Agreed. I hadn't seen this live and was waiting for a clip. Thought it would look differently. FIFA and IFAB have gone a long way toward favoring the attack (VAR milimeter decisions aside, that is). And I've said before that an attacker simply running after a ball isn't inherently "making an obvious action." But in a case like this, where two players are sprinting toward a ball that could be an OGSO if the attacker gets there first and they are in close proximity... I think it's offside either way and you can just sort of pick whehter it's the "challenging" aspect or the "obvious action" one. I can see very narrow arguments against each one individually (there isn't really a physical challenge even though she's in close enough proximity and did any action actually impact the defender's ability to play the ball), but when you take this play collectively, I think offside has to be the expected decision. An attacker in an OSP sprinted after the ball and a defender sprinted with her to prevent that attacker from playing the ball first, all while in close proximity to each other. It doesn't fit cleanly in either bucket, but it's like 90% in both of them.
Wait, what? UEFA has that as offside?! @Mikael_Referee, any insight here? Is this new? Maybe I missed something (or am missing something here). But that seems to be the poster child for "running is not an obvious action" and until you wrote otherwise here I'd have had this 100% in the category of "defender chose to play it, tough." If that is offside, to me, that's revolutionary and going back to where we were in the 2000s. Don't get me wrong, that would be a good thing. But assessing this play as offside feels like a big change to me.
I'm glad I'm not the only one who was starting to feel like we have shifted back towards the defense in the last couple of years with these interfering with an opponent clips. This is clip L2 from 2020-1 RAP.
Thank you for the explanation. I've had it drilled into me to wait for the attacker touch in that situation. If the Morgan play had been close to the half line or up against the touchline (not a OGSO), would you feel the same way? Does the "interfering with" process apply to any situation where an offside attacker and defender are going after a ball?
So I was curious so I went digging for another example. This is from the 2nd half of 2020. UEFA says onside but that the VAR should not get involved if it was called offside.
Those two videos taken together make no logical sense, right? They are either both offside or both onside. It's the exact same play insofar as the nature of what any offside offence would or would not be. I'm more than a little perplexed.
I thought that the far side defender kept him on, but they might have frozen the play at the wrong nanosecond.
The point of these clips is more to analyze the question on if he interfered with an opponent. Yeah he was probably onside in real life, but it's more of "if he was in offside position, did he commit an offense".
I guess a difference is that one is going up in the air after the ball, whereas the other is still just running toward where the ball is coming. But that is a pretty thin distinction. It seems to me there has always been a lot of fuzz around the edges on these plays, as there is really no sharp way to define when it crosses the line. Perhaps that is really what UEFA is saying when they say that VAR should not interfere? That there is subjectivity and that while the preferred call is not-OS, it's in that fuzzy zone? FWIW I think Alex was more involved than either of these two clips.
Maybe, but this is where we get right back to the philosophical discussions about what "involved" is and what the point of the offside law is. In the two videos @code1390 provided, the defenders in question would never make the attempts on the ball that they did if not for the presence and physical runs of the attackers in the offside positions. The exact same thing can be said of the Dutch defender in today's match. If Morgan doesn't chase that ball today, the Dutch defender lets her keeper come out and collect it OR collects it herself while still running, rather than sliding, because she knows she has no pressure. So Morgan is more involved why or how, exactly? Because she's running at the ball along with the Dutch defender whereas the defenders in the two UEFA clips are intercepting a pass or cross intended for the OSP? I'm not saying your wrong. That is a distinction here. But again, when you go back to why offside exists and how defenders act during dynamic play, that's a very, very thin distinction. And if the two UEFA clips are supposed to have two different outcomes, then I can't even comprehend where the actual distinction is supposed to be.
Forgive me if this was covered earlier in this thread, but why is a center ref never referring to the monitor, but is being directly overruled by VAR? Because it's completely different in the Gold Cup. There seems to be a real need for an IFAB worldwide adoption of the VAR rules....
You must watch MLS. The global standard is that the R goes to the monitor for subjective calls, but objective calls (ball over line, did the ball touch the arm, and offside position) are simply reported to the R who makes the call. MLS decided to depart from the model and have the R go to the monitor for OSP decisions--so far as I know, it's the only place in the world that does that. So in the Olympics (and other FIFA competitions) you will not see the R go to the screen to look at offside position. (But if the VAR thought there was a clear error as to whether the player challenged for the ball (or the other subjective elements of offside), the R should go to the monitor. (Alex was called off on the field, so since the VAR didn't think there was an error the R was not called to the screen--if she had been called on initially and the VAR disagreed, the R would have been called to the screen for that subjective call.)
Offside decisions are generally given without the ref looking at the monitor since they are "factual" decisions. MLS is an exception. Gold Cup is the same as the Olympics where the referee will go to the monitor for PK/red card decisions but not offside position.
Thanks for the last 2 replies, I knew that offside was supposed to be called as an objective decision, but I wasn't aware of the dichotomy of having the ref not go to the monitor for those but doing so to review PKs etc. I guess if they go to the monitor less, there's less of a chance for a coach to hug them....
That’s a surprising decision. It’s clear the attacker is just positioning himself to go down at the slightest contact. There’s a push so it’s defensible and VAR shouldn’t intervene, but that’s very soft for this level, I’d say. Quite surprised he’d instantly give it from that distance, on available evidence. The yellow card throws me off. What is it for? There’s no hold. No OGSO. It’s not reckless.
Exactly my thoughts; a poor decision IMO. The caution must have been simply reflexive as Grinfeld must have gone through the same cognitive process as when giving a penalty for holding. Of course, it is totally wrong.
SPA and the foul was not an attempt to play the ball is a caution in PA. So is a push before the ball comes an attempt to play the ball?
United States vs Canada Referee: Kateryna Monzul (UKR) Assistant Referee 1: Lucie Ratajova (CZE) Assistant Referee 2: Maryna Striletska (UKR) Fourth Official: Stephanie Frappart (FRA) Australia vs Sweden Referee: Melissa Borjas (HON) Assistant Referee 1: Shirley Perello (HON) Assistant Referee 2: Enedina Caudillo (MEX) Fourth Official: Salima Mukansanga (RWA)
Well, is a cross into a zone where it’s unclear who will get the ball a promising attack? It’s never really been treated that way. Likelihood to gain possession is low.
I only watched from ≈75mins and on in the background, but it seemed a decent performance in a not-challenging game. Some restart mistakes with throw-ins, corners; good use of YCs, and always accepted. Would be interested to hear from someone who can offer sth a bit more helpful than that!
So does FIFA? Mexico v Spain would be a tough assignment. Valenzuela? Gomes seems like only alternative. Mexico v Japan would obviously be a little easier, with whichever UEFA referee doesn’t get a semi.