Another offside question.

[CUS]

U15B, a free kick just inside the half line. The sun is shining in the keepers face. The defenders set up their line maybe 25yds from goal. The attackers line up with the defenders.

The kick is taken, the defenders all step forward, and at least 4 attackers make their break towards goal. The kick is a high floater towards the postage stamp. The keeper--blinded by the sun--is having problems tracking the ball. At the last minute makes a futile jump for the ball but it floats in. AR raises flag, center agrees, offside, no goal. Game finishes 0:0, coach is p!ssed.

When I asked (me not being the coach of the team) the AR why offside was called, he told me that 4 players made a play for the ball therefore, offside. I asked even if the ball was 20 feet over their heads? Yes.

Poking around here briefly and the 'net seems to show that the refs made a solid decision. I read the Offside Myths doc and that seems to agree with the decision made. The coach does not agree.

Any thoughts?

[Rufusabc]

First of all...that is some free kick. A ball floats in from just past the half way line and everyone is defending way past the area? My visualization of this play in my head is a little fuzzy because for the ball to be that high as it passes the players in an offside position and then suddenly float in WITHOUT any of the attackers making any type of play on it seems unrealistic. If they run towards the keeper as he attempts to play the ball therefore distracting him....then it is offside.

Rog

[rippingood]

First, not to be too picky, but from your description, there does not even seem to be an offside situation.

Before kick: attackers line up with defenders. There is a bit of uncertainty here, but one interpretation is that the attackers are not in an offside position at this point.

Kick is taken, the defenders step forward. If that is the case, the attackers were onside when the kick was taken, so they are not in an offside position.

Now, if the attackers were just a bit closer to goal (head, foot, etc) than the defenders when the kick was taken or if the defenders moved up to put the attackers offside prior to the kick, then there is offside position.

With that scenario, the question becomes - do the attackers matter? In other words, erase the attackers from the scene. Does the keeper still mess up? As Rufusabc said - if they distract the keeper... If they do not distract the keeper or get in his way (keeper has the sun in his eyes and can't see the attackers anyway) then the attackers are not interfering with play, or an opponent, so the goal should stand.

Some free kick indeed - I saw something like this last fall in U19B. I was being a good parent and chasing down a ball that had gone well past the endline. When returning it to behind the goal, there was a foul at midfield. Player taking kick belted it into the wind toward the goal. The ball hung just enough that it fooled the keeper and dropped just under the bar. My guess is that it would have gone about 10 yds over the goal on a calm day. I probably had the best 'seat' in the house to see that play.

[Wreave]

Depends on if the CR believed the offside-positioned attackers distracted the keeper. Just being there isn't a distraction, but a deliberately distracting movement or gesture can create an offside penalty.

If they started at the 25, and broke for the goal, it sounds like they could have been inside the PA by the time the goal occurred. At a kick from that distance, the keeper would have been trying to come up to get the ball. The attackers could have been perceived as blocking the keeper's view - if not necessarily of the ball, which was high, but of where the ball was expected to be.

Without being there, I'd support the referee. It's not a case where you can say "the ref was certainly wrong" or "the ref was certainly right".

And of course, I imagine far more energy was expended by the coach yelling at the referee than at the attackers who got caught offside in the first place. If they had stayed with the defenders, they could have had the win without controversy.

[IASocFan]

...
When I asked (me not being the coach of the team) the AR why offside was called, he told me that 4 players made a play for the ball therefore, offside. I asked even if the ball was 20 feet over their heads? Yes.

...Any thoughts?

The offside attacking players should be called offside if they affect the play. If the ball was 20 feet over their heads and they did not interfere with the keeper, then the goal should stand. In the opinion of this referee.

[ref47]

as is normally the case, the description leads to a single, guided conclusion - no offside should be called. the players are in a line 25 yds out from goal, about 1/2 way between the fk and the goal line. AFTER the kick is taken, the defenders step towards the kick and the attackers move towards the goal. Not in offside position at the time of the kick.

but, this is apparently not how the ref and ar saw the play. they saw an offside position at the time of the kick. and, they determined that at least one offside positioned player either became involved in play or interferred with an opponent (the keeper). our author fails to give adequate info to allow us to reach a conclusion on this part of the issue.

ref said offside, interference, no goal, case closed.

