Change in offside rule in England

[seahawkdad]

There will still be 'air'-ors...

[Greyhnd00]

Originally posted by Statesman
If I knew you guys were going to be jerks about it I wouldn't have mentioned any ideas I had. I shudder to think how you treat the coaches and players when you're reffing their games. I'm not sure if these ideas would help or improve the game but I thought they might be interesting to consider at the very least. Instead of mocking them because they aren't the current standard, why not actually consider the impact they could have on the gameplay?

Afterall, isn't game analysis the whole point of this forum in the first place? God forbid we should seriously discus alternatie ways to better serve the players and the game.

[kevbrunton]

Originally posted by Statesman
I was thinking about offside the other day and came up with some ideas for potential ideas. I guess I could "air" them here :)

1) If an attacker is deposessed of the ball by a defender with the action placing him in an offside position only to have his teammate recover the ball and kick it back forward to him, offside should be ignored.

2) In the offside trap if a group of attackers break free, offside should be ignored.

3) Offside should be ignored if the play is generated in the section of the field whose boundry is set by the line of the penalty area, the touch lines, and the goal line.

We all know what the intent of the rule is, no camping of the goals trying to get a wild pass forward (like they do in basketball). I think once the attack has progressed to the level mentioned above, the rule gets more in the way. I don't mind the current rule it just seems a little too old-fashioned.

States -- thicken the skin a little -- some of those guys may not even be referees. They're not names I'm used to seeing too much around here.

As for your proposals.

IMO, #1 and #2 would be a nightmare to call. For #1 how much pressure does the defender have to apply for it to be considered "dispossessed" vs. just making a mistake. Also, how long between the dispossession and the recovery by a teammate would be allowed. For #2, it seems to me that you are trying to stop the situation where the defense moves in concert a step or two forward just before the ball is played, therefore leaving an attacker in the offside position (classic offside trap), correct? If so, how do you distinguish between that "illegal" manuver vs. a defense just pushing out of their area. The defenses would be put in a position of having to have the ball 50 yards upfield and in possession of a teammate before they can move forward.

As for #3, that might be interesting, but there are a couple problem areas -- the biggest would be making the call on the far side. You'd almost have to have 4 AR's in that situation. Another would be that you are then adding MORE for the AR to have to look for -- if the attacker is in the offside position, then was inside or outside the PA when the ball was played. Judge all that while we're trying to watch the guys in the middle of the field for the traditional offside infraction.

As I said in the opening -- don't be afraid to chuck out some ideas -- some people will flame you if they don't like them, but just ignore it. Some others will consider them.

[fanmaster]

Originally posted by whistleblowerusa

Ahhh. So, if you are "offsite" that would give enough "air" between the players to judge offside and surely make the attacker guilty of offside :)

I sure blew that one . . I just gave my fingers a red card.

[kevbrunton]

Originally posted by quarterUltra
A better idea would be four linesmen. More eyes to watch for fouls as well as offsides and whether or not the ball is completely over the goal line, etc.

Thoughts?

I started discussing this, but then it seemed to me that it gets into more than just a discussion of the offside rule, so I started a new thread for it -- actually, I should I'll start a new thread when I get back from a meeting -- have to go do my blasted job for a little bit :).

[whipple]

Originally posted by Statesman
If I knew you guys were going to be jerks about it ...

Statesman,

Remember to air is human... to forgive, devine.

If by "generatng" you mean that the ball was last touched by a teammate who had advanced beyond the 18, I find the concept of #3 intriguing with the problem being the judgement or enforcement since the AR would now have two parralax problems, and even with 4 AR's it might be difficult to judge.

[jc508]

Originally posted by XYZ
Is "see air" an English phrase? Yea, I wanna see FIFA write that in the LOTG. :rolleyes:

I like it and anything else that will aid the attackers.

As for wording, let me try. I would think that FIFA could work the section as:
A player is in an offside position if:
- he is nearer to his opponent's goal line and completely ahead of the second last opponent and closer to the goal line than both the second last opponent and the ball.

[Statesman]

Well, I'm usually a CR for the clubs I do but this past weekend I was placed as an AR for the first time in a few years on some games. The reason these ideas came up were just based on some calls I had to make I felt were a bit trivial.

The first scenario was rather a simple situation, actually. Very recognizeable and easy to call because it's usually pretty obvious. The idea is when the SLD dispossesses an attacker of the ball, only to have a teammate subsequently recover the ball and send it back forward to the now-offside player. The duration would be a single possession -- if the ball is recovered from the SLD and sent forward, offside is ignored. If the SLD passes the ball to a teammate and the ball is recovered then sent forward, offside is flagged.

The second scenario was also meant to be a simple adjustment. Basically, if the forwards of the attacking team do break the offensive trap by running past the defenders after the ball was sent over them, passes between those players should not be considered for offside if one is done forward. I had a few situations where an excellent attack was unfolding after 2-3 attackers cleared the defenders, only to have one of them sprint ahead of the ball and receive a pass -- offside. Kind of pointless IMO.

