New Offside Rule begins testing this weekend

[Father Jack Hackett]

I think it’s a great idea. The only issue is, is there a rule on how big the gap is and what parts of the body?

 

[chriswallace85]

It should be based on the body or the majority of the players. All this 'leading knee, trailing heel' stuff is silly. There is no way the officials can see this live.

If an attacker uses the new rule to deliberately hang past the last defender, then it counts as taking the piss out of the rule.

In lower league/casual football, if the attackers body is clearly past the defender when the ball is played, it is offside. If their body is pretty much level with the defender, it is not. It works.

The big problem comes from making it a high precision science.

This.

 

[wigwams]

The same rules would apply, it would just go back to being random luck-of-the-dice if you are given offside or not

And we’d be back in the championship

 

[ChrisAshley]

Not sure Alderete and Ballard will be the ideal centre back partnership anymore if these rules come in.

 

[englishman abroad]

Wenger is now just a FIFA stooge,

 

[gonzalo]

You just got me thinking, when was the last time scored from outside the penalty area in open play, similar to Daryl Murphy or Carlos Edwards ?

Talbi v Burnley surely?

 

[Matnab]

Issue I see with the new rule:

Striker can stand goal side of a defender as long as part of his body is overlapping part of the last defender's.
If the striker is goal side of the defender, the defender will need to pull back to cover, but that allows the striker to go further forward.

The striker can just pull the defender further and further back, until their both stood on the edge of the six yard box. The defender has a choice of either allowing the striker to take that line, or forcing him further out but allowing the striker to be goal side of him.

Exactly. Yet somehow people haven't thought it through far enough to this conclusion and fail to understand how it would make the game unrecognisable.

Imagine set pieces. Strikers loitering behind the defensive line until they're marched all the way back to the goal line as they keep bak peddling to get goals side. Completely farcical.

 

[Edinburgh Black Cat]

from the way its described at the top of this post, var will still be arguing over a fanny hair's breadth but on the opposite side now.

Aye, agreed. If that's how they implement it then it's mostly a failure. The only slight improvement is that the attacker is getting the advantage. Currently there are goals being disallowed with absolutely no advantage.

The bit you highlighted is an alternative approach that I'd take. Preferably under the current offside rules, but with VAR requiring a quicker and clearer infringement to overturn a decision.

 

[FoldingStars]

The offside rule was invented to prevent goal hanging, not goal scoring.

But this change doesn’t improve anything so like my first reply, it’s pointless. We will still have the exact same complaints about them only being a tiny bit offside but now have people going that would have been offside last year. It’s a pointless move that doesn’t improve anything.

Really the implementation of ‘interfering with play’ stopped it being about goal hanging.

 

[Lucky1985]

But this change doesn’t improve anything so like my first reply, it’s pointless. We will still have the exact same complaints about them only being a tiny bit offside but now have people going that would have been offside last year. It’s a pointless move that doesn’t improve anything.

Really the implementation of ‘interfering with play’ stopped it being about goal hanging.

You’re conflating two different arguments.

“it doesn change anything” and “people will still argue about whether it was offside or not”

It doesn’t change anything: Yes it does. Fewer goals will be disallowed, meaning more higher scoring games, which I believe makes for more entertaining matches.

People will still argue whether it was offside: I agree. This was never a point of contention from me. It’s the same argument moved 50 cm further up the pitch, but in moving it that 50cm there will be more goals awarded, and fewer disallowed.

 

[FoldingStars]

You’re conflating two different arguments.

“it doesn change anything” and “people will still argue about whether it was offside or not”

It doesn’t change anything: Yes it does. Fewer goals will be disallowed, meaning more higher scoring games, which I believe makes for more entertaining matches.

People will still argue whether it was offside: I agree. This was never a point of contention from me. It’s the same argument moved 50 cm further up the pitch, but in moving it that 50cm there will be more goals awarded, and fewer disallowed.

We disagree on making it more entertaining, defenders will drop deeper, the game will be even more boring and it will bring less goals. If you have a 6 foot 4 centre half and a 5'5 winger they know they will get outpaced so drop even more the game will be worse for it.

