• The forums will be unavailable for a few hours on Saturday 6th June, when they do return they will initially be in a degraded state with some features missing, but normal posting/reading will be possible. The main website will not be affected by these updates.
    New user registrations are currently disabled.
    Some other features of the forum are also currently disabled.

Full body offside rule


JL1985 said:
Up to the 1990s, the mere presence of a player in an offside position was an offence. The example you give, play doesn't have to stop, Brobbey or any other SAFC player should just leave the ball.
Click to expand...
You're factually wrong about the offside law. It has always been offside only if the player is interfering with play or seeking to gain an advantage.

Obviously, if the Burnley keeper has launched the ball upfield, the entire Sunderland side could refuse to touch the ball until Brobbey has covered the 50 yards or so that he needs to get onside. But in the meantime, there is every chance that Burnley will have scored. You can't have a situation where the centre half's only options are to head it clear and give a free kick for offside 70 yards away, or to let the other lot score.
 
Looks so dumb this shite. Imagine being in the ground after watching football for god knows how many years, seeing what should be a blatant offside but this wank new rule says it's onside
 
Doesn't matter what the rule or the interpretation of it is, the team on the losing side of the decision is going to piss and moan when it's close.

Offside by millimetres, so what, that's the rule, it's offside. Whether they measure from the forehead or the fingertips, I don't care, it's more important they make decisions consistently.
 
dsr-burnley said:
You're factually wrong about the offside law. It has always been offside only if the player is interfering with play or seeking to gain an advantage.

Obviously, if the Burnley keeper has launched the ball upfield, the entire Sunderland side could refuse to touch the ball until Brobbey has covered the 50 yards or so that he needs to get onside. But in the meantime, there is every chance that Burnley will have scored. You can't have a situation where the centre half's only options are to head it clear and give a free kick for offside 70 yards away, or to let the other lot score.
Click to expand...
1925, the rule was brought in. It remained unchanged until 1990.

"When a player plays the ball, any player of the same side who at such moment of playing is nearer to his opponents' goal-line is out of play, and may not touch the ball himself, nor in any way whatever interfere with an opponent, or with the play, until the ball has been again played, unless there are at such moment of playing at least two of his opponents nearer their own goal-line. A player is not out of play when the ball is kicked off from goal, when a corner-kick, or a throw-in is taken, when the ball has been last played by an opponent, or when he himself is within his own half of the field of play at the moment the ball is played by any player of the same side"
 
JL1985 said:
1925, the rule was brought in. It remained unchanged until 1990.

"When a player plays the ball, any player of the same side who at such moment of playing is nearer to his opponents' goal-line is out of play, and may not touch the ball himself, nor in any way whatever interfere with an opponent, or with the play, until the ball has been again played, unless there are at such moment of playing at least two of his opponents nearer their own goal-line. A player is not out of play when the ball is kicked off from goal, when a corner-kick, or a throw-in is taken, when the ball has been last played by an opponent, or when he himself is within his own half of the field of play at the moment the ball is played by any player of the same side"
Click to expand...
This was the law in 1975. Look especially at the third paragraph.

"LAW XI. - OFF-SIDE A player is off-side if he is nearer his opponents' goal-line than the ball at the moment the ball is played unless:(a) He is in his own half of the field of play .(b) There are two of his opponents nearer to their own goal-line than he is.(c) The ball last touched an opponent or was last played by him.(d) He receives the ball direct from a goal-kick, a corner-kick, a throw-in, or when it was dropped by the Referee

Punishment. For an infringement of this Law, an indirect free-kick shall be taken by a player of the opposing team from the place where the infringement occurred.

A player in an off-side position shall not be penalised unless, in the opinion of the Referee, he is interfering with the play or with an opponent, or is seeking to gain an advantage by being in an offside position."

You must be logged on to see external links

Even on your 1925 rules, you must have a heavily abridged version. You have left out the Official Decisions paragraph, "It is not a breach of the Law for a player to be in an off-side position, but only when in that position he interferes with an opponent, or with the play. ..."

That 1925 law was a simple change from the 1924 law, because the number of opponents between the forward and the goalline was dropped from 3 to 2. It was otherwise identical to 1924 and prior years; it wasn't a new rule in 1925.
 
Since multi camera broadcasts have been a thing for regular games, technology use was inevitable. FIFA weren't going to bother with even goal line technology until the Lampard ghost goal against Germany. Offsides are becoming quicker and more automated. People just generally don't like it coming down to an earlobe offside. Offside rule doesn't need to change. Implementation of VAR in other decisions is casing real problems as that is just coming down to human interpretation and in plenty of cases no real difference in just going with whatever the on field referee determined.
 
Scouts need to start looking for players with long limbs, gain the biggest advantage possible.

Mr Tickle scores 50+ a season once this rule comes in
 
dsr-burnley said:
This was the law in 1975. Look especially at the third paragraph.

"LAW XI. - OFF-SIDE A player is off-side if he is nearer his opponents' goal-line than the ball at the moment the ball is played unless:(a) He is in his own half of the field of play .(b) There are two of his opponents nearer to their own goal-line than he is.(c) The ball last touched an opponent or was last played by him.(d) He receives the ball direct from a goal-kick, a corner-kick, a throw-in, or when it was dropped by the Referee

Punishment. For an infringement of this Law, an indirect free-kick shall be taken by a player of the opposing team from the place where the infringement occurred.

A player in an off-side position shall not be penalised unless, in the opinion of the Referee, he is interfering with the play or with an opponent, or is seeking to gain an advantage by being in an offside position."

You must be logged on to see external links

Even on your 1925 rules, you must have a heavily abridged version. You have left out the Official Decisions paragraph, "It is not a breach of the Law for a player to be in an off-side position, but only when in that position he interferes with an opponent, or with the play. ..."

That 1925 law was a simple change from the 1924 law, because the number of opponents between the forward and the goalline was dropped from 3 to 2. It was otherwise identical to 1924 and prior years; it wasn't a new rule in 1925.
Click to expand...
We’ll have to agree to disagree on this one. I’d prefer a black or white decision whereas you prefer an officials interpretation of who is active or not active.
 
HABA87 said:
It just shifts the problem along.
Click to expand...
Yup.

Is it the full body or is his heel keeping him offside.

I work in town planning and our old gaffer when comparing plans vs as-built on-site used to apply the squint test. If he squinted and it looked ok he was happy. If only there were more like him in our industry now!
 
JL1985 said:
We’ll have to agree to disagree on this one. I’d prefer a black or white decision whereas you prefer an officials interpretation of who is active or not active.
Click to expand...
But your way, the team that's leading could waste infinite time without ever risking losing the ball - as long as they have a goalkeeper that can reliably kick the ball into the opposition half.

You would also be making the winger to the goalline and cut back for the centre forward to score, become impossible, because the winger would be offside. I don't like the idea. It's black and white, but it takes a lot out of the game.
 
Richie K said:
Should just have a microchip on the front of the shirt, and you can use GPS technology to factually check who is closer to the goal.
Click to expand...
Or multiple chips inserted under the skin at strategic parts of the entire body. Can’t be any worse than having a shit tattoo done.
 
Last edited:
Ged rid of lines altogether and just do it with the naked eye. 20 seconds to review and if no overwhelming evidence, stick with the on field decision. Sorted
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top