FIFA Will Trial Arsene Wenger's New Offside Rules: Should MLS sign up?

Completely agree with you. We definitely need to be taken seriously and trialing unproven and untested new rules will only diminish our growing reputation.

I do see a possible downside for this new offside rule that favors the attacking players though. I can see teams just picking it in when going up against superior opponents to avoid being picked apart. I hope that isn’t the case, but it seems like a strategy I’d use when massively mismatched.

 

What? This is just a player dribbling with an opponent holding his shirt.
There is no offside judgement to be called here. Nothing.

 

They should do what baseball does and allow it one conference (league's I think they call them in baseball) but not in the other.

 

Only question is how it will effect the game tactically.

Defenders aren't going to risk it., so they will sit back more and anticipate those runs in behind.

It COULD then open up more space in front of the back line.
But it would more likely result in the whole defense just compacting.

It could then open up more space on the counter however. So maybe defenders back off some while in possession. Maybe that gives forwards a little more space to receive and hold up the ball when their team clears it etc.

Can do what ifs all day long. Would need to see it in action. But not in MLS.
My fears is it would lead to more defensive play and potentially less scoring.

 

I wonder if, in the real world, the impact will be as great if not greater on free kicks as in the run of play.

No chance. How can a rule that helps the offense lead to less scoring? I guess you're suggesting that, tactically, defenses will react so strongly it will negate and then some the way this change would help the offense, but in my opinion that's extremely far fetched.

Your hypothetical is that defenses will play so far back you'll almost never see through balls. OK. But that just means defenses would concede possession really deep in their own end, which means more dangerous crosses, which this rule will make easier to finish.

Playing this out, under your hypothetical (if I haven't misstated it) would mean more goals, but different goals.

Poor analogy, unless the stadium being built is an experiment that, if successful, WILL be built in my backyard.

It's like marijuana legalization 10 years ago. I could see both sides of the issue. I was happy that states that I don't live in were the guinea pigs. Now that I see it's a successful experiment, I want it where I live.

 

Because there are a tremendous amount of soccer posers in our nation that claim to love and support pro men's soccer but find any and all reasons to avoid MLS. Rule adjusting/try outs is on paper, a solid concept. However, when applied to a nation that is still growing as a soccer culture, the side affects are real. In the old NASL, there was the old gimmicks of clock running down, shoot outs to solve ties in league play and FIFA told the NASL league office that if Pele and others play in the NASL, their goal scoring accomplishments might go down as having occured in a "renegade league", their words back then. Such was the disdain for a sports culture looking to not adhere to FIFA and IBFA globally accepted standards. If MLS was to get permission and some sort of backing from FIFA and the IBFA then the perception of altering the most dominant sport on the planet might not be so robust. Do the pros out way any cons. Does it insult or is it seen as MLS being innovative over tinkering.

Attacking play is always a good thing. However, any coach will speak on the reverse, defense as a priority. Defense as the better thing. More so in a sport that is do defensive in nature to begin with. The offside rule being so key to soccer over the generations in that the rule allows any modest team to still hang with a more powerful and talented team, or specifically in professional soccer talk, a wealthier club that can purchase an All- Star Team basically, the law allows the less heralded team to be in the fight in a sport that is 90 minutes long. A team sport that has a significant trait like boxing, a puncher's chance, to take the beating, bend but don't break, to then eventually land that one shot and slay the giant, so it is with soccer in that on that day, the underdog can and does find a to win even when the odds and stats say said team should have no chance. Hence the global appeal to being a fan and supporter of a team. Even is on should have been the move that it was supposed to be in 1990. In that year of 1990 with the addressing of offsides and in 1992, with the back pass to the goalie and the use of hands to pick up the ball law, both where the laws that soccer only really needed to speak on, clarify or get ride of. One is still being "fixed" while the other was a magnificent adjustment to an other wise perfect sport. The back pass Law has greatly changed soccer as far as time wasting late on is concerned.

