A&H

Should I have given offside?

F

farrell

New Member
I was reffing an under 12s game with club linesman. Blue attacker was 5-6 yards offside (I could clearly see it was offside) when a ball was played over the top. He chased it and the defender chased behind him but I waited for the linesman to give offside. About a yard away from the ball the attacker stopped and left the ball (realises he was offside) and the defender also stopped but he assumed offside had been given so he left the ball. Then a different blue attacker came and got the ball (he was always onside) but after a few steps he also stopped thinking offside had been given and he kicked the ball to a defender. At this point I had given nothing and the linesman hadn't signalled offside but I blew for it as everyone had stopped expecting an offside (which I believed it was) but the linesman said he never interfered as he didn't touch the ball.

What would you have done?
 
The Referee Store
Firstly they should play to the whistle and not be making any assumptions on decisions even at that age. I would say as the clearly offside attacker got to within a yard of the ball then I'd be giving the offside, however I can see why others wouldnt.
 
Blow the whistle, award the IDFK and restart the game. The assistant is there to offer information which you act upon.

This is another reason why CARs should only give ball in and out of play. Old discussion that one...
 
You seem to be blaming the CAR for this, Brian, or am i reading that wrong :rolleyes:
 
CapnBloodbeard said:
So, for those who advocate offside - which part of the law is satisfied here?
Click to expand...
The attacking player nearest the ball has made an obvious move to take possession when no other team mate can. The team mate only moves when then defender has given up the chase. Example 4 on P111 of LotG best illustrates that it is not necessary for the ball to be played by the player in an offside position.

@haywain I'm blaming a system that allows an untrained person to have a major influence over a fairly important decision in a game.
 
Last edited:
CapnBloodbeard said:
So, for those who advocate offside - which part of the law is satisfied here?
Click to expand...
From my perspective, the only technically correct way you could choose to call this offside is by saying that the attacker in an offside position 'interfered with an opponent' by 'clearly obstructing his line of vision to the ball'. By the sounds of the OP, he certainly didn't 'interfere with play' or 'gain an advantage by being in that position'.

For me though, I'm not calling this offside. Reason I'm not in Brian's (well argued) camp is that I don't get from the situation (as described above) that the attacker's team mate was clearly out of the equation .. but would be helpful to have this point clarified :)
 
"THE LAW IS AN ASS" to quote a phrase by someone or other ??

yet again we are experiencing referees debating a very serious Law of football

Personally .....i would have given the offside as soon as the Defender is pulled out of position by the run as Imo he had interfered with the game ?

Technically ......according to the latest revisions on offside....... i should be playing on ? as the offside player hasnt touched the ball ?

Why cant FIFA just clarify the LOTG ? Including Handball then the game will be much easier for all concerned . :confused:
 
If the o/p thought it was offside, which he did, why didn't he whistle for it instead of waiting for the CAR to flag.

Russell is right in that you had to be there as description from o/p, like many on the forum, is never going to cover every angle

But, going by how i've interpreted the o/p, not offside. I would have said that a shout from the ref to the players to keep on playing or words to that effect would have been helpful but, since o/p had already made up his mind, it was never going to happen

This situation was not too dissimilar to the 3rd goal scored by everton against man u last weekend. Whilst beezer has placed himself squarely in last week's referee territory, any law which looks wrong when played out on a football field certainly needs sorting....but not ignoring
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Wooooooooh hang on there @haywain ........afraid you have just touched a nerve .......I neither accept or like the phrase "last weeks ref" I find it a rather derogatory term on this site with the underlying meaning that last weeks ref is not very good ! to put it mildly

I was simply making a point on interpretation of the laws and how easily they can be twisted .
 
sorry if i touched a nerve, beezer, forgot you were a rangers fan for a moment there ;)

For me, 'last week's ref' was just an easy way of saying, 'knows the law..or should do.. but chooses to ignore it...for a myriad of possible reasons'
 
Beezer said:
Personally .....i would have given the offside as soon as the Defender is pulled out of position by the run as Imo he had interfered with the game ?

