Flick On - Offside or Not

[kevbrunton]

A situation occurred in a game last night -- how would you guys have handled it...

Red has a throw in a few yards on their half of the field. A red player is a good 3 to 4 yards in an offside position behind the 2nd last defender. This is happening on the opposite side of the field from the AR (me).

When the throw is taken, 3 players - 1 red and 2 blue contest for the ball in the air. The ball deflects to the, of course, wide open red player who was in an offside position.

Since I couldn't tell who flicked the ball on, I did not raise the flag. Of course, the blue coach right behind me is going balistic. After red scored, rather than signalling a good goal by running up the line, I held my ground and waived to the center to come over.

When he came over, I explained the situation and asked who flicked the ball on near midfield -- the red attacker (in which case the player was offside) or a defender (in which case the player was NOT -- because a defensive flick doesn't "reset" the "picture" and the previous "picture" was off a throw-in). The center said that the flick was by the red attacker and so then I said, then you have to disallow the goal and go back to the offside.

Of course, when we did that, the red coach went ballistic.

Did we handle this correctly? If I couldn't tell who flicked it on, should we just said "no offside" at that point and then it stands? What do you guys think?

[Statesman]

Collina talks about this exact scenario occuring in one of his Serie A matches in his new book. The AR didn't put the flag up because he couldn't tell who last played the ball. Collina didn't call for offside because he couldn't tell if the player was off. It wasn't until the play unfolded and a goal scored that they conferenced to find out what happened.

After putting the pieces together to determine the player was offside, Collina just went over to the scoring team's manager and said, "You're going to have to trust me, so and so was offside." The manager looked back at him and replied, "Oh well, that's ok" and the game proceeded.

There isn't much else you can do in this situation. When in doubt, the flag stays down. You can always come back and revist the call at the next stoppage if need be. If you were to put the flag up and the player was NOT offside, you have only two choices: center makes the wrong call, or the center has to waive you down. Neither is beneficial to the game. By keeping the flag down, you allow the game to unfold as it naturally would anyway with the option of coming back and making the correct call. If the player was not offside then there has been no impact on the game. If he was offside then it can still be called and the game restarted properly. It's a win-win situation, whereas putting the flag up is lose-lose.

The only trick is to manage the situation so you don't have to throw out a ballistic coach :)

[Ref Flunkie]

The only trick is to manage the situation so you don't have to throw out a ballistic coach :)



Sounds perfect to me, and I'm sure >90% of the ARs out there would put their flag up to signal offside. Of course, with my current view of coaches, I am not surprised the coach went crazy, and if he can't understand when you explain it to him in a calm matter, then that's his/her problem... tell 'em to zip it!

[kevbrunton]

Statesman, thanks for the feedback. We let him vent and then got on with the game. Fortunately, we didn't have to toss him. His basic argument was that after we let the play go initially, we couldn't call it back - and he still disagreed with us on that point.

[Crowdie]

When the throw is taken, 3 players - 1 red and 2 blue contest for the ball in the air. The ball deflects to the, of course, wide open red player who was in an offside position.

Did the ball hit an attacking player and continue on its path (by hitting the top of the attacking player's head, for example) or did the attacking player flick the ball on?

[Ref Flunkie]

Did the ball hit an attacking player and continue on its path (by hitting the top of the attacking player's head, for example) or did the attacking player flick the ball on?

I don't see how this matters, in either case the attacker is playing the ball...

[Crowdie]

I don't see how this matters, in either case the attacker is playing the ball...

What if the ball touches the edge of the player's arm and goes straight through. Has the ball touching the edge of the player's arm resulted in the throw in being completed?

[Ref Flunkie]

What if the ball touches the edge of the player's arm and goes straight through. Has the ball touching the edge of the player's arm resulted in the throw in being completed?

