Offside - feet or body?

[SMorientes]

[dlw10]

I mentioned this to my lad who is a ref and he said it was the "any part of the body you can score with" so Smith was clearly offside in that respect.

I've always understood this to be the case. But it seems ridiculous to me to be frank. If you ask me, if you're going to be so pedantic and specific about which body parts must be where to be offside, then you have to introduce a video referee to appeal to in close calls, just as all other sports have done by now. If you're going to say that your toe being a milimetre infront of the defender's protruding frizzy leg hair, then you have to eliminate the inevitable human error, no way can a linesman* judge that when he's simultaneously trying to watch for the exact moment that the ball leaves the passer's foot.

As mentioned by someone else, the fact that it's taken so long to get anywhere with goal-line technology means it will be 2040 before we have appeals to a video referee or something. In which case, I firmly believe that to call offside, it needs to be much more clear cut, i.e. there is daylight between the attacking player and the defender. Ideally a good yard or so of it as well. Then you should only get offsides that are clearly off and far fewer controversial decisions. At the same time defending would be slightly harder and we'd hopefully see more goals.

If it were up to me I'd scrap the offside rule completely but I haven't found anyone else that feels that way.


*A lineswoman though, that's a different matter. Sian Massey gets every impossibly difficult decision spot on, if only she could officiate on all games.

Funnily enough, the rule as it stands is probably the easiest way to make the decision. I have run more lines than I care to remember for both my lads teams in the past and really all a liner can do is to look along a line at the rear most edge of the last defender. So, if any part of the attacker is in front of that then you stick your flag up!!!!! You cannot possibly get into the detail of whether one blokes feet are ahead of anothers - its all too quick!

[Aces]

We are having goal line technology at long last, why not go all the way and do away with linesmen for offside and just review the goal for any offside, it only takes ten seconds.

[johnh]

I mentioned this to my lad who is a ref and he said it was the "any part of the body you can score with" so Smith was clearly offside in that respect.

I've always understood this to be the case. But it seems ridiculous to me to be frank. If you ask me, if you're going to be so pedantic and specific about which body parts must be where to be offside, then you have to introduce a video referee to appeal to in close calls, just as all other sports have done by now. If you're going to say that your toe being a milimetre infront of the defender's protruding frizzy leg hair, then you have to eliminate the inevitable human error, no way can a linesman* judge that when he's simultaneously trying to watch for the exact moment that the ball leaves the passer's foot.

As mentioned by someone else, the fact that it's taken so long to get anywhere with goal-line technology means it will be 2040 before we have appeals to a video referee or something. In which case, I firmly believe that to call offside, it needs to be much more clear cut, i.e. there is daylight between the attacking player and the defender. Ideally a good yard or so of it as well. Then you should only get offsides that are clearly off and far fewer controversial decisions. At the same time defending would be slightly harder and we'd hopefully see more goals.

If it were up to me I'd scrap the offside rule completely but I haven't found anyone else that feels that way.


*A lineswoman though, that's a different matter. Sian Massey gets every impossibly difficult decision spot on, if only she could officiate on all games.

Funnily enough, the rule as it stands is probably the easiest way to make the decision. I have run more lines than I care to remember for both my lads teams in the past and really all a liner can do is to look along a line at the rear most edge of the last defender. So, if any part of the attacker is in front of that then you stick your flag up!!!!! You cannot possibly get into the detail of whether one blokes feet are ahead of anothers - its all too quick!

Except if any part of the attacker is not interfering with play.

[johnh]

I don't know why they changed the old offside rule. All they have achieved is to introduce complication and therefore controversy.

[rigger]

... cheers, Boggie

[SMorientes]

Funnily enough, the rule as it stands is probably the easiest way to make the decision. I have run more lines than I care to remember for both my lads teams in the past and really all a liner can do is to look along a line at the rear most edge of the last defender. So, if any part of the attacker is in front of that then you stick your flag up!!!!! You cannot possibly get into the detail of whether one blokes feet are ahead of anothers - its all too quick!

That sort of is my point though, it's certainly not an exact science, it's just a guess based on whether you can see a bit of a body part sticking out, which will be wrong perhaps as often as it is right, when compared to video replays. What's more the linesman sees an attacker's leg sticking out past a defender much more easily when the defender is closer to the linesman than the attacker. If the defender's on the far side of the attacker, it's really difficult to judge who's limb is marginally closest to goal. Plus your view is compromised by your limited depth perception, all this should either be countered by a better margin for error (i.e. a definite gap of a yard or two between players) or video refereeing. Since the latter is not gonna be forthcoming for a while, I'd say the former should be introduced.

[dlw10]

Funnily enough, the rule as it stands is probably the easiest way to make the decision. I have run more lines than I care to remember for both my lads teams in the past and really all a liner can do is to look along a line at the rear most edge of the last defender. So, if any part of the attacker is in front of that then you stick your flag up!!!!! You cannot possibly get into the detail of whether one blokes feet are ahead of anothers - its all too quick!

That sort of is my point though, it's certainly not an exact science, it's just a guess based on whether you can see a bit of a body part sticking out, which will be wrong perhaps as often as it is right, when compared to video replays. What's more the linesman sees an attacker's leg sticking out past a defender much more easily when the defender is closer to the linesman than the attacker. If the defender's on the far side of the attacker, it's really difficult to judge who's limb is marginally closest to goal. Plus your view is compromised by your limited depth perception, all this should either be countered by a better margin for error (i.e. a definite gap of a yard or two between players) or video refereeing. Since the latter is not gonna be forthcoming for a while, I'd say the former should be introduced.

What you say is of course quite correct. I have always suported a rugby style "is there any reason why I can't award a goal" video analysis at the top level where the ball is in the net. It wouldnt stop the incorrect flagging but it would get us closer by disallowing a "goal" when the replay shows it clearly was offside. But we've had that debate here before !

[Deleted User 1076]

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.

To be fair to referees assistants, to call offside correctly, they have to be able to see in two places at the same time. Personally I think you should be given onside if you are onside when you receive the ball.

[BigLeedsFan72]

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.

To be fair to referees assistants, to call offside correctly, they have to be able to see in two places at the same time. Personally I think you should be given onside if you are onside when you receive the ball.

As soon as the ball is touched the forward becomes offside. Not when he touches it. I called a player offside in his own half once because he was in the opponents half and in an offside position when the ball was played and he ran into his half of the field and took control of the ball. The other team couldn't understand why they had to lose 15 yards and have the free kick so far back.