O/T The Offside Rule

[Jurgen the German]

Does the rule need clariyfying? Should they just get rid of this "2nd phase" "3rd Phase" stuff? I think it would be far easier if the rule only applies for when the ball is played initially. If it gets cleared or the ball bounces around the box and someone else passes the ball or shoots, then the it's only offside if the person who receives the ball/shoots is offside from that instance.

 

[thejazzman]

I think this will still cause complaint imo, simply because the moment something happens it has an effect. If a player standsd in an offside position in front of a goalkeeper, but doesnt get the ball at that moment, he has still affected play by either distracting defenders or the goalkeeper, so whatever occurs from there on is influenced by that. With the Saudi Sportswashing Machine goal against utd, for instance, Johnny Evans was tussling with Cisse, who was in an offside position, so you can see why someone would say it was unfair if he then scores and own goal as the result of tussling with a player who was offside. I dont think we'll ever clear this up...the only rules that seem to help in regards to offside are the ones that leave NO room for debate, such as whether a player is level with the last defender or not; anything else is always going to invite differing opinions, particularly where managers are concerned. There's a website that has a panel of referees who periodically review contentious decisions across the league, and very rarely do they all agree, despite knowing the rules. Its like the rule on what constitutes as a penalty or handball...you can reduce a penalty down to "contact made", but you cant make a rule that governs how much contact is needed to justify a penalty, or what SORT of contact.

 

[jts1882]

Was it Shankly who said something like if he'd not interfering with play what is he doing on the pitch? There are some crazy interpretations like when a player dummies and lets the ball roll under his foot being considered to not be interfering with play.

I like the simple version. Offside is offside. Someone mentioned on another thread that a player might be considered inactive if he was walking back with his hands on his head like in rugby. Or if lying injured. The trouble is players will abuse any exceptions like this by suddenly joining play. Perhaps something simple that anyone within ten yards of the ball is active and interferring with play although we'll get debates on how far away a player is.

 

[Armenia Spur]

I think it needs to go completely back to basics. If ANY member of your team is in an offside position, then its offside. Theres been to many changes and interpretations. At the moment i understand that a player has to touch the ball for the offside to be given, so what if he dummies it, tricks the keeper and the ball goes in? Technically wouldnt be offside according to my interpretation

 

[monkeybarry]

Was it Shankly who said something like if he'd not interfering with play what is he doing on the pitch? There are some crazy interpretations like when a player dummies and lets the ball roll under his foot being considered to not be interfering with play.

I like the simple version. Offside is offside. Someone mentioned on another thread that a player might be considered inactive if he was walking back with his hands on his head like in rugby. Or if lying injured. The trouble is players will abuse any exceptions like this by suddenly joining play. Perhaps something simple that anyone within ten yards of the ball is active and interferring with play although we'll get debates on how far away a player is.

It was cloughy.

I think going back to the 'interfering with play' rule would be best. Ie if u are standing by the corner flag, ur influence on a shot from 20yds is almost zero. If you standing in the eyeline on the gk, u affect what happens. Yeah its not perfect, but better than the over complicated alternatives or the old rule which would be too restrictive

 

[jts1882]

^^^

I agree in principle. The trouble is any interfering with play rule will have grey areas and controversial calls. Then FIFA start tinkering with the rule. Most of the time its common sense, like your standing by the corner flag example. But after the tinkering we get the crazy situation where a stepover dummy is not interfering. Or a player jumping and down just out of the direct line of sight of the goalkeeper.

I would be nice to go back the old interfering with player version and just state the referee is expected to us common sense (and ban all further tinkering with the rule). There will be subjective decisions but as long as the referee can give a plausible reason it should be accepted.

 

[Modric THFC]

The problem is ex player in the media who think they no it all have never read the new offside rule.
Niall earlier called Adebayor onside because there was no daylight between him and the sunderland defender.

They should all be made to sit and watch this before they give their 'expert' views - http://www.fifa.com/lotg/football/en/flash/start.html

 

[Modric THFC]

I think it needs to go completely back to basics. If ANY member of your team is in an offside position, then its offside. Theres been to many changes and interpretations. At the moment i understand that a player has to touch the ball for the offside to be given, so what if he dummies it, tricks the keeper and the ball goes in? Technically wouldnt be offside according to my interpretation

If he dummies it he is interfering with play, its simple.