Remove the offside rule

[Yorkshire Saint]

https://www.skysports.com/football/news/11095/12249982/marco-van-basten-on-the-offside-law-why-it-should-be-scrapped-and-the-hockey-precedent-that-might-surprise

Interesting concept. Not sure i like the thought of it but would certainly remove a lot of frustration and would be a lesser evil than the emotive VAR show we have now. 

It would probably be good for teams with Central defenders with no pace.... oh wait, maybe it is a great idea.

I hear Lineker is pushing hard for free kicks not waiting for the whistle and a player can play a free kick to himself as well as Wenger pushing for kickins rather than throwins...

The beautiful game hey 

[JustinSFC]

They don't need to remove it, the thing that pisses me off about it is they no longer put the flag up when the offence happens.

They're waiting until the end of play and I cannot get my head around why.

[Pilchards]

4 minutes ago, JustinSFC said:

They don't need to remove it, the thing that pisses me off about it is they no longer put the flag up when the offence happens.

They're waiting until the end of play and I cannot get my head around why.

That’s too stupid.

I say the offside rule only comes in effect from the penalty area so it doesn’t distract the keeper.

Also a 10 minutes sin bin for a dissent to the officials or the 10 yard back rule.

I hate the fact a player can tell the official to fuck off while in Rugby they are even scared to talk to him.

[LiberalCommunist]

Feels like we are living in the experimental age of football. Where changing rules are sucking the fun out of football.

I don't trust they will implement anything for the betterment of the game. 

[Saint Garrett]

2 hours ago, Nick75Sfc said:

https://www.skysports.com/football/news/11095/12249982/marco-van-basten-on-the-offside-law-why-it-should-be-scrapped-and-the-hockey-precedent-that-might-surprise

Interesting concept. Not sure i like the thought of it but would certainly remove a lot of frustration and would be a lesser evil than the emotive VAR show we have now. 

It would probably be good for teams with Central defenders with no pace.... oh wait, maybe it is a great idea.

I hear Lineker is pushing hard for free kicks not waiting for the whistle and a player can play a free kick to himself as well as Wenger pushing for kickins rather than throwins...

The beautiful game hey 

Both rules were introduced in field hockey, appreciate its not the same game...but it stopped a lot of the whining and fake injruies when a player can play a quick free kick to himself without the whistle having to go, you soon get no-one arguing with the ref.

Would be interesting to see  how getting rid of offside would affect the game tactically.

[Minsk]

All they need to do (in regard to the VAR farce) is make the rule state that an attacker is only offside if there entire FOOT is ahead of the defender's FOOT. i.e. There is clear daylight between the two. Not because of fingertips, shirt sleeves, armpits, arse, big toe or because the attacker takes a bigger size boot than the defender; or that the attacker is pointing to where he wants the ball; or that the attacker is leaning forward as he is sprinting on to the ball. I could go on but I'm sure you get my drift.

[eelpie]

2 hours ago, Pilchards said:

That’s too stupid.

I say the offside rule only comes in effect from the penalty area so it doesn’t distract the keeper.

Also a 10 minutes sin bin for a dissent to the officials or the 10 yard back rule.

I hate the fact a player can tell the official to fuck off while in Rugby they are even scared to talk to him.

How about a ten minute sin bin for the officials?

[Whitey Grandad]

2 hours ago, JustinSFC said:

They don't need to remove it, the thing that pisses me off about it is they no longer put the flag up when the offence happens.

They're waiting until the end of play and I cannot get my head around why.

They keep the flag down in case they make a mistake and raise it when they shouldn’t which might rule out an otherwise valid goal.

I hate it too, but there again I also hate VAR.

[kenneth_kenobi]

I have seen experimental games with no offside and they were SO boring!!  No through balls to chase, no wing play, it just ended up with strikers lurking near goal, so defenders marking them, and a couple of midfielders knocking it about near halfway and taking ridiculous long range shots.

[kenneth_kenobi]

57 minutes ago, Minsk said:

All they need to do (in regard to the VAR farce) is make the rule state that an attacker is only offside if there entire FOOT is ahead of the defender's FOOT. i.e. There is clear daylight between the two. Not because of fingertips, shirt sleeves, armpits, arse, big toe or because the attacker takes a bigger size boot than the defender; or that the attacker is pointing to where he wants the ball; or that the attacker is leaning forward as he is sprinting on to the ball. I could go on but I'm sure you get my drift.

