Jump to content

time to scrap offside law?


Fitzhugh Fella

Recommended Posts

there were 2 incidences in the match last night that really brought it home to me just how modern football has outgrown the offside law. One incidence was an offside given when it shouldn't have been and another was one that wasn't given when it should have been.

 

The first was when Waigo was flagged offside when replays showed he was at least a yard on. He had moved far too quickly and with perfect timing that the linesman just could not keep up. He was in a very likely goal scoring position and it must have been very frustrating for him. Certainly the benefit of doubt (which there must have been) was not given to him which is not following the rules.

 

The second came just prior to Charlton's goal when their winger received the ball at least 2 yards offside but the linesman was about 5 or 6 yards back and as he was nowhere near level just did not have a clue and had no choice but to allow play to progress and they scored 30 seconds later.

 

If the offside law is to stay then there must be a better way of judging it. Quite simply linesman or asst referees on the touchline are in a ridiculous position, perspective wise, to make correct decisions. It's hard enough further back even with a better global view from the stands and the modern game is just too fast. How can an asst ref expected to be level? Those two mistakes which both went against Saints could have been costly.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've been thinking about this for a while now. There is no place in football for the offside rule these days. If we got rid of the rule I think we should become the first team to adopt the revolutionary tactic of sticking all 10 of our outfield players on the opposition goal line for the entire match ready to tap the ball in every time Kelvin hoofs it upfield.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Or how about keeping the offside rule but implanting a series of chips into each players ball-playing body parts so that it can be determined electronically whether he is on or offside.

 

Or implant a device that gives them a large electric shock each time they stray into the offside force field.

 

When I was at Eastleigh Tech this topic came up and in order to demonstrate, the PE master organised a short match. I was in goal. The game quickly descended into both teams staying in their own penalty area shouting abuse at each other eg.'come and have go if you think your hard enough'. Occasionally the ball would be lumped up the field over the barren midfield wasteland.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

there were 2 incidences in the match last night that really brought it home to me just how modern football has outgrown the offside law. One incidence was an offside given when it shouldn't have been and another was one that wasn't given when it should have been.

 

The first was when Waigo was flagged offside when replays showed he was at least a yard on. He had moved far too quickly and with perfect timing that the linesman just could not keep up. He was in a very likely goal scoring position and it must have been very frustrating for him. Certainly the benefit of doubt (which there must have been) was not given to him which is not following the rules.

 

The second came just prior to Charlton's goal when their winger received the ball at least 2 yards offside but the linesman was about 5 or 6 yards back and as he was nowhere near level just did not have a clue and had no choice but to allow play to progress and they scored 30 seconds later.

 

If the offside law is to stay then there must be a better way of judging it. Quite simply linesman or asst referees on the touchline are in a ridiculous position, perspective wise, to make correct decisions. It's hard enough further back even with a better global view from the stands and the modern game is just too fast. How can an asst ref expected to be level? Those two mistakes which both went against Saints could have been costly.

 

 

 

I dont think that because the officials were wrong that the Offside rule should be done away with.

 

Over a season I expect the decicisions even themselves out.

 

Although last nights linesman may have ruled Bobby Stokes at Wembley in 1976 offside

Link to comment
Share on other sites

For there goal we still had a player on our goal line when there winger recieved the ball so was no-where near offside.

 

There was an offside called for them which never was too. In all I think the poor decissions worked in our favour last night.

 

The current offside rule is very flakey to say the least. It seems the rule was put in to prevent goal hanging and to make the match a bit more competitive. Now there seem to be so many ways to interperate it, refs players and fans find it hard to keep up. I think they need to find a way to simplify it without causeing the game to stop and start every time someone kicks the ball.

 

Some kind of technology that only comes into play in the last 3rd of the pitch might work but that would also have problems and half the fun of football is the factor of human error so as much as I think we could do with some technology to help us out I wouldnt want to ruin it by getting rid of all mistakes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The law isn't the problem, the enforcement of the law is the problem. You can't scrap it as it will leave a situation where players camp out in the opposition half.