. :confused:
Click to expand...
Pulling a defender out of position isn't offside. If you think about it, everytime a run is made from an offside position, a defender has to follow/mark, so if that was a free kick you'd see a LOT more offsides given. Which is actually precisely what FIFA wanted to avoid

Brian Hamilton said:
The attacking player nearest the ball has made an obvious move to take possession when no other team mate can. The team mate only moves when then defender has given up the chase. Example 4 on P111 of LotG best illustrates that it is not necessary for the ball to be played by the player in an offside position.

@haywain I'm blaming a system that allows an untrained person to have a major influence over a fairly important decision in a game.
Click to expand...

Yes, in situations where nobody else can play the ball. This is quite different.. 'Intending to take possession' isn't, unfortunately an offence.
I believe the attacker deserves to be called - but under the current law, they can't be IMO.
 
@Beezer, I'm generally with you in thinking that our lives would be made immeasurably easier by some simple amendments to some badly worded laws.

However on offside, playing devil's advocate, I think the current Law is now (relatively) unambiguous. But there's still a real temptation not to fully apply it either a) because 'it never used to be like that' or b) players, coaches, spectators don't understand it so it might hurt match control or c) it's not 'fair' as it's currently worded.

Personally, I'd change it because it's now tilted too heavily towards the attacking team and doesn't 'feel' right. But until that happens I reckon we should just get on with it and all try to apply it as consistently as possible
 
The one scenario that really makes an Ass of the offside law is .......defence pushing up ...lazy striker walking back 10 yards behind ...
Wide player plays a diagonal ball acrtoss the pitch .....winger gets on it then the striker turns on goal and gets the ball played back to him for an unopposed tap in ?? ...

Doesnt really sit well with me.
 
haywain said:
sorry if i touched a nerve, beezer, forgot you were a rangers fan for a moment there ;)

For me, 'last week's ref' was just an easy way of saying, 'knows the law..or should do.. but chooses to ignore it...for a myriad of possible reasons'
Click to expand...
Consider youself forgiven ;)
 
Beezer said:
The one scenario that really makes an Ass of the offside law is .......defence pushing up ...lazy striker walking back 10 yards behind ...
Wide player plays a diagonal ball acrtoss the pitch .....winger gets on it then the striker turns on goal and gets the ball played back to him for an unopposed tap in ?? ...

Doesnt really sit well with me.
Click to expand...

see arsenal's third goal v blackpool on the link, beezer, still irritates the hell out of me but, as a coach, i would be making it a tactic

http://www.soccer-blogger.com/2011/04/10/blackpool-vs-arsenal-1-3-highlights-2011-video/

haywain said:
This situation was not too dissimilar to the 3rd goal scored by everton against man u last weekend. Whilst beezer has placed himself squarely in last week's referee territory, any law which looks wrong when played out on a football field certainly needs sorting....but not ignoring
Click to expand...

watch from 10:50 on the highlights - after call of duty 3 ad

http://www.timesoccer.com/video/04/19-manchester-united-vs-everton-live-fa-cup-highlights.html
 
Last edited by a moderator:
That's the very one !!! :)

Also Blackpool s goal ...... I may have not been getting on the end of that and taking the penalty and the red card ? :)
 
Beezer said:
That's the very one !!! :)

Also Blackpool s goal ...... I may have not been getting on the end of that and taking the penalty and the red card ? :)
Click to expand...

just enjoyed watching us tear arsenal a new one for that goal, beezer

happy days, happy days :)
 
CapnBloodbeard said:
Pulling a defender out of position isn't offside. If you think about it, everytime a run is made from an offside position, a defender has to follow/mark, so if that was a free kick you'd see a LOT more offsides given. Which is actually precisely what FIFA wanted to avoid
Click to expand...
I unsterstand all points being made here ...but..... interfering with the keepers vision can be called offside (interpretation ).........therefor a defender having to chase a striker who is 6 yards offside just in case he doesn't touch it and someone else runs in is then distracting the defender from possibly closing down another player ? possibly the one who will pick the ball up and square it to him for his tap in with no chance of the defender getting there ?

As Haywain says , why don't teams do this more often ?

As the offside law stands this is like a loophole to score goals !!!
 
If the keeper's view is blocked then he is prevented from playing the ball.
If a defender chases a striker in an offside position, he hasn't been prevented from doing anything - he has made a decision, and a bad one at that (in FIFA's eyes). That's the difference between the two. While that may seem unfair, it would be impossible to referee if it was otherwise.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top