The third situation is the one that adjusts gameplay quite a bit. Basically by "play generating" within the area, I'm meaning the attacker with the ball is passing from within the area to another player within the area. Once the ball leaves the area, any further forward passing to traditional offside players would be flagged. However an attacker could easily dribble the ball back forward into the area and then make the pass without it being flagged. The only pressure on the AR would be deciding whether the pass was within the area or not.

[wu-tang beez]

I'd like to see the rule adopted by all refs. Ties are supposed to go w/ the offense(much like plays @ the plate in basball) but we all know, that the defenders in both sports are given the benefit of the doubt & we have less scoring. This way a player will have to be clearly offsides b4 the call can be made.

I like it, too bad it prob won't last beyond the 1st 2wks; much like basballs failed attempt to speed up the game w/ a pitching clock.

Much like the Bill of Rights, the FIFA rulebook is a living document & we should interpret freely its meaningsin accordance to our needs as a soccer nation ;-)

[scrub]

The offside rule is always poking its controversal head into games.

Having never seen a game with no offside rule, I cannot forsee the big problem with removing it. I understand removing it would change the nature of soccer, but maybe for the better.

Can people explain why the offside rule and why not just get rid of it?

[superdave]

I don't see why everyone is freaking out. The English FA has merely codified what "even" is.

Nothing more. Nothing less.

[billf]

Statesman,

In the first situation you describe a situation that punishes the defender for making a good play. Possession changed, that's a new play. Logic dictates that the player is offside because he gained an advantage from the position. You're suggesting a change to the law that makes law 11 even more difficult to understand.

In the second situation, your description eliminates offside when a break begins onside but an attacker is a head of the ball. I see where you're going with this, but it's not very hard for an attacker to stay behind the ball. This is just stupid on the part of the attacker because the hard work of breaking the trap was already done. In this case, do you allow an attacker to sprint right at the keeper an interfere with him as well?

In the third situation, you're suggesting a change that requires the AR to see the opposite boundry to the penalty area. That's not always possible. A field may be crowned, and we also all work on fields that aren't lined that well. That makes things very complicated and again the spirt of law 11 is broken because attackers are free to interfere with the keeper.

I understand what you are trying to do with these suggestions, but the beauty of TLOG IMO is that they are simple. They don't describe every possible situation that can occur. If you suggest this, why don't you just suggest that we eliminate law 11 instead of making it more complicated?

[whipple]

Originally posted by Statesman
The only pressure on the AR would be deciding whether the pass was within the area or not.

And, considering that the AR must still maintain a positon with the SLD and observe both postion and invovlement, adding that one extra observation of making certain that the ball is played from within the PA, or even if we added an 18 line from touch to touch, it could be even more problematic than what we have now.

I, as a note, am an AR for a lot of games, and adding complexity may be the last thing we need, even if we think is is an improvement or might in some way make things easier. For example, this idea of seeing light between an attacker and a defender is as doubtful as the old one step behind, lattitude we had back before 68 or 70. In essence, even with the tie going to the attacker is the least subjective, and should, if properly instructed provide for the greatest consistency in applicatin, even though there will still be mistakes.

Along these lines, I totally blew an offside call on Saturday, right at the beginning of the second half while running a line for a B17. I hate to admit just how many times I have made this identical error where I mistakenly raise my flag calling the defenders offside. Even though my flag is only halfway up and realizing my mistake, I begin to yank it down, the CR whistles and I start lookng for a hole to crawl into. Of course the players all know you blew it so there is no sense denying it.

I have had other experineced referees do the same one on me, as well, usually I get sucked in when their flag goes up, but occassionally you get away without the bad call or can salavge it. Two years ago, same tournament, I was the CR in a final, and right after the start of the half the AR's flag went up, and I blew the whistle quckly, then when I looked at the AR to signal where on field the offense occured, he had the flag in his mouth, and was shaking his head.

I immediately knew what had happened and awarded a drop ball for the inadvertant whistle. The beauty of his mechanic of putting the flag in his mouth was that no matter how disappointed the spectators were at his obvious mistake, he faced up to his and added a little touch of humor. I don't know how well such an approach would do at the World Cup, but it seems to work at the youth level.

Sherman

[Viking64]

Originally posted by superdave
I don't see why everyone is freaking out. The English FA has merely codified what "even" is.

Nothing more. Nothing less.

I totally disagree. What "even" is, is codified into the training. If half your torso is ahead of the head of your SLD, you are offside, according to the training. In practice I've found most players are a 1/2 yard in play, to ensure they are not out of play.

Now, the FA has said you have to be completely past your SLD to be called. That's the only way you can see light between them. Having been an AR and made a lot of offside calls, this is much different. The difference is essentially an entire yard of more space where you are in play, and not offside.

If you want to see the difference, take a piece of chalk and draw a line on the ground. Take your soccer ball, and look at the ball from the side while it rolls across the line. Take your chalk, mark where the ball is when it's out of bounds.

