The Offside Laws

Discussion in 'General Football & Other Sport' started by The Voice of Reason, Nov 11, 2018.

  1. Is it time that the "Offside Laws" were given a radical overhaul? IMO the answer is yes!

    They should be made a lot less complicated i.e. The interfering with play law should be removed as it is left too much to the individual officials interpretation, which can vary considerably.

    Perhaps we should go back being in an offside position is all that counts regardless of interfering with play or not, but with one big change, and that is that the half way line should NOT be where the offside area begins.

    I think that the front line of the penalty area should be extended out to the side lines and only from that point on should be where you can be caught in an offside position, alternatively a line, perhaps halfway between the halfway line and the penalty area should be drawn right across the pitch and that would become the offside zone.

    I'm expect some of you could come up with other ways of changing the "Offside Laws" so what do you think?
    Knight GT, Happy bunny and FromDiv4 like this.
  2. Jumbolina

    Jumbolina First Team

    The change I would make is if you are deemed not interfering with play then you then can’t touch the ball in any subsequent phases. It’s a nonsense that in our game at Man Utd last season Rashford is miles offside when the ball is played to Mata but then he can charge forwards and tuck the pass from Mata in. He obviously would not have been there had he not been miles offside in the first place. We should abolish the phases of play nonsense and you cannot touch the ball again before

    A) ball out of play
    B) in hands of a keeper
    C) ball goes back into your own half
    Happy bunny likes this.
  3. FromDiv4

    FromDiv4 Reservist

    Its needs to have “fact” rules not “interpretation” rules.

    How about, extending the throw-in rule and saying you cannot be offside from a free kick?
  4. Jumbolina

    Jumbolina First Team

    Everyone would just stand in front of the Keeper while their teammate shoots?
    Happy bunny likes this.
  5. FromDiv4

    FromDiv4 Reservist

    Maybe, so all of the defending team could stand in front of them to block the ball? I don’t think either would really happen. It was an idea.
  6. GoingDown

    GoingDown Pizza & Figs

    It's not the laws that require overhauling, they are quite simple. In fact, the quite laughable suggestion that a player can only be offside in an extended penalty area sounds far more complicated.

    It's not the laws, it is those that are meant to understand and implement them in a game situation who require an overhaul.

    Of course, had the Premier League teams not voted against VAR last season because of the reaction of dimwit pundits on one or two bad games during the testing phase, we wouldn't even be having this discussion.
  7. What is complicated about that? If you are in that area in an offside position you are offside, if you are outside that area in what at present is an offside position you WOULD NOT BE OFFSIDE!!! simples :rolleyes:
  8. That's the problem - interpretation of what constitutes an offside position. The offside rule was one of my dad's pet hates and his rants against it always included one particular incident - I can almost hear him raging as I type. In a 0-0 draw at Millwall in the mid-60s, in one of his first games for the club, late in the match Scullion chased a ball down the wing to the corner flag & sent a first time cross into the goalmouth, where it was duly dispatched into the back of the net. However, an eagle-eyed linesman spotted that a doubtless knackered Scully had remained by the corner flag, and flagged him offside. Technically, he was in an offside position - but what a nonsense decision.

    It seems to me that, whatever rules are changed, the game/players change to counter it anyway - so why not just scrap this particular one. It's only there to fuel controversy and give pundits apoplexy as far as I can see.
  9. UEA_Hornet

    UEA_Hornet First Team Captain

    Even I remember times in the mid-90s where attacking moves were ended while an (onside) player charged down one wing because his lazy/injured/dim witted teammate sauntered back on the other wing from an offside position. I don't think you can have situations like that and so you always need some level of interpretation.
  10. Hornpete

    Hornpete Reservist

    If one team gets a player booked for diving, then the other team can't be offside for the rest of the game.

    If the forward is offside then he must do 5 burpies before he be active again.
    UEA_Hornet likes this.
  11. WillisWasTheWorst

    WillisWasTheWorst Reservist

    But remember a lazy/injured/dim witted defender out by the corner flag plays all his opponents onside. Why should it be any different for attackers?
    I think it was Bill Shankley who said “If a player is not interfering with play, what’s he doing on the pitch?”
    The Voice of Reason likes this.
  12. UEA_Hornet

    UEA_Hornet First Team Captain

    Fair point. But the rule exists to benefit the defence. And any changes tend to be to promote attacking, while also helping get the balance between defence and attack right.
  13. hornetboy1

    hornetboy1 First Team

    The offside law is overly complicated and to open to interpretation. When you bring in interpretation to any rule you will always get inconsistency.