I would assume if the player attempts to make a move at the ball, and makes contact, then it has been played. In our case above, the player obviously jumped for the ball, where it hit him. Whether it was flicked or simply glanced off his head, I would consider it being played...even if the throw was traveling in the same direction initially. However, if a player is simply standing there and a throw (or kick or whatever) deflects off of him, then I do not think that is being played and it should be taken from when the ball was initially kicked/thrown. Sound good? :)

[jkc313]

A situation occurred in a game last night -- how would you guys have handled it...

Red has a throw in a few yards on their half of the field. A red player is a good 3 to 4 yards in an offside position behind the 2nd last defender. This is happening on the opposite side of the field from the AR (me).

When the throw is taken, 3 players - 1 red and 2 blue contest for the ball in the air. The ball deflects to the, of course, wide open red player who was in an offside position.

Since I couldn't tell who flicked the ball on, I did not raise the flag. Of course, the blue coach right behind me is going balistic. After red scored, rather than signalling a good goal by running up the line, I held my ground and waived to the center to come over.

When he came over, I explained the situation and asked who flicked the ball on near midfield -- the red attacker (in which case the player was offside) or a defender (in which case the player was NOT -- because a defensive flick doesn't "reset" the "picture" and the previous "picture" was off a throw-in). The center said that the flick was by the red attacker and so then I said, then you have to disallow the goal and go back to the offside.

Of course, when we did that, the red coach went ballistic.

Did we handle this correctly? If I couldn't tell who flicked it on, should we just said "no offside" at that point and then it stands? What do you guys think?
The two of you acting as a team got this one 100% correct. Good job

[MidwestRef]

This is about as textbook as one can handle a situation like this. The beautiful thing about our role as an official is that we can correct our call before the next restart. You allowed the game to continue and then worked with the center to make the right call. I know that if I were in the same situation, my flag would probably go up out of instinct. I'll remember this situation in the future.

If the referee also wasn't sure who played the ball, then you're up a crick without a paddle! :) Seriously, if neither of you could tell who played the ball, then I think you have to rule a goal for this reason - when in doubt, keep the flag down.

[GreatZar]

Out-freakin'-standing! Great job...

[Crowdie]

However, if a player is simply standing there and a throw (or kick or whatever) deflects off of him, then I do not think that is being played and it should be taken from when the ball was initially kicked/thrown. Sound good? :)

So if the ball deflected off an attacking player who didn't play at the ball and went to an attacking player in an offside position would you call that player offside?

[MassachusettsRef]

So if the ball deflected off an attacking player who didn't play at the ball and went to an attacking player in an offside position would you call that player offside?The law is pretty clear here. You have to call the player offside. The law says "last touched or played by an attacker". The "last played part" is open to various interpetations (even, as we've seen, within FIFA). But the "last touched" part is pretty clear.

If a ball touches an attacker and goes directly to a player in an offside position, that player is offside--even if the "touch" is only the slightest of deflections after a throw-in.

[Crowdie]

I agree but there were several games last year in Europe where the player wasn't called offside so that is why I was interested to see what other referees thought.

The argument put up was that because the ball had not been played by the first attacking player the throw in was still happening hence the second attacking player could not be offside. In the defence of the referee in one of the situations it was hard to tell if the ball had touched anything except the player's shirt.

[Stan]

That is good AR/CR mechanics.

I had occasion to use the same mechanics in a somewhat more embarrasing situation last weekend. High level U-14B game, two state champions... yellow wing is dancing at the offside restraining point with blue defender while the ball is being brought up the opposite side of the field. At the instant before the ball is crossed to the wing, who at that point was just even with the defender, I involuntarily blink (ouch). The next thing I see is the wing 5 feet behind the defender as the ball lands neatly in front of him, with blue partisans yelling for offside. Needless to say, the wing collects the ball, pushes it to baseline and places a perfect centering cross on the feet of an onrushing attacker, who scores.

I froze at attention with my flag down, and the center came running over. After telling him the above, I asked if he saw anything to indicate that the wing jumped before the pass. He did not, so we agreed that the goal should stand.

