A&H

defender blocking shot diverts ball to attacker in offside position

JamesL said:
So if someone shoots from 20 or even 25, or even 30 yards out the referee believes it is on target, or close or close as, or to put into law the referee believes that the ball is going into the goal or close to it, then any intervention is a save.
Click to expand...

I would suggest that they would need to be the only player between the ball and the goal for a shot from such a distance to be ‘saved’.......
But potentially, yes. That’s why I said the definition of ‘save’ opens up a whole new debate!
 
The Referee Store
JamesL said:
So if someone shoots from 20 or even 25, or even 30 yards out the referee believes it is on target, or close or close as, or to put into law the referee believes that the ball is going into the goal or close to it, then any intervention is a save.
Click to expand...
This is my understanding. It doesn't matter how far the shooter is from goal... and there doesn't have to be a "shooter"... any kind of touch can lead to a "save"... though obvs for offside purposes it needs to be a touch by an attacker...

Interesting one then: if the ball deflects off an unwitting attacker and is heading into the goal, my understanding is that any (legal) touch by a defender would not reset offside... attackers don't have the same privileges with deflections/rebounds...
 
Padfoot said:
If the defender has committed ‘an action which contacts with the ball’ the LOTG are 100% crystal clear that they have ‘played the ball’ so it CANNOT be a rebound/deflection.
Click to expand...
Yes, but that's not a good definition to use in relation to the offside law. That law doesn't talk about a player who simply "plays the ball," it talks about a player who:
deliberately plays the ball
Click to expand...

There's room for quite a large difference in interpretation between just playing the ball (i.e. an action making contact with it) and deliberately playing the ball. To me, the LotG definition of playing the ball could easily encompass a deflection - which is where I think the FIFA list of considerations comes into the reckoning. It's an attempt to help in deciding whether the ball was deflected (which could in certain instances be seen as an accidental playing of the ball) or deliberately played.

I think a rebound is a little easier concept to deal with, it's normally where the ball bounces back off a player without them necessarily doing anything other than being in the ball's path when it hits them. The deflection is the tricky one, as far as I'm concerned. I'm not sure I'm totally on board with all the FIFA considerations but I think I'm more in agreement with them than the idea that any time a player plays the ball according to the LotG definition, offside is reset - again due to the difference between "playing" and "deliberately playing" the ball.

I think it's an over-simplification to talk about just applying the law as it is written since it is written to require a different decision depending on whether the ball was deliberately played or deflected, but without giving a clear definition (or indeed any definition whatsoever) of what exactly constitutes a deflection.
 
Last edited:
Padfoot said:
Are you that desperate to avoid the tough decisions that you’re going to pretend that the definition doesn’t exist
Click to expand...
We all make unpopular decisions in every game. I'm not desperate to avoid tough decisions (I'm sure I speak for most referees in saying this)
Whilst we have a tendency to overly complicate our interpretations, nobody is under any pretense that words in the book don't exist. We're bound to get distracted by the chaotic release of guidelines and coaching from various directions. Don't think you're the only one with the guts for the job
 
Give the expected decision.

Shot from outside the penalty area? Defender sticks his leg out to make contact with the ball? Deliberate play. No offside. :cool:
 
Peter Grove said:
Yes, but that's not a good definition to use in relation to the offside law. That law doesn't talk about a player who simply "plays the ball," it talks about a player who:


There's room for quite a large difference in interpretation between just playing the ball (i.e. an action making contact with it) and deliberately playing the ball. To me, the LotG definition of playing the ball could easily encompass a deflection - which is where I think the FIFA list of considerations comes into the reckoning. It's an attempt to help in deciding whether the ball was deflected (which could in certain instances be seen as an accidental playing of the ball) or deliberately played.

I think a rebound is a little easier concept to deal with, it's normally where the ball bounces back off a player without them necessarily doing anything other than being in the ball's path when it hits them. The deflection is the tricky one, as far as I'm concerned. I'm not sure I'm totally on board with all the FIFA considerations but I think I'm more in agreement with them than the idea that any time a player plays the ball according to the LotG definition, offside is reset - again due to the difference between "playing" and "deliberately playing" the ball.