Only a few years ago they introduced the ruling that there had to be clear daylight between them for it to be offside, to give strikers any advantage.  That all went out the window when these ridiculous VAR rules came in.

[Saint86]

1 hour ago, Minsk said:

All they need to do (in regard to the VAR farce) is make the rule state that an attacker is only offside if there entire FOOT is ahead of the defender's FOOT. i.e. There is clear daylight between the two. Not because of fingertips, shirt sleeves, armpits, arse, big toe or because the attacker takes a bigger size boot than the defender; or that the attacker is pointing to where he wants the ball; or that the attacker is leaning forward as he is sprinting on to the ball. I could go on but I'm sure you get my drift.

Honestly think about it. They'll just draw the same lines to determine if there is clear daylight, rather that if there is an armpit hair in front of the other players body 🙈. It will make no difference.

Common sense should be applied in that if it is too tight to clearly determine offside, the goal stands etc. And this is what I struggle to understand, penalties, red cards, goals etc. It has to be clear and obvious errors for VAR to correct the decision. But for offside, they'll draw the most arbitrary lines (often with an on screen line weight inaccuracy of a couple of inches) to deem players offside by millimetres - Its nonsense as it stands! The rules shouldn't change to suit VAR, VAR (and its implementation) should be changed to suit the rules. 

Edited 25 March, 2021 by Saint86

[Totton Saint]

3 hours ago, Pilchards said:

That’s too stupid.

I say the offside rule only comes in effect from the penalty area so it doesn’t distract the keeper.

Also a 10 minutes sin bin for a dissent to the officials or the 10 yard back rule.

I hate the fact a player can tell the official to fuck off while in Rugby they are even scared to talk to him.

Players kneel for BLM but on the other hand most have no respect for the refs. 

[Clapham Saint]

33 minutes ago, Saint86 said:

Honestly think about it. They'll just draw the same lines to determine if there is clear daylight, rather that if there is an armpit hair in front of the other players body 🙈. It will make no difference.

Common sense should be applied in that if it is too tight to clearly determine offside, the goal stands etc. And this is what I struggle to understand, penalties, red cards, goals etc. It has to be clear and obvious errors for VAR to correct the decision. But for offside, they'll draw the most arbitrary lines (often with an on screen line weight inaccuracy of a couple of inches) to deem players offside by millimetres - Its nonsense as it stands! The rules shouldn't change to suit VAR, VAR (and its implementation) should be changed to suit the rules. 

Basically - if you need to draw lines to be able to tell then it is automatically onside.  Sounds doable to me.

[Behind Enemy Lines]

I’ve said for years that they should try and see how it goes with no offside. It would either be amazing, like in hockey, or rubbish, so could easily be brought back. But if it works, it’s the end of endless debates. 

My thoughts on offside and VAR;

Off-side should always favour the attacker. If it’s so marginal, then it goes with the attacker. If they do persist in analysing offsides, then there should be a time limit, say 20 seconds. If they can’t decide, then it’s onside. 

The VAR officials name shouldn’t be broadcast or known to the on-field ref, so as to try and eradicate the ‘mates look after each other scenario’. Of course, independent adjudicators should ensure proper checks are carried out for each check. Also, does it need to be an experienced ref as such to determine what rule has/hasn’t been broken?

But for me, the use of VAR has to change. It should be used to decide if a ball did or didn’t go over the line. An off the ball incident that the ref didn’t see. 
 

Penalty calls, fouls, offsides etc should go back to the old days off the on field officials to keep the pace of the game  yes, as before, mistakes will be made, but it’s part of the game. If officials were made to review and explain decisions, and constant bad officiating gets punished, hopefully this will improve things .

And to keep better officials, they should have more protection from players. As the article says, no swearing etc at officials. Free kicks taken straight away, to yourself if you can. Some very good ideas in that article  

 

[kenneth_kenobi]

1 minute ago, Behind Enemy Lines said:

I’ve said for years that they should try and see how it goes with no offside. It would either be amazing, like in hockey, or rubbish, so could easily be brought back. But if it works, it’s the end of endless debates. 

