then alot more 5-4 games in which goals are scored by long balls, and goal munching.

 

Thats precisely why I said that I'm not sure if this particular idea will work or not but that something needs to be done to change the fact that the majority of games are just plain dull. 

[Shak]

The "interfering with play" rule is wank, needs to be changed.

 

Perfect example was a couple of years ago.  Us against Birmingham, think it was that 1-1 game where Owen scored the equaliser.

 

One of our players hoofs an aimless long ball forward. The ball is coming down near Viduka, who was standing about 15 yards offside when the ball was played. The Birmingham defender catches the ball while backtracking cos he knows Viduka is in an offside position.

 

Result? Free kick to Newcastle.

 

Thought it was funny as fuck at the time, obviously, but it's madness that the defender gets punished there IMO.

[Exiled in Texas]

If the Birmingham defender doesn't know that it's not an offense to be in an offside position, then he deserves being penalised.I suppose he should be able to catch a ball that was going out for a throw-in before it crosses the touchline.

 

Seriously, the current offside rule not a hard thing to comprehend.

 

Now there are some maddening decisions - notable examples such as the Newcastle goal against West Ham (I think) where the Newcastle forward who was in an offside position let the ball roll untouched between his legs to the far post where an on-side player slotted home.

[Guest Stephen927]

The defender should have been playing to the whistle, not to what he thought would be given. That isn't a problem with the rule more than it is the defender jumping the gun.

[Shak]

What does he do then?

 

The thing to do there is to let the ball land and either take it down or play it back to the keeper. However, every single instinct any decent defender has in that situation is telling him not to go messing about with a striker in close proximity, and in such a dangerous part of the field.

 

So what does he do? He has to volley/header the ball back towards midfield, and likely give the ball back to the opposition. The striker is quite clearly "active" in the play there, even if he hasn't touched the ball.

[Exiled in Texas]

Law 11 - Offside

Point 1 - Offside Position

It is not an offense in itself to be in an offside position.

 

So Viduka did nothing wrong being where he was.

 

Offense

A player in an offside position is only penalized if .... he is, in the opinion of the referee, involved in active play by:

• interfering with play or

• interfering with an opponent or

• gaining an advantage by being in that position

 

So standing in an offside position is not an offense and the player in an offside position must make some other action (beyond his mere presence) to be deemed offside.

 

Take away Viduka and what would the player have done had he been there all on his own. That's the answer on what he should have done.  Then if Viduka moves and seeks to become involved in play (gaining an advantage as he would not be able to close him down had he not been in offside position) then he completes the two parts of the Offside Law - Was in an Offside position and Involved in Active Play become true.

 

 

[Guest Stephen927]

[Shak]

Thanks for that Perluigi.

 

My point is that the rule is absolutely stupid, not that I don't understand it.

[Guest Stephen927]

Thanks for that Perluigi.

 

My point is that the rule is absolutely stupid, not that I don't understand it.

 

Pierluigi.

[Shak]

Thanks for that Dave.

[Guest Stephen927]

Thanks for that Dave.

 

Ste.

[Shak]

And you were doing so well.