When MLS was first starting in 1995, Pele was asked on CNN, with Tony Meola on the set of what if MLS increased the goal dimensions. Meola, probably speaking for all goalies worldwide, said no thank you. Pele, when asked by the CNN sports reporter about MLS making the goals larger to increase scoring, Pele simply replied, "If you want more scoring, then train you forwards better." Which is where I stand on the matter. Shut the door on any of that goal larger crap. And certainly a big heck naw to making MLS a place to have larger goals. Or any league for that matter!

In an even playing field, the intent to alter a rule (Law) that supposedly leads to more scoring, any coach will take that and look to see how to gum up the works on more scoring on his or her team. From the fan or person in the stands, yeah scoring, form the coach and his staff and certainly the goalies, they will work very hard on finding new ways to deter the new change to the sport.

 

If they are going to introduce this then they better fix the horrendous interpretation of a defender's deliberate touch negating any offside or throw the flag up as soon as the ball is played towards an offside player. I hate the idea that a ball played towards an offside player can be wiped out because the defender makes a play that he has to make since he has to assume that player is onside (since the ref doesn't raise his flag until the player receives the ball). Also, if a defender blocks a damn shot it should be the same as a goalie making a save. I've seen goals scored by "offside" players because the defender blocked a shot and it goes now to a wide open player for a tap in. If we are going to give attackers more of an advantage we need to stop punishing defenders for doing their job.

 

And while we're on these annoyances, they should just put 'last defender' in the rule and then specify that the goalkeeper does not count. It's very rare, but I fail to see why a team should be bailed out by a keeper on walkabout.

 

And then MLS players play for MNT under existing rules and look like fools.

 

Doesn't even need to be on walkabout. Goalie comes out on a corner like a lunatic and flaps at it. Offensive player head's the ball towards goal and a guy in front of it directs it in before the man on the post can clear it. That goal gets chopped off because the keeper was incompetent? So, yeah, I'm with you on that crusade as well.

 

Correct. Same for my buddies and I down here. For many years now we have been of the same mindset that the IBFA and FIFA need to re-address the 1990 innovation of "even is on". Probably would have saved us from where we all are now, assistant refs holding the flag down to then raise it up a year later. Or the VAR crusade which is ideal for if the ball crossed the goal line, fouls inside the box and handball shouts, however the offside debate has been overcooked for three decades now. Even is on, tie goes to the runner!

 

I know we've had this discussion to the ends of the Earth on the referee forum, but the issue with FIFA's directive that offside is objective is that it assumes VARs can do the following three things with 100% accuracy and precision 100% of the time. (* indicates that this is only applicable for VAR applications that use the line-drawing technology).

• Select the exact frame when the ball is played.
• *Accurately draw the line at the attacker's most forward body part eligible for scoring.
• *Accurately draw the line showing the closest defender's "offside determining" body part at the right point.

As we are dealing with human beings using the technology, I think we can all agree that none of these will be accurate 100% of the time. So offside may appear to be objective, but it's subjective in practice.

If I were in charge of things, I'd calculate a margin of error based on frames per second and some sort of average sprinting speed. Maybe this is 15cm (about six inches), and then the lines are that width. If the attacker and defender lines overlap, then the call on the field stands because the margin of error factor comes into play. I would also give the VAR a maximum of 90 seconds to make this determination (this is how long the referee in a NFL football game has to review video evidence - I would also make this 90-second limit the norm on all on-field reviews).

We need to get back to where VAR is only correcting those blatantly obvious errors. Two examples of very good VAR uses recently were the Arsenal-Burnley game where the Burnley defender's red for denying a goal by handling was overturned because the ball hit the top of his shoulder and the penalty in the Dortmund-Bayern game on Saturday where the on-field call was no foul even though there was a clear trip/step on the foot. I didn't have a problem on the late-game challenge leading to the Bayern goal not having an OFR because that wasn't clearly and obviously a foul. Right now, VAR is too focused on re-refereeing and showing how great the technology is instead of trying to correct blatant mistakes.