The blue team's spectators, predictably, had no idea what had just happened, and assumed that I had just been stubborn. The game wound up being a 4-0 blowout, so the incident was not game-deciding, but I was pleased that the mechanic worked.

[Gary V]

The argument put up was that because the ball had not been played by the first attacking player the throw in was still happening hence the second attacking player could not be offside. In the defence of the referee in one of the situations it was hard to tell if the ball had touched anything except the player's shirt.
The Laws are perfectly clear that offside is determined at the time of the last play or touch by the teammate. This is true whether the player intended to play it or just got in the way. It's also true whether the ball touched the player's arm in a manner that is not a handling foul.

The player's shirt (and other equipment) is considered to be part of the player. You'd call a foul on a player that held only the opponent's shirt, wouldn't you?

The Laws are less clear about an opponent's play resetting offside considerations, but all the official advice, Q&A, etc from all sources I've ever seen are consistent. The defender has to make a deliberate play, not a deflection, for the offside to be reset.

Since this was from a throw-in, a flick-on by the defender is immaterial. If the ref decides it was a deliberate play, offside was reset. If the ref decides it was a deflection, the ball is considered to be coming directly from the throw-in.

[HoldenMan]

eye contact could come in handy here - if something like this happens on the far side of the field, and you're not sure who it came off (and the CR is in a better position to tell) and the CR looks at you, then he probably knows the attacker touched it and is looking for your offside opinion.


Unless of course he's not entirely certain if the attacker touched it or not......or he's looking for/at something else.....hmm..............

[MassachusettsRef]

eye contact could come in handy here - if something like this happens on the far side of the field, and you're not sure who it came off (and the CR is in a better position to tell) and the CR looks at you, then he probably knows the attacker touched it and is looking for your offside opinion.


Unless of course he's not entirely certain if the attacker touched it or not......or he's looking for/at something else.....hmm..............This wouldn't work for me or for most other referees I know. I'd look to the AR in either scenario (whether I saw a defender or attacker last touch it) because I want to be able to visually wave my AR down (if I've determined a defender touched it) so that he knows I've acknowledged him and he stays involved in the play.

Remember, this situation was not down near the goal line--it was 50-60 yards away from goal. If my AR has his flag up here I want him to know that I've seen him and that I saw a defender last touch the ball. That way, he puts his flag down and gets back involved in play as quickly as possible. Otherwise, he stands at midfield with the flag until he's acknowledged and may be vastly out of position for a critical goal line decision, a foul call, or a different offside call further down the field.

[Ref Flunkie]

The Laws are perfectly clear that offside is determined at the time of the last play or touch by the teammate.

Yeah I went searching for this verbage as well. Ok, just for argument sake, why is the requirement for offside "reset" different for attackers and defenders? For attackers, it simply has to "touch" an attacker to be reset, for a defender, it has to be "played/controlled". This seems a bit unfair, but I'm sure there is a good argument out there as to why, I just can't think of one at the moment.

[MassachusettsRef]

Yeah I went searching for this verbage as well. Ok, just for argument sake, why is the requirement for offside "reset" different for attackers and defenders? For attackers, it simply has to "touch" an attacker to be reset, for a defender, it has to be "played/controlled". This seems a bit unfair, but I'm sure there is a good argument out there as to why, I just can't think of one at the moment.To decide whether or not you think there is a good reason, think about the following scenario:

Defender clears the ball out but his attempt hits Attacker X in the head and deflects back towards the Defender's own goal. Ball goes straight to Attacker Y, who was behind the Defender and clearly in an offside position. Attacker Y breaks away on goal.

Should Attacker Y be punished for gaining an advantage from being in an offside position? The ball was last played by a defender, but last touched by an attacker.

The converse, of course, should be obvious. If the requirement were only that a defender have to touch the ball to reset offside, attackers could intentionally deflect the ball of defenders, defenders would be less likely to attempt headers or tackles (that might cause deflections) and a keeper's save would reset offside.