I think it's an over-simplification to talk about just applying the law as it is written since it is written to require a different decision depending on whether the ball was deliberately played or deflected, but without giving a clear definition (or indeed any definition whatsoever) of what exactly constitutes a deflection.
Click to expand...

Once again someone decides that because the very clear definition in the LOTG doesn’t suit their agenda.....they try to invent a new one, without any basis in Law which just simply leads people down an erroneous path towards an incorrect (although popular) decision.

FWIW the definition cannot apply to a deflection......anyone want to hazard a guess why?
 
Padfoot said:
Once again someone decides that because the very clear definition in the LOTG doesn’t suit their agenda.....they try to invent a new one, without any basis in Law which just simply leads people down an erroneous path towards an incorrect (although popular) decision.

FWIW the definition cannot apply to a deflection......anyone want to hazard a guess why?
Click to expand...

Once again someone decides they are right and belittles anyone that disagrees with them, leading to at least one of their posts being deleted (and not by me I should add). As I have said many times before, whilst you think you are always right reality may well suggest otherwise … :)

The referee has to decide whether it was a deliberate play of the ball. That is it, no more than that to think about, but different referees will define deliberate play of the ball different to others, just as different referees will have different views on deliberate handling.
 
RustyRef said:
Once again someone decides they are right and belittles anyone that disagrees with them, leading to at least one of their posts being deleted (and not by me I should add). As I have said many times before, whilst you think you are always right reality may well suggest otherwise … :)

The referee has to decide whether it was a deliberate play of the ball. That is it, no more than that to think about, but different referees will define deliberate play of the ball different to others, just as different referees will have different views on deliberate handling.
Click to expand...

But that’s the whole point....the LOTG defines what ‘play’ is.....therefore it is not up to individual refs to invent a definition just to suit the decision they want to make as opposed to the decision that they are obligated to make.

The thought process is thus....’did the player make an action which contacted the ball’.....’yes....then they played the ball’......’no, then they haven’t played the ball’.

For those still struggling with this concept......in the OP scenario....if the defender is stood still and the ball strikes them, that is a rebound/deflection.......if they make a movement to intercept the ball and contact the ball, that is playing the ball.
Very very simple.
 
Padfoot said:
But that’s the whole point....the LOTG defines what ‘play’ is.....therefore it is not up to individual refs to invent a definition just to suit the decision they want to make as opposed to the decision that they are obligated to make.

The thought process is thus....’did the player make an action which contacted the ball’.....’yes....then they played the ball’......’no, then they haven’t played the ball’.

For those still struggling with this concept......in the OP scenario....if the defender is stood still and the ball strikes them, that is a rebound/deflection.......if they make a movement to intercept the ball and contact the ball, that is playing the ball.
Very very simple.
Click to expand...
The LOTG may define "Play", but it does not define "deliberately play" anywhere near as clearly. The fact that you're ignoring that distinction just because it proves your argument of this being straightforward wrong doesn't make your post come across in good faith.
 
Padfoot said:
The LOTG are clear.....if you take an action which contacts with the ball, you have played the ball. In terms of offside, only an action which is a ‘save’ has relevance when considering the OP.
Click to expand...
So, in your world, a player who is worried about getting hit by the ball at close range and is therefore actively moving to try and get out of the way of the ball , happens to be hit by it and therefore their action is a 'play of the ball'? Seems wildly counter intuitive to me ......
 
  • Like
Reactions: one
Russell Jones said:
So, in your world, a player who is worried about getting hit by the ball at close range and is therefore actively moving to try and get out of the way of the ball , happens to be hit by it and therefore their action is a 'play of the ball'? Seems wildly counter intuitive to me ......
Click to expand...
I don’t think that’s what was meant there. The opposite in my opinion.
If moving to not hit or ‘play’ the ball then intent has to come into it.
 
Padfoot said:
Oh dear.......wrong again.