 

With all the technology available today, I'm sure there is a better way than simply getting rid of it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, the last experiment to remove/reduce the offside law worked really well didn't. Had a big impact and everyone remembers the names of the clubs that played with it. Heck even had a game at The Dell under those rules.....

 

Nice sentiments FF, but it is the same as all this encroachment of technology into cricket, it's wrong, sometimes it goes for you and sometimes it goes against, just like Life in general

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's the whole 'interfering/not interfering with play' malarky the 'first' and 'second' phase ball ( which I thought was Rugby ), and whether the player is 'live', ( doubtful for some - at least they are probably brain dead ), or not at the time the ball is played.

 

I think Bill Shankly's "Any player of mine who isn't interfering with play doesn't deserve to be on the pitch" sets the right tone. Go back to the basic if you have only 1 opponent between you and the goal when the ball is played forward, you are offside. Simples. And if there is any doubt about the buildup when a goal is scored, go to a TV replay, they do it in Rugby.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why not just have a video ref like they do in rugby... If an offisde decision was marginal, the linesman would keep his flag down and allow play to continue... if this resulted in something significant like a goal or penalty, the ref would then request the video ref to rule on the offside decision and after a few seconds, the big screen would show "OFFSIDE" or "NOT OFFSIDE". It's been suggested many times before and seems to be successfully used in other sports.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How about making the officials do their job properly, and taking them to task if they **** it up. The FL/FA/PL are far too protective towards them.

 

If the linesmen and ref aren't up to the job, get rid. There's too much money at stake now in football. "Swings & roundabouts" isn't a good enough defence any more.

 

If a professional footballer concentrates like hell to keep himself 6 inches onside, and a chartered accountant or petrol pump attendant (no disrespect to either, of course) robs him of a perfectly good goal, then with the technology available today, that's a bl00dy disgrace.

 

I can remember the days when they were all the myopic offspring of single parents. Most of them probably still are.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There was an offside called for them which never was too. In all I think the poor decissions worked in our favour last night

Agreed, Charlton had a much more blatant miscall as you say, I think from a free-kick, their player did a lot of finger-wagging after and quite justifiably because replays showed he was nowhere near offside.

 

The problem really is the change of the rule that came in a while back. the old offside law was actually much easier to police, the new one has much more of an element of doubt and subjectivity. But scrapping the law altogether would be silly, there is a reason it was introduced, simply to stop "goal-hangers".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How about making the officials do their job properly, and taking them to task if they **** it up. The FL/FA/PL are far too protective towards them.

 

If the linesmen and ref aren't up to the job, get rid. There's too much money at stake now in football. "Swings & roundabouts" isn't a good enough defence any more.

 

If a professional footballer concentrates like hell to keep himself 6 inches onside, and a chartered accountant or petrol pump attendant (no disrespect to either, of course) robs him of a perfectly good goal, then with the technology available today, that's a bl00dy disgrace.

 

I can remember the days when they were all the myopic offspring of single parents. Most of them probably still are.

But in 3 years time, when we are back in the promised land, the officials will be professional, and they will still get it wrong !

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think we probably had the balance of the decisions last night (although I did think we should have had a penalty for hand ball - not seen a replay though so that could be bollix).

 

What I did think needed changing was Parkinson was forever shouting at the lino that every decision he gave in our favour was wrong and having a 'quiet word' with him wheneevr he was close. I do think PP 'got' to the lino in the end and smirked triumphantly when the lino gave a clearly wrong throw in decision Charton's way.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Time to scrap offside law?

 

No i don't think so Duncan, time to use technology available and employ a video referee..........controversial i know, but i feel it can be used without causing too many hold-ups in the game.

 

 

In hindsight i think what i have just said is a load of rubbish, it would not work for the offside law.Other incidents maybe.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's the whole 'interfering/not interfering with play' malarky the 'first' and 'second' phase ball ( which I thought was Rugby ), and whether the player is 'live', ( doubtful for some - at least they are probably brain dead ), or not at the time the ball is played.