My thoughts on offside and VAR;

Off-side should always favour the attacker. If it’s so marginal, then it goes with the attacker. If they do persist in analysing offsides, then there should be a time limit, say 20 seconds. If they can’t decide, then it’s onside. 

The VAR officials name shouldn’t be broadcast or known to the on-field ref, so as to try and eradicate the ‘mates look after each other scenario’. Of course, independent adjudicators should ensure proper checks are carried out for each check. Also, does it need to be an experienced ref as such to determine what rule has/hasn’t been broken?

But for me, the use of VAR has to change. It should be used to decide if a ball did or didn’t go over the line. An off the ball incident that the ref didn’t see. 
 

Penalty calls, fouls, offsides etc should go back to the old days off the on field officials to keep the pace of the game  yes, as before, mistakes will be made, but it’s part of the game. If officials were made to review and explain decisions, and constant bad officiating gets punished, hopefully this will improve things .

And to keep better officials, they should have more protection from players. As the article says, no swearing etc at officials. Free kicks taken straight away, to yourself if you can. Some very good ideas in that article  

 

Agree with all the VAR stuff.  But as I said above, I have seen games with no offside and it was woeful, takes all the exciting parts out of the game - just end up with midfielders knocking it about and taking long-range shots, as there is no space behind the defence.

[Lord Duckhunter]

How does it work if there’s a free kick on the edge of the area. The attacking team could put 8 players in the 6 yard box. 

[Behind Enemy Lines]

4 minutes ago, kenneth_kenobi said:

Agree with all the VAR stuff.  But as I said above, I have seen games with no offside and it was woeful, takes all the exciting parts out of the game - just end up with midfielders knocking it about and taking long-range shots, as there is no space behind the defence.

May I ask what level this was at? I think it would be interesting two have two professional teams give it a go. 
 

2 minutes ago, Lord Duckhunter said:

How does it work if there’s a free kick on the edge of the area. The attacking team could put 8 players in the 6 yard box. 

That would be interesting. It would make it very hard in such a congested area for someone to take the shot. Of the attacking team, they will need to keep some players back for fear of the counter attack. 
 

Reasons like this I would like to see a few friendlies with professional teams give it a go. 

[Mystic Force]

The offside rule was added to make the game more entertaining, something might have changed in over 100 years but I doubt it. I think the best way would be to put tracking devices on the players then a computer can decide if the tracked part of the body is offside. Then we all get to argue if the tracker needs to be on a left nut or a shoulder or a foot.

[SFC Forever]

If a linesman flags for offside and ref stops game what would be outcome if var says player was in fact onside. 

Linesmen afraid to look ridiculous perhaps reason for delaying flagging

[Whitey Grandad]

41 minutes ago, SFC Forever said:

If a linesman flags for offside and ref stops game what would be outcome if var says player was in fact onside. 

Linesmen afraid to look ridiculous perhaps reason for delaying flagging

They are instructed not to flag by a higher authority.

[rallyboy]

The assistant fucked up Ings' goal v Villa by flagging when he wasn't supposed to, they can't impose the current rules so let's not confuse them with changes.

As for no offside, bonkers.

Use the area, or a third defender, but no restriction at all would be a comedy circus.

And while we're on time-wasting, if you want to speed up games you should get 20 seconds to take a corner, goalkick or a throw, that's easily long enough - and when a goal is scored the opposition can kick off after 30 or 45 secs, so stop all the pissing about with your long drawn out timewasting celebrations.

😡

[Lord Duckhunter]

1 hour ago, Mystic Force said:

I think the best way would be to put tracking devices on the players then a computer can decide if the tracked part of the body is offside. Then we all get to argue if the tracker needs to be on a left nut or a shoulder or a foot.

They are about to trail this, it’s been delayed because of Covid, but is back on agenda.  AI will track each player and offside will instantly buzz on an officials monitor,  as it does with goal line at the moment. 

[ChrisPY]

Wouldn’t change the law for offsides. Make the lines drawn by VAR the equivalent of say 30cm in width and if there’s any overlap, then it’s onside to take into account the margin for error.

Quick free kicks should always be allowed unless an injured player needs treatment (they’d then leave the pitch for the free kick to hopefully stop the defending team from faking injury). The advantage needs to be with the team who had the foul committed against them.