    There are too many nuances and the officials are not good enough keeping on top of it. Until we have VAR, then I would say go back to the old rule. If any player is in an offside position, interfering or not, then it is offside no matter what.

    Here are some other law changes I would like to see:-

    * A penalty is always awarded if the ball strikes a players hand, unless his arms are in a natural position and the ball is deliberately lifted.

    * A yellow card is never given if a penalty is awarded.

    * A goalkeeper can always be substituted on to replace an injured keeper, even if 3 substitutes have been made.

    * An injured player, who receives treatment on the pitch should not be forced off the field of play afterwards.

    * An offside flag should be raised immediately, not delayed until a player touches or moves towards the ball. This will reduce the risk of injury when players challenge for a ball unnecessarily when it's already offside.

    * A compulsory minimum of 1 minute to be added for every substitution made after 85th minute.
    Last edited: Nov 12, 2018
  14. Warrington Hornet

    Warrington Hornet Reservist

    They did that in a competition called The Dryborough Cup back in the 1970's. No idea what the results of the trial were though!
  15. WillisWasTheWorst

    WillisWasTheWorst Reservist

    If a penalty is awarded as a result of a dangerous tackle you have to be able to give a yellow (or red) card.
    Although I agree with it in principle, the one about the offside flag is incompatible with VAR because the offside has to be checked if and when a goal is scored.
  16. The third goal Liverpool scored on Saturday further highlights to me how ridiculous the offside laws are at present for the following reason: -

    At present if an attacking player is in an offside position but is deemed to be not interfereing with play he is not penalised and any goal scored is allowed. However if a defending player is not interfereing with play, as Kiko obviously was not on Saturday, because he not only was way out by the corner flag but on the deck as well, he is deemed to be playing the goal scorer onside.

    How can that be fair?

    This emphasises to me how daft the not interfereing with play law is, and why it should be scrapped IMO!
    FromDiv4 likes this.
  17. WillisWasTheWorst

    WillisWasTheWorst Reservist

    Agreed, but this is not just a recent thing. I’ve been saying this for decades. The defender is always active but the attacker is not. There was an incident in the Wolves v Huddersfield game where an injured defender played the Wolves striker onside so he had a clear run on goal. The defender was obviously in no way influencing the play. The difference in recent times is that the interpretation of interfering with play on the part of the attacker has been greatly relaxed, so the disparity between the two is increased.
    FromDiv4 likes this.
  18. Exactly! So why is this?
  19. WillisWasTheWorst

    WillisWasTheWorst Reservist

    I'm sure the original reason for having the concept of 'interfering with play' was to prevent accidental offsides; e.g. winger runs towards the by-line and pulls the ball back to the centre-forward who scores. The winger could be technically offside (beyond the last defender) but he can't do anything about it so you wouldn't want the goal disallowed.

    In the 1980s some teams got very clever in using an offside trap which frequently caught out forwards, sometimes when a teammate was in the act of scoring a goal. So the argument from the authorities, I'm sure, would be that by relaxing the 'interfering with play' criteria they have allowed more goals to be scored and have made the game more exciting.

    I also think they would probably argue that it would be more difficult to judge whether a defender, rather than an attacker is interfering. The linesman would have to do more than just 'look along the line' to judge an offside and it would become much more subjective.

    The assumption is that fans prefer to see attacking players, rather than defenders, prosper. Personally I feel that this offside interpretation, along with the clampdown on anything resembling a tackle, has tipped the balance too far against defenders.
    The Voice of Reason likes this.
  20. UEA_Hornet

    UEA_Hornet First Team Captain

    Up until a few years ago I'm pretty sure the offside rule explicitly said if there was any doubt the attacker should be favoured in any given situation.
  21. Shakespearo

    Shakespearo Reservist

    Back in the 70s the North America Soccer League had an offside line midway in each half . The problem they found was that defenders had hang back on the line marking opposition forwards and hence could not support their own team's attacks. Trevor Francis, in his Shoot column, likened it to netball positioning .
  22. That and the 'when the ball was played' rule - in many cases, the linesmen have to be something akin to swivel-eyed loons to get that one right.

Share This Page