Jump to content
IGNORED

The Offside Rule


Jesus

Recommended Posts

So I was thinking about this at the weekend after watching Match of the Day.  The Nolan goal.  How on earth can that be deemed offside?  The only part of his body, that was remotely past the defender, was his head. His chest, legs, and arms were all level at the very least. With that I went online and read the latest version of the "offside rule" (in my day it was always clear daylight between the attacking player and the last defender), and it concluded that any part of the body, which can be used to score, that is ahead of the last defender, is deemed as being offside.  How stupid is that? As an attacker, surely if you're timing your run perfectly, you're going to be leaning forward? Even if you bend your run, you're going to be leaning forward?  Isn't this giving a massive benefit to the defender? Anyway, I just needed to get that off of my chest.  It just seems stupid.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The offside rule was introduced in the very early days of football to minimise the number of goals being scored and therefore increase the value of a goal. Initially the rule was one defender between attacker and the goal line. Usually the goalkeeper.

The law was changed sometime around the end 19th and start 20th century, to two defenders because clever defenders were stepping forward to catch attackers offside. The most notorious was Billy McCracken of Newcastle.

In those far off days, football administrators believed that results mirroring a sport like basketball for example where teams score pretty well every time they attack was not what the game should be. The offside rule significantly reduced the number of goals.

In modern football with such organised and skilled defending, there must be a very strong argument for dispensing with the offside rule.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In those far off days, football administrators believed that results mirroring a sport like basketball for example where teams score pretty well every time they attack was not what the game should be. The offside rule significantly reduced the number of goals.

In modern football with such organised and skilled defending, there must be a very strong argument for dispensing with the offside rule.

 

And they were absolutely right to reduce the number of goals: it is the scarcity of goals which makes football such an exciting game (and why a lot of Americans don't get it!).  However, we've moved a long way from the old 2-3-5 formation and it strikes me that dispensing with the offside rule would only be good for the game.  Hasn't it been tried somewhere?  If so, what was the outcome?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In modern football with such organised and skilled defending, there must be a very strong argument for dispensing with the offside rule.

I agree that a change may be beneficial but not sure about dispensing with it completely. The problem is, if you change one thing, there is no gaurantee that everything else will remain the same. In all probability if one thing changes something else will change as well.

A lot of offside decisions are caused because defenders deliberately push up to catch attackers offside. They are often near the halfway line which means that the attacking team can sometimes beat the offside trap and get a clear run on goal. With no offside rule the defending team wouldn't do this and just play deeper.

I'm sure that a "no offside rule" was tried as an experiment once in one of the lower semi pro leagues for a season. It didn't produce good football as both teams had their defenders playing very deep near their own penalty area with a big gap in midfield. It also didn't produce any increase in goals.

The solution may be some change that retains the basic principle of the rule but has some slight amendment that benefits the attacking team. I haven't a clue what this change could be.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We haven't in recent games!

Fielding

Flint Williams

Ayling Smith Elliot

Little Wilbrahams Ayling Freeman Bryan

Well that's how it appears sometimes!! Cotts did say after the Sheffield game he wanted 5 in the box!

He's here, he's there, he's every-f*&^ing-where, Luke Ayling, Luke Ayling

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Don't have any problem with the offside rule as it stands. Surely nobody gets confused by the 'phases' thing anymore?

Also, despite the abuse they take, it's remarkable how good a job assistant referees do. Especially when you consider it's impossible to focus completely on two different events (the ball being played and the line of defence) happening simultaneously in different locations.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Part of an organised defence is being aware and able to catch the opposition offside. Many of us will remember Arsenal under George Graham who coached his defenders to play offside to a very high level. Tony Adams was pictured numerous times with his arm up claiming for offside. That team were well known for it. Fair play to them in.

It's also a very skilled art for strikers to beat the offside flag. Timing movement is everything.

Football just wouldn't be the same game without the offside rule.

Tony Adams raised his arm to claim offside every time a player got by him!

It's a tradition of trying to con match officials that continues to this day....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No you are not offside if the ball is received directly eg if no other player touches it.  This applies to throw ins and corners, i believe.