[CB Fry]

Sounds mental to me and would change the entire point of the sport.

Offside is the rule that makes football, football. Its fundamental. I don't get why some people think it is an add-on or a technicality. It is the game.

If you take it away you change the entire dynamic of the game because you no longer have to pass through or beat the other team, just can try and completely bypass them by positioning your striker in their box from the kick off, and bomb the ball in. Have your wingers not needing to beat the offside trap to gain space down the channels but to be down near the corner flags from the off. 

Obviously the defense would respond to this and all of a sudden the teams would have to devise "plays" more like American Football to get the ball to those advanced players. The valued assets would be long cross field passing and then pure pace not to beat offside traps as such but just to run into space at the right time. And goal hanging, like during World Cup Singles at school.

Would probably suit James Ward-Prowse nicely. And Jonathan Forte.

Would be a completely different sport within five years.

Who knows might be interesting. Actually let's do it.

[skintsaint]

Maybe they should bring in a rule where attacking players can only be offside in the opposition half or something....i dunno. 🙄

[Dark Munster]

15 hours ago, Minsk said:

All they need to do (in regard to the VAR farce) is make the rule state that an attacker is only offside if there entire FOOT is ahead of the defender's FOOT. i.e. There is clear daylight between the two. Not because of fingertips, shirt sleeves, armpits, arse, big toe or because the attacker takes a bigger size boot than the defender; or that the attacker is pointing to where he wants the ball; or that the attacker is leaning forward as he is sprinting on to the ball. I could go on but I'm sure you get my drift.

Yes, that's what I and a few others have been saying for a while now. In ice hockey they have an offside rule about not entering the attacking zone before the puck, and what do they use to measure this? Skates (not the ones down the road). Why, because it's simpler. They don't care where the hockey stick is, or the arm etc. Such a simple change and will make it easier to implement.

Ice Hockey: A player is judged to be offside if both of their skates completely cross the blue line dividing their offensive zone from the neutral zone before the puck completely crosses the same line. In both organizations, it is the position of a player's skates that are important.

[Dark Munster]

13 hours ago, Saint86 said:

Honestly think about it. They'll just draw the same lines to determine if there is clear daylight, rather that if there is an armpit hair in front of the other players body 🙈. It will make no difference.

Common sense should be applied in that if it is too tight to clearly determine offside, the goal stands etc. And this is what I struggle to understand, penalties, red cards, goals etc. It has to be clear and obvious errors for VAR to correct the decision. But for offside, they'll draw the most arbitrary lines (often with an on screen line weight inaccuracy of a couple of inches) to deem players offside by millimetres - Its nonsense as it stands! The rules shouldn't change to suit VAR, VAR (and its implementation) should be changed to suit the rules. 

Rubbish. It'll make it much easier to implement, only one thing to look at (well two, attacker's and defender's foot). Yes there will be close calls, but less of them. And as others have said, give VAR 20 or 30 seconds to decide. After that the decision goes to the attacker.

[Fan The Flames]

Offside wasn't introduced, it's always been there. Over the years it has become less stringent and the balance has always moved in favour of the attackers, it's gone from 3 defenders down to 1, then from behind the defeader (remember the 80's Sunday League shouts of 'I can see daylight' when their dodgy linesman flagged your team offside) to in line with defenders. The only place to go is to allow attackers to be in line but infront of defenders. Anything else and there is no offside and as Fry says and it becomes a different game.

The flag has to stay down until the end of the move otherwise the advantage is with the defender. When a goal is scored the defence still has a chance to get it struck off by VAR, if a linesman wrongly flags an onside move, the attack has no recourse. There are some obvious ones that they could flag a bit quicker. This could be improved

Where ever you draw the line there will be slow laborious marginal calls.

Foorball has moved to a system of binary rules; over the goal line or not, handball or not, offside or not, to provide the consistency that managers and pundits always called for and I guess in part to remove the accusation of bias. It works for some rules like goal line decisions but it clearly doesn't work for handball. It should work for offside but the technology isn't good enough.

This is the main problem with VAR for offside at the moment, is the insistence by the FA that it can make the right call when it really can't and we can all see it can't. They should just acknowledge this and then make a decision what to do in the grey area, avantage to the defence or advantage to attack. I think people would accept it better.