To arrive at your fabled definition of ‘deliberately play’ you merely have to insert the word deliberate into the LOTG definition I.e. ‘a deliberate action by a player which contacts the ball’......

It’s very very simple.....if you accept, and you really have no choice because the LOTG are crystal clear on this, the definition of ‘play’ then it’s very short hop to understanding that ‘deliberately played’ must, and can only, mean a deliberate action by a player which contacts the ball.
Click to expand...
Define how we as referees are meant to determine deliberate? In the absence of mind-reading, we end up having to make a judgement call - and that's where the list of considerations that you seem to have such a problem with comes into things...
 
GraemeS said:
Define how we as referees are meant to determine deliberate? In the absence of mind-reading, we end up having to make a judgement call - and that's where the list of considerations that you seem to have such a problem with comes into things...
Click to expand...

Allow me to elucidate......

In short, deliberate includes:
* Player moving towards the ball
* The ball is expected
* A deliberate act wow, really? Deliberate includes a deliberate act?
* Enough time to act
* Balanced and ready to play
* The ball is properly played which as per LOTG means that the player commits an action which makes contact with the ball.......

Deflection includes:
* Ball moving towards the player of course the ball will be moving towards the player....doesn’t in any way mean that the player can’t play the ball.
* Finds the ball coming against them
* An instinct reaction attempt to play the ball as per LOTG definition, this would be playing the ball therefore not a deflection.
* Not enough time to play the ball another nonsensical statement.
* Has to find their balance first irrelevant....players are perfectly capable of playing the ball whilst off balance.....
* The ball deflects from the player well...that seals it for me!
Click to expand...
 
Padfoot said:
Allow me to elucidate......
Click to expand...
Allow me to respond...

This comes from people who are far more versed in the Law than you claim to be. This comes from people who are far more experience than you.

Sure, some of the phrasing is poor in that list. But you know what? You're also reading things in a way that suits your personal bias on this material.

"A deliberate act" -- this is an act/action that is one clearly intended (ie, someone jumping and making a motion for a header).

Ball moving toward player vs player moving toward ball... it's the same stuff that we look for with handling. Is the player making some sort of effort to play that ball or does it catch them as they're moving out of the way or by surprise?

Enough time to play the ball is another way of thinking about instinct vs an action that they're consciously choosing to make.

And I can't say this enough, but these are NOT REPLACEMENTS FOR THE WORDS ON THE PAGE.

This is all things for a referee to think about and help with decision making.

There's very little in the Laws that is purely black and white (despite what you keep touting). Almost everything requires a decision, and just because someone sees something differently than you doesn't mean that they're bottling it. It means that they had a different interpretation because of their decision making process.

FIFA puts out these considerations in an effort to get everyone's decision making process on a similar page... which allows for more consistency between match officials (both in a crew in the same game, and from game to game).
 
AlexF said:
Allow me to respond...

This comes from people who are far more versed in the Law than you claim to be. This comes from people who are far more experience than you.

Sure, some of the phrasing is poor in that list. But you know what? You're also reading things in a way that suits your personal bias on this material.

"A deliberate act" -- this is an act/action that is one clearly intended (ie, someone jumping and making a motion for a header).

Ball moving toward player vs player moving toward ball... it's the same stuff that we look for with handling. Is the player making some sort of effort to play that ball or does it catch them as they're moving out of the way or by surprise?

Enough time to play the ball is another way of thinking about instinct vs an action that they're consciously choosing to make.

And I can't say this enough, but these are NOT REPLACEMENTS FOR THE WORDS ON THE PAGE.

This is all things for a referee to think about and help with decision making.

There's very little in the Laws that is purely black and white (despite what you keep touting). Almost everything requires a decision, and just because someone sees something differently than you doesn't mean that they're bottling it. It means that they had a different interpretation because of their decision making process.

FIFA puts out these considerations in an effort to get everyone's decision making process on a similar page... which allows for more consistency between match officials (both in a crew in the same game, and from game to game).
Click to expand...

Except that they are simply confusing the issue because the LOTG has already clearly defined what we are to consider as playing the ball.

Everything else is superfluous and disengenous.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top