Hope some of the refs on this board can answer a question that arose from the Jason Kreis goal this weekend. The play involved three Burn players. With Kreis in an offside position in the middle of the field, Pareja makes a nifty pass to Gbandi running past defenders on the left. Gbandi's speed takes him about six yards from the endline, and he sends a low pass toward the goalmouth. Everyone else had hustled toward the goal, but Kreis was always ahead of the last defender. However, at the time of Gbandi's pass towards goal, Kreis was slightly behind the ball. He proceeded to put the ball in the back of the net. I think passive offside was the correct call on the initial pass to Gbandi, but I also think that as soon as the ball came back to Kreis, he should have been whistled offside. He'd clearly received an advantage by being ahead of the defenders on the play. But is it possible that he'd reestablished an onside position by being behind the ball (though ahead of all defenders) when Gbandi passed it to him?
I watched the game as well and I think the refs got the correct call on that one. The question is if Kreis gained an advantage in his position on the touch to Gbandi. Clearly Kreis wasn't invloved in that play... but did he draw a Quake defender or Onstat (keeper)? I don't think he did. Once Gbandi touches the ball foward and makes the cross, Kreis is behind the ball so not offside there. To the best of my knowledge, these are distinct plays and need to be looked at individually. On a side note, it did seem the CR was giving the Quakes yellow cards like candy but didn't give equal treatment to the Fire for the same kind of plays. Both teams were equally rough and for the most part he called a good game, outside of the cards.
I didn't see the play, but from your description... If Kreis was in an offside position when the pass was made to Gbandi, then from your description, there was no offside here -- he is in the middle of the field and Gbandi was out wide. As soon as Gbandi receives the ball, the play is COMPLETELY reset. So when he passes it back into the center to Kreis to score, if Kreis was behind the ball at the time of the pass, then he is onside and it's a good goal.
This is not a criteria in determining offside. BTW...5 posts and nobody added an 's' to offside. <golf clap> Scott
The play is completely reset. Interesting. If the sequence is seen as two distinct plays, then the goal was clearly good. Kreis was offside on neither one. I could swear I've seen goals called back because a guy who was initially in a passive offside position later participated in the action (in an onside position). For example, the cross goes over the head of a guy who is offside but then is redirected back to him. Is that possible, or were the refs mistaken in those cases?
For those interested, there's a replay at http://www.mlsnet.com/multimedia/pepsi/index.php Let's hear it for a thread where we're actually praising an MLS referee crew for doing something right! The call was spot on, Kreis was not offside on this play and the goal was correctly awarded! Jarrett
Refs definitely nailed this one. Kreis starts in offside position on initial through pass to Gbandi. Both make run at the net, Gbandi drifts the ball ever so slightly back to Kreis' position as he drills it into the goal. Kreis fell back just enough to be onside at the time of the pass by Gbandi. You don't get any closer than that, folks.
A seemingly well-informed fan asks a legitimate and clearly defined question regarding a particular incident from a recent MLS match and you see a problem with that? If this type of discussion isn't appropriate for the referee form, then what is? Surely not publicly complaining about our assignors and league personnel. Have an open mind and engage in give-and-take with the other posters on these boards. All will benefit. It's also a philosophy that should be remembered when you take the field. You must engage and manage players, coaches and spectators--not dictate over them.
WELL DONE!!!!!!!!! I should have said "not one of the criteria" Now I've got to figure out a way to work "stadia" into a post to show people I know my pluralses! Scott
Massref, I know the kid can sometimes get on our nerves (he's a teenager, that's his purpose in life), but I thought the same thing when I saw the thread title because we had just had the long thread about Ty's blathering on about passive offside. I just wish we could get that out of the vocabularly of soccer people, but alas that's probably not to be. You're right the question was legitimate and the discussion has been good.
A good discussion guys. I 100% agree with the passive call (although I guess a could be debated as the argument could be made that how could Kreis not gain an advantage by being in front of the defence for an extended period of time. But, he did not seem to affect the run or positioning of the defence so he has to be called passive). However, pausing the actual pass from Gbandi to Kreis, it looked like Kries had actually pulled ahead of the ball again, after getting back onto an on-side position....BUT...having said that the AR had to give benefit of the doubt because attacking players should be IMO, especially as it was literally to close to call. I've watched video over and over again and its so close I think the right call has been made. However, the real reason I want to post here is to give a great big well done to the ref. I thought he had an excellent performance, no hystrionics and seemed to have the respect of players early on, despite it being his first game. Excellent job.!! As fans we're all keen and quick to jump on what we percieve to be a bad game, so I feel that praise should be given for what in my opinion was a very good performance. -Richard
It cetainly is a determining criteria... if he drew onstat or a defender, then he has gained an advantage by being in that offside position. Perhaps that defender could have marked Gbandi better and the cross would have never happened. Again, I didn't see that, so it looked like the correct call.