 

Completely true

 

http://www.fifa.com/aboutfifa/footballdevelopment/technicalsupport/refereeing/laws-of-the-game/law/newsid=1290867.html

 

I've noticed Wilbraham making use of this with throw-ins a few times this season... We've also started keeping a winger out wide on the opposite side to where the ball is expected to go, so that the other side can't just bunch up and crowd us out

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So I was thinking about this at the weekend after watching Match of the Day. The Nolan goal. How on earth can that be deemed offside? The only part of his body, that was remotely past the defender, was his head. His chest, legs, and arms were all level at the very least. With that I went online and read the latest version of the "offside rule" (in my day it was always clear daylight between the attacking player and the last defender), and it concluded that any part of the body, which can be used to score, that is ahead of the last defender, is deemed as being offside. How stupid is that? As an attacker, surely if you're timing your run perfectly, you're going to be leaning forward? Even if you bend your run, you're going to be leaning forward? Isn't this giving a massive benefit to the defender? Anyway, I just needed to get that off of my chest. It just seems stupid.

I haven't seen the offside incident from the weekend, but if it was on MOTD then did you watch it on a freeze frame?

If so,the linesman doesn't get that view!

Linesman watch the ball get played,then look along the line.

Realistically the ball will always have travelled 5 yards before any linesman ( or supporter) will look across the line for an offside.

These tv pundits who watch a freeze frame and say the linesman was wrong or right are idiots imo.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Quick pub quiz question....can you be offside from a goal kick??

No and I'm surprised at the number of people that don't know this. It seems every week that I hear someone shout out that so and so is offside when it's a goal kick they then go on to have a pop at the linesman for "not knowing the rules" :facepalm:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nope, Can only be offside from in play situations

When the ball has left the pitch you can't be offside when the ball is reintroduced to play. Fouls you can be offside from as the ball doesn't leave the playing area.

 

I wish a few of the people sat near me at AG knew this!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Completely true

 

http://www.fifa.com/aboutfifa/footballdevelopment/technicalsupport/refereeing/laws-of-the-game/law/newsid=1290867.html

 

I've noticed Wilbraham making use of this with throw-ins a few times this season... We've also started keeping a winger out wide on the opposite side to where the ball is expected to go, so that the other side can't just bunch up and crowd us out

Yes I believe he does,  just shows what a very clever player we have.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No and I'm surprised at the number of people that don't know this. It seems every week that I hear someone shout out that so and so is offside when it's a goal kick they then go on to have a pop at the linesman for "not knowing the rules" :facepalm:

It's incredible really,people spend hundreds of pounds a year following a sport,and they don't even know the rules!
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I haven't seen the offside incident from the weekend, but if it was on MOTD then did you watch it on a freeze frame?

If so,the linesman doesn't get that view!

Linesman watch the ball get played,then look along the line.

Realistically the ball will always have travelled 5 yards before any linesman ( or supporter) will look across the line for an offside.

These tv pundits who watch a freeze frame and say the linesman was wrong or right are idiots imo.

 

To be fair Bill pundits also prove the officials correct more times than not and that has to be good surely? and unless it's a glaring mistake by the officials (which needs to be highlighted) i.e. a close call they usually add the caveat 'in real time that was a very tough call to get right'.

 

With Nolan's goal the pundits all believed that technically it was probably just about the correct call.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The offside rule was introduced in the very early days of football to minimise the number of goals being scored and therefore increase the value of a goal. Initially the rule was one defender between attacker and the goal line. Usually the goalkeeper.

The law was changed sometime around the end 19th and start 20th century, to two defenders because clever defenders were stepping forward to catch attackers offside. The most notorious was Billy McCracken of Newcastle.

In those far off days, football administrators believed that results mirroring a sport like basketball for example where teams score pretty well every time they attack was not what the game should be. The offside rule significantly reduced the number of goals.

In modern football with such organised and skilled defending, there must be a very strong argument for dispensing with the offside rule.

 

Any chance you could explain this to my girlfriend?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To be fair Bill pundits also prove the officials correct more times than not and that has to be good surely? and unless it's a glaring mistake by the officials (which needs to be highlighted) i.e. a close call they usually add the caveat 'in real time that was a very tough call to get right'.

With Nolan's goal the pundits all believed that technically it was probably just about the correct call.

Personally I think they should concentrate on the hundreds of mistakes made by players during a game,rather than highlighting one decision that may, or may not be a mistake by the officials.

The problem is,these ex players are afraid to have a pop at the current players.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...