 

I think Bill Shankly's "Any player of mine who isn't interfering with play doesn't deserve to be on the pitch" sets the right tone. Go back to the basic if you have only 1 opponent between you and the goal when the ball is played forward, you are offside. Simples. And if there is any doubt about the buildup when a goal is scored, go to a TV replay, they do it in Rugby.

 

Technically it's 2, because the goalkeeper may not always be on his goal line.

 

But that apart, I'm with you. And forget this "not interfering with play" crap. As a defender how the hell are you supposed to try and second-guess the ref's opinion on whether that wide winger is interfering or not when you step up to play the central striker offside? It makes marshalling a defence these days ridiculous guess-work.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Interestingly, I also thought Lallana was offside when he received the ball from Papa Waigo and laid it off to Lambert to make it 2-0. Will be interesting to see if there's a replay from the right angle to prove/disprove that when I watch the re-run when I get home tonight.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Technically it's 2, because the goalkeeper may not always be on his goal line.

 

But that apart, I'm with you. And forget this "not interfering with play" crap. As a defender how the hell are you supposed to try and second-guess the ref's opinion on whether that wide winger is interfering or not when you step up to play the central striker offside? It makes marshalling a defence these days ridiculous guess-work.

 

I agree WGS, summed it up perfectly for me when he said if you are on the pitch, you are interfering.He was talking about a game at Old Trafford when we were the victim of an offside goal by Ruud Van Nisteroy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You could divide the pitch into quarters and double the number of linesmen. Should help them keep up with play.

 

Scrapping the rule would be silly IMO. There's nothing that says "going to the footy" more than screaming at some incompetent official.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How about making the officials do their job properly, and taking them to task if they **** it up. The FL/FA/PL are far too protective towards them.

 

If the linesmen and ref aren't up to the job, get rid. There's too much money at stake now in football. "Swings & roundabouts" isn't a good enough defence any more.

 

If a professional footballer concentrates like hell to keep himself 6 inches onside, and a chartered accountant or petrol pump attendant (no disrespect to either, of course) robs him of a perfectly good goal, then with the technology available today, that's a bl00dy disgrace.

 

I can remember the days when they were all the myopic offspring of single parents. Most of them probably still are.

 

And it is this sort of attitude on why there is such a poor standard of refs ( at least according to the 'experts') So you say get rid, and replace them with whom exactly? I suggest perhaps you go and volunteer your time in becoming the ref, with a greater pool of refs the standard would obviously improve, however its time thats ***** like yourself actually gave them a bit of actual respect. As for your uncalled comment on petrol pump attendants, I was a ref for quite a few a few years, reffing at a decent level (quit due to undeserved abuse) and I'm an environmental scientist, hardly a low class job. Also remember that the players are getting paid ridiculously large amounts in comparison to the ref so each of their mistakes should be focused upon more rather then the ref.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Definitely NO to changing the offside law. If that happened then you'd soon have America wanting 4 quarters, bigger goals and the much joked about 'multi-ball' if the game is a draw at 90 mins.

 

The one thing I think should be done is have a separate time keeper. You have a big digital clock that counts down from 45.00. When there is a substitution, goal or injury then it gets stopped. The whole crowd can see it. Both managers can see it. When it hit's 0.00 the game is over - end of. You only allow extra time for a penalty to be taken.

 

It is one person's job to operate this clock. That is all they do. It is not a law change so wouldn't be too controversial for 99% of teams. Only Man Utd & Liverpool would vote against it because they are used to being given extra time at home if they are behind. This idea would cut all that out. Simple.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dopey idea.

 

The off-side rule is the whole point of football. You have to get through the opposition team to score a goal by passing or dribbing through their last line of defence. Not booting the ball to someone already the other side of their last line of defence.

 

If you remove the offside rule then the whole game becomes some kind of kicking competition with five attackers in the box with "quarterbacks" booting the ball in and goal hangers looking for scraps.