As for the Wenger directive, I don't like it. It doesn't solve the primary issue (trying to remove the difficulty of calling offside), and it will likely force teams to play deeper on defense. It will clog the attacking third of the field and reduce the aesthetics of through balls to beat a higher defensive line. So while the idea is nice in theory, I actually think it will have an opposite impact regarding attacking soccer.

 

It is indeed a difficult call to make, more so at the highest level of the sport. With the speed of the game being what we know to be. Trying to fix something performed by humans is a big task no matter what, offsides being really challenging. So with soccer, keep the offsides judgment in the hands of humans down on the field where the run of play occurs. If one follows the sport for decades, your own team will get their fair share of slightly offsides blended with slightly on sides calls that get flagged for offsides for your team's benefit. VAR and the time VAR spends VAR'ing, should be for fouls or theatrics inside the 18 and handballs. Let the ref crew be responsible again, with a little help from the both above. Goal line tech has solved the other outstanding need for VAR.

If the attacking third of the field gets impacted, gummed up from this new application to offsides, the Wegner directive, and through balls to open up an overtly high back line become even more rare, then perhaps the return of the midfield conductor is as well a fallout. The #10 role rises from the ashes. Makes the beautiful game shine again specifically because beating the trap is so demanding.

 

To be fair, in one version we're talking about (any overlap is on), then it could be a good 2-3 feet, almost a full stride. Even there, we could be talking about one stride 40 yards from goal, or one stride when the attacker had to sprint 10 yards already to get there, etc.

And the key for me is:

I just dispute that this is actually the primary issue. It is equally tough for the naked eye to tell whether the whole ball crossed the whole line for a goal on the close calls, but fans were ecstatic when a technological system came and answered the question. The difference with offside is precisely that VAR is coming in and making correct calls (by the rule) overruling goals that fans, at gut level, wanted to count. Meaning what they really want is for the rule to change. The measurement issues are the surface issue.

 

I understand this point. The issue for me is that even though offside is technically objective and black and white, a VAR review that is supposed to be 100% accurate and precise depends on three things happening with 100% accuracy and precision every time.

1. The exact frame of contact is picked.
2. The attacker's offside line is accurately drawn.
3. The defender's offside line is accurately drawn.

As we are dealing with human beings, that just isn't going to happen. As the technology is run by humans, human error will still be involved.

So for me, the definition of offside isn't the issue as much as refusing to admit there is a margin of error both for the on-field AR and the VAR. That's why I get so upset at these millimeter-thin offside rulings. I'm fine with a razor-thin call on the field standing after a VAR review. VAR was designed to correct CLEAR AND OBVIOUS errors. For the reasons I've stated, offside is as much a subjective decision as it is an objective decision (such as whether an attacker had the ball go off an arm right before a goal was scored or whether a foul occurred inside or outside of the penalty area). Clear and obvious errors are not these millimeter-thin decisions. Accept there's a margin of error, incorporate it into the line drawing, limit the time of review to 60-90 seconds, and you don't have to worry about changing the definition of offside.

 

On paper this sounds ideal vevo, good find. However, does this terrific increase in VAR technology get trickled down and applied accordingly to the entire pyramid of the sport? Does this get to the EPL and Serie A, sure. Then to Liga MX and MLS, good. The USL and the rest of the world's lower divisions, well how affordable is this platform???
Also, does this VAR 2.0 get airlifted to all around the globe? Does this get hand delivered every time FIFA runs an event any where on our planet. FIFA sanctioned youth World Cups, let's say in Peru or Egypt? Then even further down the soccer pyramid, do we get to have this system installed at our local inner city school district stadiums, not likely gonna ever be there for all of us coaches at the youth level around our planet. So the end game is that all levels below just the top tier of the professional side of the sport, the offsides call will always rest on the shoulders of men and women in real time, holding little flags and sprinting 50 yards over and over for 90 minutes. I think this is the way the sport should remain. If technology is to be introduced into a sport with no time outs and a running clock to specifically call time out, then have said tech focus on what happens inside the 18 and the goal line. To many VAR inserts and the beautiful game will suffocate in its ability to flow, what is so enjoyable about watching the sport. Certainly playing the sport!