Sorry Soccerman but Scott is correct. Unless the offside attacker is somehow actively interfering with the opponent (blocking his view or ability to move), then simply being in an offside position "drawing" the defender does not constitute involvement. Defenders are trained to ignore any attacker in an offside position as he cannot participate in play. It's along the same lines as the old misconception that an offside attacker who "draws" the attention of the goalkeeper should be whistled. What the heck is the goalkeeper doing defending against a player that is offside? That's his bad, not the attacker.
No, drawing a defender doesn't mean he has affected play -- in that situation, the defender has CHOSEN to play the offside attacker rather than the ball. Affecting how a defender or goal keeper PLAYS the ball -- such as impeding a defenders run to the ball by being in an offside position or affecting how the goal keeper SEES the ball or MOVES to a shot by being in an offside position -- that's what would make a player guilty of offside without being involved with a play on the ball.
Since I'm not a professional player I can't comment on what that player is required (trained) to see, however I do have 30 years playing experience at just about every level and I don't think I would have known Kreis was in an offside position in that situation (it was pretty close and there was A LOT going on in the box before that). If I were a defender in that situation I would probably hope Onstat had the near post and then I would work to mark Kreis at such an angle that I could cover the cross and try to prevent the shot if I could. Kreis, being in that position definitely would have impacted my play. Again, I'm not a professional so perhaps (probably) my play would have been improper. Cases like these are judgement calls and I try to refer back to my playing experience to try and make the best call. If I had judged Kreis had impacted play by being in that position, I would have called it. At this point, either I don't understand the law or it's too vague and allows much too much interpretation.
The defenders were very aware Kreis was in an offside position because they purposely put him there. Watch the video and you'll see the defenders take a few steps forward just enough to put him offside. This type of play is one you see on numerous occasions. The defenders, in this case, take a chance on Gbandi playing the ball forward into space before Kreis realizes his position. Gbandi was paying attention though and instead shot through with the ball himself, allowing for Kreis to become involved. This is why the goal really is something of a spectacle -- the field awareness of Gbandi and the slight fade away of Kreis on the run to get onside at the last possible second combined for a score. Beautifully orchestrated goal!
you are not alone SoccerMan94043, you are not alone, in as much as I find the law very easy to interpret the key to understanding is the thoughts of defenders are not a consideration. A referee judges offside position at the moment of the teammate's touch. No infringement yet as we look to see the impact that player has on play by what HE does not what others do! The perception by defenders, "I see him (the attacker) therefore I am affected !", is simply not a criteria. Offside is a infringement not based in penal law. As a technical INDFK offence it relies on specific points that must be present. When we generalize on interferring with play or an opponent as that seems to be the sticking point by most who find offside confusing. As a tactical ploy defenders will run traps to force the attackers into committing an offisde infringement. Not very sporting but legal in law. In effect they actualy take those attackers out of that (phase of play) as active participation by them (the attackers) would result in a stoppage in the defender's favour. Assuming the AR or CR realizes it. ;o). Now you were affected and CHOSE to act as you raced by the attackers to deliberately place them in an offside position. YET remember offside in its self is not against the law. We now NEED that offside attacker to DO something that indicates to us he is involved directly in the outcome. THe fact the offside attacker bothers you is YOUR choice not his. If we can determine as a referee it is his choice to bother you by involving himself, impeding or preventing you from getting to the ball IT can be a simple thing like blocking the view of the keeper where soley by position he is directly involved. It can be verbal and it can be interactive physically , it can occur later by gaining an advantage but in all cases the actions are by him the attacker, not the thoughts of a defender. The thing is as you defend you are always thinking about who is likely to cause you problems. An advantage for you is an offside attacker can not participate in play. So quess what no need to worry. Offside and deliberate handling are two concepts no matter how simply we lay them out manage to generate mounds of confusion.
Thanks for the explaination... I will try and pay a bit more attention from the referees point of view and see if I can catch some my errors.