[PVancouver]

"The description leads to a single, guided conclusion - no offside should be called." Except CUS agrees with the refs that offside should have been called.

I would assume (worst case) that all four attackers were in an offside position when the ball was kicked high into the air, directed on goal. I would assume (worst case) that all of the attackers break toward the ball/goal. But I would also assume that none of the attackers come anywhere near the ball or the keeper. The keeper was blinded by the sun and let the ball go into the net.

The goal should count. To claim that any of these players interfered with play or the goalkeeper is ridiculous. The coach has a right to be upset.

One could argue that if a defender turned around and followed one of the attackers, that defender was interfered with, but CUS declares that this argument was not put forth. (Neither was interference with the goalkeeper.) I think this was a simple case of an AR misunderstanding how the law is currently to be enforced.

[whyref]

U15B, a free kick just inside the half line. The sun is shining in the keepers face. The defenders set up their line maybe 25yds from goal. The attackers line up with the defenders.

We are obviously to assume that this was a DFK and not an IFK, correct?

[CUS]

Thanks for the replies, folks. Some clarifications after talking to the AR (my nephew) and his mom, who was on the sidelines behind him. I had the second worse seat in the house, as I was on the players bench on the far side of the field:

1) The defensive line was set up at the 18.
2) At least one player lined up in an offside position.
3) Three more were in an offside position as the ball was struck.
4) Player in #2 ran towards the goal so fast, he ended up in the goal as the ball settled in.

Thanks again for your time.

[Ref Flunkie]

4) Player in #2 ran towards the goal so fast, he ended up in the goal as the ball settled in.

Thanks again for your time.

This is the only one that would have me leaning toward offside. However, with the ball being played 20 feet over their heads, does this not lead to the "The GK should know enough not to go with the man" that we have been told previously? If this is a perfectly placed shot that the GK could not have gotten to, even though he saw it clearly all the way in with no screening done by the offside players, then I think I would let the goal stand.

[gosellit]

Remember this, the so-called "Red Bull Rule"


http://www.ussoccer-data.com/docfile/Apr2006Offside.htm

Not sure if clarifies anything, but it does give some additional guidance in which to base your opinion.

[PVancouver]

I can certainly agree with:

Interfere with an opponent by clearly obstructing his line of sight. Henderson blocked the vision of the United goalkeeper.

I can't agree with:

Interfere with an opponent by making a gesture or movement which, in the opinion of the referee, deceives or distracts an opponent.Both Henderson and Stammler, by deliberately moving to this particular offside position solely for the purpose of diverting the United goalkeeper's attention, violated this requirement.

Henderson and Stammler weren't actually gesturing or moving, so I don't know how they can be guilty of this. The "deceives or distracts" language in the LOTG is bogus, anyway, IMO. No one can define what this means.

Thanks for bringing this up :rolleyes: .

CUS' example is now a lot different from the one he originally described. The attacker certainly would have been a distraction for the goalkeeper and likely more directly interfered with the keeper as well.

[GOOOOAL!!]

Here's my take....

If the attackers that were in an OS position when the ball was kicked were actively challenging the GK, then yes OS should be called and the goal disallowed. If the players are merely in the area and watching the GK, then the goal should count.

The latest interpretation of "interfering or distracting" an opponent is meant to be literally interfering like holding the defender or cutting through their running path to slow them up. The "there is a forward in the PA at the back post so I better worry about him and not worry about the ball that is headed into my net" argument from the GK doesn't work any more.

Now if the GK is challenged for the ball and is not allowed to cleanly play it because of the attacker making contact or preventing him from seeing the ball, that is different and should be called OS.

Hope that is clear as mud.

[CUS]

Thanks folks. Unfortunately it still is all "clear as mud", so we'll have to defer to the judgment of the referee.

[PVancouver]

When I asked (me not being the coach of the team) the AR why offside was called, he told me that 4 players made a play for the ball therefore, offside. I asked even if the ball was 20 feet over their heads? Yes.

Poking around here briefly and the 'net seems to show that the refs made a solid decision. I read the Offside Myths doc and that seems to agree with the decision made. The coach does not agree.

If this is still your opinion, then you still have much to learn, and so do your refs.