LUFCTALK

Saw most of the Brum game, Matt Smith's disallowed goal looked close but in my opinion he was onside.
I like to think I look at decisions objectively but saw no reason why the goal should be disallowed.

Then I had a discussion with a knowledgeable friend who informs me that a player is offside if his feet are in an onside position but he is leaning toward the goal making his upper body offside, I am sure this was never the case & if it is now then it is ridiculous.

I remember John Barnes scoring a goal against Belgium I think, that was flagged for offside, he was in the centre forward position, a shock I know, lol and someone crossed the ball in and he stuck his foot out and the ball snuggled in the net in the corner. The linesman flagged for offside immediately and on the replay it showed he was never near offside once, before, during or after he scored. Unfortunately linesmen get it wrong quite often and just why we don't have instant replays to show if it was a goal I don't know, but ...... Then again why have a sensible system? It's took foreeeeeeeeevvvvvvvverto get goal line technology at last, so irradicating incompetent linesmans wrong decisions might take another 50 years.

Just to add Smith was very close to being offside and I can see why he gave it offside, it was 50/50 in my opinion.

I've heard an interpretation of the offside law that says if any part of the body that you can score with is beyond the last man then it's off. So Smith's head was offside (not difficult at his height).

Spiderman wrote:a player is offside if his feet are in an onside position but he is leaning toward the goal making his upper body offside, I am sure this was never the case & if it is now then it is ridiculous.

As found via Wikipedia

The 2005 edition of the Laws of the Game included a new International Football Association Board decision that stated being "nearer to an opponent's goal line" meant that "any part of his head, body or feet is nearer to his opponents' goal line than both the ball and the second-last opponent (the last opponent typically being the goalkeeper)."[2]

I think it's subject to common sense interpretation. There are perfectly sensible onside position where you could maybe see a turned attacker have a bit of his shoulder protruding further than the body of his defender, but nothing else, and any linesman accurately seeing that will probably allow play to continue. But there are also cases where you see the attacker & defenders feet roughly on the same line, yet with the attacker stood straight and the attacker's body well leaned forward as his run starts. Simplified in the way that your friend explained it and you take exception with, you might think it's onside, but that always looks like absolute offside to me, because the attacker is well on his way to taking advantage of extra space behind the attacker, and his body is both a factor and clue to it.

This is the kind of position I mean where I think the offside is pretty obvious.
Both feet of the striker are behind the footing of the defender, but his whole torso is in front, and as such he already has an advantage on goal.

Bogdan wrote:This is the kind of position I mean where I think the offside is pretty obvious.
Both feet of the striker are behind the footing of the defender, but his whole torso is in front, and as such he already has an advantage on goal.

On a playback system I would advocate that this shouldn't be flagged up as offside. To me it should be the position of the feet and advantage should be given to the attacker, after all we want entertainment with more goals.

Okay, but we're discussing what the laws of the game actually state, and they mention head, body or feet (being forward of the defender).

Bogdan wrote:Okay, but we're discussing what the laws of the game actually state, and they mention head, body or feet (being forward of the defender).

That's probably why the John Barnes goal was given offside he was in between two defenders just behind them and the ball was crossed over and he stuck his foot out and scored from behind the level of the defenders. We all know the offside rule is codswallops, lol

It was a very close call, wrong in my opinion but what a finish, no messing and oozed confidence, our striker problem might well be on the mend.