Change in offside rule in England

[Dune]

Offside rule set for more changes

http://www.soccernet.com/england/news/2002/0803/20020803offside.html

"The League Managers' Association has been informed that the assistant referees 'must see air' - the exact definition - between a forward and a defender before giving offside this season."

Not a big change but it sure gives the forwards a big advantage.

[Daksims]

Seems like a good rule. Wouldn't mind the MLS adopting that one.

[MPJ334]

hmmmm. can't think of anything to say...maybe some more experienced referees have something?

[billf]

Well this is good news since the English have been very conservative in their approach to intepreting law 11.

This isn't a change of the law by the English FA, it's just a new more liberal interpretation. It's good for the game in the sense that close calls will now have to go to the attacker. I think the USSF is pretty liberal with its interpretaion of offside now. You do see goals scored every week in MLS where a player is in a passive offside position, and there are a lot of close calls where the flag stays down. The USSF has interpreted offside liberaly for decades, so I think this may be a case of England catching up to our mentality.

However, we are not taught to look for daylight between the attacker and the defender. I'd like to see that term make its way into USSF training.

[whistleblowerusa]

Originally posted by billf
Well this is good news since the English have been very conservative in their approach to intepreting law 11.

This isn't a change of the law by the English FA, it's just a new more liberal interpretation. It's good for the game in the sense that close calls will now have to go to the attacker. I think the USSF is pretty liberal with its interpretaion of offside now. You do see goals scored every week in MLS where a player is in a passive offside position, and there are a lot of close calls where the flag stays down. The USSF has interpreted offside liberaly for decades, so I think this may be a case of England catching up to our mentality.

However, we are not taught to look for daylight between the attacker and the defender. I'd like to see that term make its way into USSF training.
If the AR is bad and can't make an accurate dicision then whether you see air, skin, hair, popcorn, or anything else that you might think will help, it will still be a bad call or a good call.
Seeing "air" was and still might be in some areas, a way that was being taught by some older instructors here in the US. The ATR and other instructional materials teach that the torso placement is hwo we should judge close calls. Looking for "air" still depends on correct positioning and focus on the game and of course some skill.
Mistakes happen and that is part of this game or any other game the people of the world play.

[Barca_Fan2003]

I get the image into my head thinking of this:
A bunch of old rabbis interpreting the Talmud.

[whistleblowerusa]

Originally posted by Barca_Fan2003
I get the image into my head thinking of this:
A bunch of old rabbis interpreting the Talmud.
Or the National Weather Service trying to predict a storm. :)

[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.

[Maczebus]

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 :)

SNIPPED

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.

And they just keep coming...
...I'm speechless...

[jd6885]

how about attaching a computer chip to the players' boots? A computer will calculate the offside line by the last two players' position and if an opposing player passes this line, steel prongs will pop out of the ground, stopping the play...butt effectively ending the player's life... well, maybe not. Ok, how about a light turns on and the offside player's number and team name will pop up on a board so the referee can decide to call a passive offside and continue with the play or stop the play with his .44 magnum? Ok maybe not with a magnum... but hey it could work for those certain defenders that just won't give those 10 yards for on freekicks :D

[fanmaster]

Hey, we could have Christmas Tree lights like in drag racing, green for OK, yellow for 'even with the defense' and red if they are past the next to last defender. Then as soon as the ball is kicked, all you do is notice the color out the corner of your eye.

[norfcath]

Originally posted by Barca_Fan2003
I get the image into my head thinking of this:
A bunch of old rabbis interpreting the Talmud.

"From Moses to Moses, there is none greater than Moses." And I'm not even Jewish! Let the interpretation continue if it will favor the attacker.

[quarterUltra]

Wasn't the FA going to use some kind of lighting system to help the AR's in their calls? What ever happened to that?

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?

[MPJ334]

Originally posted by whistleblowerusa

Or the National Weather Service trying to predict a storm. :)
funny you should mention that. our last two marching band rehersals have had marching cut short due to weather...we went inside one day and left the other...on the first i decided to play emergency storm channel on Cable... (in electronically simulated voice) "The nattional weather service in birrrmingham, alaabama just just issued a severee thunderstorm warning effective until 8 pm, Centtral Dayylight Timme (when our rehersal would be over, of course) for ____ and ____ counties (the two ppl from my school live in)." but i don't know if it was actualyl issued

[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:

[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?

[whistleblowerusa]

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:
What if the player had beans or something as "airy" for lunch? He could ceate his own air and keep himself onside forever. :)

[fanmaster]

You missed the point . . . the air means you are offsite . . .

[MassachusettsRef]

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. Stateman,

Without being a jerk......

all or your proposals (#1, #2 and #3....though I admit, I don't understand #2....) will put far too much pressure on the AR, don't you think? #1 is VERY subjective. Are you suggesting it should be left to the ARs' discretion? or the CR's? #2...I just don't understand how it would be instituted (I think I know whta you mean). And #3....too much pressure on the AR, don't you think? Distinguising between that area and the rest of the field....could get very subjective.

[whistleblowerusa]

Originally posted by fanmaster
You missed the point . . . the air means you are offsite . . .
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 :)