VAR is killing the celebration of a goal, in a low scoring sport to damage your usp is utter madness.

Football was a game of few rules and it has to move back to that and maybe the best way is to allow refs to be subjective again, ref the match and ref the moment. The intrinsic problem with reffing games is that it's run by refs and we all know you have to be a twat to be a ref, they are less in love with the game and more in love with their knowledge of the laws. So what ever system is employed they will fuck it up.

[Whitey Grandad]

18 minutes ago, Fan The Flames said:

Offside wasn't introduced, it's always been there. Over the years it has become less stringent and the balance has always moved in favour of the attackers, it's gone from 3 defenders down to 1, then from behind the defeader (remember the 80's Sunday League shouts of 'I can see daylight' when their dodgy linesman flagged your team offside) to in line with defenders. The only place to go is to allow attackers to be in line but infront of defenders. Anything else and there is no offside and as Fry says and it becomes a different game.

The flag has to stay down until the end of the move otherwise the advantage is with the defender. When a goal is scored the defence still has a chance to get it struck off by VAR, if a linesman wrongly flags an onside move, the attack has no recourse. There are some obvious ones that they could flag a bit quicker. This could be improved

Where ever you draw the line there will be slow laborious marginal calls.

Foorball has moved to a system of binary rules; over the goal line or not, handball or not, offside or not, to provide the consistency that managers and pundits always called for and I guess in part to remove the accusation of bias. It works for some rules like goal line decisions but it clearly doesn't work for handball. It should work for offside but the technology isn't good enough.

This is the main problem with VAR for offside at the moment, is the insistence by the FA that it can make the right call when it really can't and we can all see it can't. They should just acknowledge this and then make a decision what to do in the grey area, avantage to the defence or advantage to attack. I think people would accept it better.

VAR is killing the celebration of a goal, in a low scoring sport to damage your usp is utter madness.

Football was a game of few rules and it has to move back to that and maybe the best way is to allow refs to be subjective again, ref the match and ref the moment. The intrinsic problem with reffing games is that it's run by refs and we all know you have to be a twat to be a ref, they are less in love with the game and more in love with their knowledge of the laws. So what ever system is employed they will fuck it up.

Oi, careful!

I was with you all the way until then. When I was too old to thud around the pitch I took up refereeing because I love the game and I wanted to keep being involved. The best view of the game is from being out there in the middle.

[Fan The Flames]

1 minute ago, Whitey Grandad said:

Oi, careful!

I was with you all the way until then. When I was too old to thud around the pitch I took up refereeing because I love the game and I wanted to keep being involved. The best view of the game is from being out there in the middle.

You were obviously one of the better ones with a higher motivation. I remember the kids at school who became refs and the refs I played with, there were all of a type. Occasionally you would come across a good one and they stood out. You'll have to admit the current elite bunch are a bit shit and Mike Riley isn't fit for purpose.

[Whitey Grandad]

3 minutes ago, Fan The Flames said:

You were obviously one of the better ones with a higher motivation. I remember the kids at school who became refs and the refs I played with, there were all of a type. Occasionally you would come across a good one and they stood out. You'll have to admit the current elite bunch are a bit shit and Mike Riley isn't fit for purpose.

Agreed. Some of them are good, but a lot of them aren’t. It’s like all service industries. Some are in it for the love of what they do. Others do it just for the money. Others because it gives them a sense of power.

[kenneth_kenobi]

On 25/03/2021 at 12:31, Behind Enemy Lines said:

May I ask what level this was at? I think it would be interesting two have two professional teams give it a go. 

It was 2 club sides in Australia, so not top standard but even so pro players - I have never been so bored watching a game, 2 lines on penalty boxes, huge expanse in between with just midfielders, no-one to pass to as they are all pushing up on goal, so 30-40 yard shots - ended 0-0.

 

[offsidetrap]

I'd need a new forum name

[Viking Saint]

On 28/03/2021 at 12:18, Whitey Grandad said:

Agreed. Some of them are good, but a lot of them aren’t. It’s like all service industries. Some are in it for the love of what they do. Others do it just for the money. Others because it gives them a sense of power.