 

How can someone who is a bloody football historian not understand that. Maybe you need to find an aussie rules team to support.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And it is this sort of attitude on why there is such a poor standard of refs ( at least according to the 'experts') So you say get rid, and replace them with whom exactly? I suggest perhaps you go and volunteer your time in becoming the ref, with a greater pool of refs the standard would obviously improve, however its time thats ***** like yourself actually gave them a bit of actual respect. As for your uncalled comment on petrol pump attendants, I was a ref for quite a few a few years, reffing at a decent level (quit due to undeserved abuse) and I'm an environmental scientist, hardly a low class job. Also remember that the players are getting paid ridiculously large amounts in comparison to the ref so each of their mistakes should be focused upon more rather then the ref.

Your post just reminds me why there is a problem with some of them.

 

IMHO of course.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The rule should not be removed - it is there for a good reason in tersm of making the game a better spectacle. However, the technology is now available to ensure mistakes are not made, so this should be introduced as soon as possible. Fact is most of the time, linos are just not going to be able to keep up with modern athletic footballers and will miss out or mess up on essential decisions.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The law isn't the problem, the enforcement of the law is the problem. You can't scrap it as it will leave a situation where players camp out in the opposition half.

 

With all the technology available today, I'm sure there is a better way than simply getting rid of it.

 

 

exactly

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I run the line for my boys team, its a very hard thing to do and every week i look back at a one or two decisions and wonder if i was right. We have a couple of pocket rockets who are always being flagged offside because the lino can't keep up. Best thing to do is if the player is off then thats it. this 1st stage and 2nd stage of play is a nightmare to manage.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You could divide the pitch into quarters and double the number of linesmen. Should help them keep up with play.

 

 

Actually this is quite a good idea. Considering that the 'per match' cost of 22 average players even in League 1 is probably in the order of £50,000, the cost of a couple of extra Linos per match is insignificant. Miniscule when measured against PL wages.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Perhaps FF is doing a 19C and creating a deliberately provocative headline? You can't seriously want to scrap the offside law? Seriously?

 

That's what I thought!!

 

If you want to see how it would work try watching basketball!

 

Most Americans (over 40) don't understand offside and this must continue.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There are many points here and they have all been debated to death before. Two-dimensional video evidence is often worse than the close-up eye-witness who is better able to judge momentum and movement. There must be one set of laws for football at all levels and in all countries so that rules out the video referee. There have been many false decisions in rugby where this has been used. The 'Hawkeye' that is used in cricket is presented as technical fact when it is only a mechanical prediction of where the ball is likely to go.

 

Interpretation of 'Interfering with play' is the big problem. The referee is in the best position to judge whether a player is interfering but the assistant on the line can only judge whether the player is in an offside position. The definition of 'interfering' has changed several times in the past few seasons. As an ex-fullback, I would prefer that we went back to the old methods.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The law isn't the problem, the enforcement of the law is the problem. You can't scrap it as it will leave a situation where players camp out in the opposition half.

 

With all the technology available today, I'm sure there is a better way than simply getting rid of it.

 

Yes, it's called USING the technology available. With all games filmed, it would only take a second for a 4th official with the technology to tell the ref (all miked up) if there was an offside or not. It would end defenders stood still appealing, and all would play on. Sometimes it would be ruled out. Not saying get rid of linesmen, just that they should have the authority to refer it to the 4th official in marginal cases .... just like cricket umpires.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dopey idea.

 

The off-side rule is the whole point of football. You have to get through the opposition team to score a goal by passing or dribbing through their last line of defence. Not booting the ball to someone already the other side of their last line of defence.

 

If you remove the offside rule then the whole game becomes some kind of kicking competition with five attackers in the box with "quarterbacks" booting the ball in and goal hangers looking for scraps.

 

How can someone who is a bloody football historian not understand that. Maybe you need to find an aussie rules team to support.

 

Good to see you still resort to personal insults to emphasise your greater knowledge.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Perhaps FF is doing a 19C and creating a deliberately provocative headline? You can't seriously want to scrap the offside law? Seriously?

 

Well it was introduced over 100 years ago to stop goal hanging and whilst I accept there might be a need to keep parts of it (maybe inside the penalty area) I can't see the point keeping a law that is physically impossible to implement correctly. Even if Charlton's goal was OK because we had a man on the line the asst ref wa sin no position to make a judgement as he was nowhere near up with play.