Then take your ball, and roll it across the line while looking at the ball from directly above the ball. Stop the ball when you can see the ground between the ball and the line both times. Compare where your "out of bounds" calls are. The ball will be several inches more out of bounds when you see it from above.

I hope it works. It will make the game more open and refs may have an easier time making the right call, both phenomenal improvements if they work.

[XYZ]

jc508
I like it and anything else that will aid the attackers.I like it, too, but not because it aids the attackers, but because it is more in keeping with the spirit of the offside rule than the present situation, in which there are far too many false positives on offside - that is, players who are NOT in an an offside position when the ball is played but are nonetheless called offside.
kevbrunton
some of those guys may not even be refereesI'm not a referee, and I'm not ashamed to say it. But I do get tired of having to say it every time I post in this forum. Frankly, the attitude that some refs seem to have that the only people who could possibly know anything about the game, in fact the only people who matter, are referees, annoys me sometimes. It's one reason I don't post much here, although I've read almost every word posted in the forum in the last couple of years. (I read a lot :D)

I respect and appreciate the job referees do. But that doesn't mean I think they know everything. Or that no one else knows anything.
scrub
Can people explain why the offside rule and why not just get rid of it?It prevents cherry-pickers (players camping out near the opponent's goal) and it allows defenders to become involved in the attack. As much as I've ranted and raved about the false positives on offside, I'd be opposed to doing away with the offside rule.
superdave
The English FA has merely codified what "even" is.Hardly. Fully past is not even. The English FA is redefining what "on" is or, to be more precise, they're redefining what "off" is.

I am amused by the phrase "see air". Whoever thought of that needs to get out in the sea air for a while. If FIFA actually uses such a phrase they will deserve all the ridicule they get.

But, except for the silly phrase 'see air', I like the idea a lot. It would make the offside rule like other rules in the LOTG, such as those which say that the entire ball must cross the entire line. (Imagine the nice pictures FIFA could put in the LOTG!)

The offside rule could say something similar, for example: "A player is in an offside position only if his entire torso is closer to the goal than the entire torso of the 2LD, and the entire ball."

Also, it's going to be harder to complain about false positives. It's easy to complain about a player who is farther from the goal than the 2LD being called off. But complaining that a player who is past was not fully past is going to be nit-picky, even for me. ;)

I like the idea the English FA has. The phrase "see air" has to go!

That's my 2 cents. Keep the change.

[tcmahoney]

Originally posted by XYZ
I am amused by the phrase "see air". Whoever thought of that needs to get out in the sea air for a while. If FIFA actually uses such a phrase they will deserve all the ridicule they get.

(snip)

The phrase "see air" has to go!

Would you prefer the term "see daylight" to be used instead? That'd be better.

But, darn it, there are all those night matches.

[Delta Blues]

Originally posted by XYZ
On a clear, unpolluted day, you can't really "see" air. In such a case, there could be no offside.

Is "see air" an English phrase? Yea, I wanna see FIFA write that in the LOTG. :rolleyes:

Just play all matches in Mexico City.

[Treetaliano]

Just a question that has bothered me for years. I played ball at the NCAA level (UNC Charlotte) and the D-3 level for one season (charlotte Eagles, before they got moved up to A league) and this happened to me once and i never quite got it...

I was playing in a match against St. Louis U my junior season and I was on the right flank on Defense at this particular moment. One of their mids had possesion around the center stripe and we were pretty bunkered in and protecting a 1-0 lead at about the 85th minute or so.

They were on all out assualt for the equalizer and had basically a 2-2-6 formation out there. Anyways their mid swings a ball to the left flank which took a wierd bounce off the chest of one of their guys which led to the ball bounding to the basically the center spot. At this point 3 players on SLU all converged on the ball with our lone forward, including my mark.

In a scene that would make the 3 Stooges proud all three of their guys collided and the ball squirted past them all and our forward grabbed it and made his way downfield with no one but the keeper who was standing about at the 25 yard mark for some odd reason.

So being caught by surprise by this, our forward made a wierd touch to get by the keeper who made a lunge at him the ball. the ball comes to me and i slot it home for the 2-0 lead.

Nope! Lineman has the flag up, offside on me. 2 minutes later SLU score the equalizer.

Basically, to sum it up, we had a 2-0 rush downfield and the lineman was bassically saying that if our forward didnt score the goal, then it was offside. Why? Ive seen it a zillion times and never heard it called. When our guy got possession there was not one player on SLU in the defensive half of the field, why couldnt he pass it off?

[Craig the Aussie]

If you were in the opponents half (you were), in front of the second last defender (you were), in front of your teammate when he touched the ball (I assume you were), and took advantage of your position (you did) - you were offside.

[MassachusettsRef]

Treetaliano,

In a 2 on 0 (or 3 on 0, 4 on 0, etc.) situation, the ball carrier can't pass the ball forward to someone that's in front of him. If you were behind the ball, you were on and wrongly called. If you were in front of the ball, though, the call was correct.