To offer it a slightly different tangent and speaking as a rugby referee, which I've been for over twenty years. I got into reffing when playing wasn't an option anymore, plus as a PE teacher, I worked Saturdays and had to referee school matches. The overwhelming majority of rugby referees across the country are of this nature, ie retired from playing but want to stay involved in the game and put back in. The real point to note however is that those who referee level 3 and above (National League 1, Championship and Premiership) will all be 20-35ish and have committed to refereeing above playing at a young age, been fast-tracked through federation and trained accordingly. If you haven't made level 4 by about age 27, you most probably aren't going to make it, hence why the standard of refereeing is arguably much higher than Football and, by and large, more consistent (unless they're French, but that's another story). 

[cambsaint]

Offside,should e a rule that offside ony applites in the last quarter of the pitch, amd most importantly there must be clear daylight between the players, it wasn't controversial before VAR, the officials usually got it right, and marginal decisisions should always favour the attacker. It's difficult enough to time a run with good defenders and making it so that the tip of your nose can count against you is just ridiculous. we should have a clear understanding that referee's call is the judgement in marginal decisions like cricket. Handball should be an intentional use of the hand or arm to control the ball in the referee's opinion who should be best placed to make that judgement. Immediate yellow card for disrespect to officials, only the captain allowed to question a decision, and sin bin for 15 minutes for twi non dangerous yellow cards, but remainin as red if a tackle deemed dangerous.VAR to stay but all marginal decisions to be left as ref's call.

[Baird of the land]

If they got rid of offside i’d Be tempted to stop following football. Defending is a huge part of the game. I zero for basketball version of the game.Van Basten just wants more goals for the big teams, rather than competitive sport.

 

[Mosin]

1 hour ago, cambsaint said:

Offside,should e a rule that offside ony applites in the last quarter of the pitch, amd most importantly there must be clear daylight between the players, it wasn't controversial before VAR, the officials usually got it right, and marginal decisisions should always favour the attacker. It's difficult enough to time a run with good defenders and making it so that the tip of your nose can count against you is just ridiculous. we should have a clear understanding that referee's call is the judgement in marginal decisions like cricket. Handball should be an intentional use of the hand or arm to control the ball in the referee's opinion who should be best placed to make that judgement. Immediate yellow card for disrespect to officials, only the captain allowed to question a decision, and sin bin for 15 minutes for twi non dangerous yellow cards, but remainin as red if a tackle deemed dangerous.VAR to stay but all marginal decisions to be left as ref's call.

Why should it go it the attackers advantage though? its far harder for a line of defenders to keep that line than it is for an attack to just make sure he keeps him self onside.

football with no offside isnt football.

[Alanh]

I don't think you can get rid of offside completely, but if it is going to be measured by VAR I think they could make a change which would improve things.  If the attacker is deemed offside due to one part of his body being in front of the last defender, then the offside decision is only upheld if that part of the body is used in the subesquent passage of play.  I.e if the shoulder is offside, but he doesn't subesquently play the ball with his shoulder, then the decision is revoked.  If the right foot is offside, and he plays the ball with his right foot, then the decision is upheld.

[Fan The Flames]

15 hours ago, Mosin said:

Why should it go it the attackers advantage though? its far harder for a line of defenders to keep that line than it is for an attack to just make sure he keeps him self onside.

football with no offside isnt football.

Like chips without mayo, isn't chips.

[Dark Munster]

7 hours ago, Alanh said:

I don't think you can get rid of offside completely, but if it is going to be measured by VAR I think they could make a change which would improve things.  If the attacker is deemed offside due to one part of his body being in front of the last defender, then the offside decision is only upheld if that part of the body is used in the subesquent passage of play.  I.e if the shoulder is offside, but he doesn't subesquently play the ball with his shoulder, then the decision is revoked.  If the right foot is offside, and he plays the ball with his right foot, then the decision is upheld.

Too complicated. Use feet only, regardless of what part of the body is used next or for the goal. As they say, K.I.S.S.

[Alanh]

14 hours ago, Dark Munster said:

Too complicated. Use feet only, regardless of what part of the body is used next or for the goal. As they say, K.I.S.S.

Agree with the principle of keeping it simple and that's what the current rule does.  If that was the sole criteria then leave it as it is.