 

Its a bit like the rule that states there is no standing in Premiership stadiums. Impossible to fully implement or police but rather than adjust the rule what do the governments and officials do? They pretend it isn't happening. Our stadia now are more unsafe than they were before all seaters, as standing amid rows of seats must be a hazard.

 

I say it again - the offside rule is not being properly managed and unless they find some way of using technology I would rather do without - at least let's experiment.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think you'd be mad to get rid of the offside rule and I don't think video refs are the solution either, as when it comes to offside (a frequent call) it would hold up play far too much.

 

Personally I just wish they would be a bit looser when it comes to offside, the current rule is that 'when in doubt give the advantage to the attacking team'. It's simple, if the linesmen or ref think it's too close to call then wave play on. When it's pretty touch and go whether someone is on or off then you shouldn't see the attacking team penalised.

 

In regard to the video technology debate in general, I think it's mad that we don't have a video referee for penalty shouts and disallowed goals. There are some awful referees out there but to be fair it's impossible for one man on the pitch to get it right all the time, ref's need to feel confident that in situations where they are unsure they have a backup to call upon. Too many big games get ruined by poor decisions from the officials and with the amount of money in football at the moment it just isn't acceptable.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The offside was in the build up to thetr goal, not the cross that McKenzie scored from. The lino, or should I call him an ass. ref? didn't notice Youga stood right in front of him.

 

No surprise really as he got virtually every other decision wrong, apart from those where he waited for the ref to call, then waived his flag accordingly.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

to be fair it's impossible for one man on the pitch to get it right all the time, ref's need to feel confident that in situations where they are unsure they have a backup to call upon. Too many big games get ruined by poor decisions from the officials and with the amount of money in football at the moment it just isn't acceptable.

 

Good points. Different game I know, but the NFL run pro and college games with 7 officials. With that many pairs of eyes they don't miss much and the game there has as much money sloshing around as real football over here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Or how about keeping the offside rule but implanting a series of chips into each players ball-playing body parts so that it can be determined electronically whether he is on or offside.

 

It could actually be possible IMO, to put a chip inside a ball, and also to have them sewn into the players kit, say around the neckband. These chips would have to be embedded with the correct programming so that they could transmit where they are in relation to where the ball was when it was last kicked. This could then be flagged to an assistant referee or the ref himself. Of course, some means of ignoring the chips would have to be in place in situations of non-interference with play; second phase stuff, and the last player still being in his own half when the ball is kicked. End of confusion. Now some bright spark can go off and do it. I'll share 5% with Junior Mullet for the idea. ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Good to see you still resort to personal insults to emphasise your greater knowledge.

 

 

Yawn. No response whatsoever on the sensible points made I see, just the usual grandstanding.

 

 

Well it was introduced over 100 years ago to stop goal hanging and whilst I accept there might be a need to keep parts of it (maybe inside the penalty area) I can't see the point keeping a law that is physically impossible to implement correctly.

 

I say it again - the offside rule is not being properly managed and unless they find some way of using technology I would rather do without - at least let's experiment.

 

 

But there are lots of rules that you could say is "physically impossible" to implement correctly unless you want 10 refs all sat round the perimeter like tennis umpires, or every whistle blown (or not blown) is discussed and counter discussed by video refs.

 

Offside is a judgment call made to the best of a linesman's ability, much like all of us make judgment calls in life about things all the time. And life aint perfect, so yearning for every single decision made by a football official to be scientifically perfect is building a ladder to the moon. Pointless.

 

Who wants scientifically perfect football matches? Not me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oh God!!!

'The technology in football debate.'

 

I go to football to be entertained. And poor referees and linos provide part of that entertainment.

We all spend a lot of time hurling abuse at the officials......and we love doing it.

Now where would the fun be, if you had to wait for a computer to tell you if a ball crossed the line, or if a player was offside?

.......please wait....loading......

Jog on! I love sh1t refs and linos.......

 

This whole technology in football issue is for the armchair fans sat at home watching on TV.......Personally, I shall be at the game shouting at the ref, informing him to wake up or feck off!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...