 

[The soap powder]

Messing around with the beautiful game man

Just leave it alone

Off side is off side and nothing wrong with the rule right now

Its the people looking at VAR that is the problem its making it no different to not having VAR

Let the Ref just do his job and shit will happen but 9/10 correct decision will be given or we will move on from it quickly if it is not

 

[AC Mack]

Is this a trick question?

A situation that previously resulted in a goal being disallowed because it was offside, now won’t.

Fewer goals being disallowed means more goals being scored.

I don’t know how else I can explain it, it’s such a simple and obvious concept, that I don’t understand what you don’t understand.

Not a trick question. You seem to be making the assumption that defenders aren't going to adapt to the new rule.

 

[Lucky1985]

We disagree on making it more entertaining, defenders will drop deeper, the game will be even more boring and it will bring less goals. If you have a 6 foot 4 centre half and a 5'5 winger they know they will get outpaced so drop even more the game will be worse for it.

Statistically, more goals are conceded by teams who sit deep, that is the reason so many teams choose to play a high line.

I don’t believe more teams will sit deeper for this reason. Ultimately a defender just needs to anticipate the pass and step forward.

They will concede the occasional goal where they miss time it, but that would be fewer goals conceded than they would by camping out in the 18 yard box.

So in my eyes, they either sit deeper and concede more goals. Or they stay up and concede more goals.

 

[hank williams]

You just got me thinking, when was the last time scored from outside the penalty area in open play, similar to Daryl Murphy or Carlos Edwards ?

 

[Matnab]

I didn’t say it solves a problem, I said it would result in more goals being allowed, which imho makes the game more interesting.

Let's make the goals double size and scrap offside. The beauty of the game is the effort required to breach a defense and score.

 

[FoldingStars]

Statistically, more goals are conceded by teams who sit deep, that is the reason so many teams choose to play a high line.

I don’t believe more teams will sit deeper for this reason. Ultimately a defender just needs to anticipate the pass and step forward.

They will concede the occasional goal where they miss time it, but that would be fewer goals conceded than they would by camping out in the 18 yard box.

So in my eyes, they either sit deeper and concede more goals. Or they stay up and concede more goals.

I guess we shall watch the Canadian league with interest and see how it goes. Either way we need to sort out VAR first (or those who man it).

 

[woodlebert]

Statistically, more goals are conceded by teams who sit deep, that is the reason so many teams choose to play a high line.

I don’t believe more teams will sit deeper for this reason. Ultimately a defender just needs to anticipate the pass and step forward.

I think this is a bad use of data

Not all teams play high lines and it tends to correlate with ability to dominate the ball. eg: better teams play higher lines. So yes, teams with higher average lines concede fewer goals than teams with lower average lines. But it's not exclusively to do with the line itself

 

[GipseT]

Should create more goalsoring chances but maybe more debates. Would suit Isidor for one. As long as this is checked quickly coz five minute checks are stupid. Is it true they might check corners next season? Dear me...

Could also just make the defence sit deep..
Which would be boring

 

[Lucky1985]

Not a trick question. You seem to be making the assumption that defenders aren't going to adapt to the new rule.

I really have nothing further to say to you then. If you can’t see how disallowing fewer goals, will result in more goals, then I don’t know how else to explain it.

If you had three chocolate bars, and I take two away, then you’re left with one.

If we reduce the amount I take away to one, then you are left with two. By reducing the amount of chocolate bars being taken off you (goals disallowed) you are increasing the amount of chocolate bars you have (goals being scored).

Was that any better?

SHort of sitting in-front of you with some coloured blocks like I do with my 2 year old son, I really can’t think of how else I can explain it.

I think this is a bad use of data

Not all teams play high lines and it tends to correlate with ability to dominate the ball. eg: better teams play higher lines. So yes, teams with higher average lines concede fewer goals than teams with lower average lines. But it's not exclusively to do with the line itself

Where statistically has the higher percentage of a goal; a shot from the penalty spot in open play, or a shot 30m from the goal?

If a team play a high line then it is much less likely that the opposition will get to shoot from a high scoring chance position.

Even look at direct free kicks. Teams will set up with a high line because it keeps the opposition players out of the box and further from goal.