Offside

**Joined:** Sat Jun 17, 2006 12:12 pm **Warnings:** 0

Should the offside rule be changed or scrapped?

The offside rule as it stands since the 2004 season:

Code:

It is not an offence in itself to be in an offside position. A player is in an offside position if: 

he is nearer to his opponents’ goal line than both the ball and the second last opponent. 

A player is not in an offside position if 

he is in his own half of the field of play or 
he is level with the second last opponent or 
he is level with the last two opponents. 

And:

Code:

A player in an offside position is only penalised if, at the moment the ball touches or is played by one of his team, he is, in the opinion of the referee, involved in active play by: 
interfering with play or 
interfering with an opponent or 
gaining an advantage by being in that position. 

The old rule was:

Code:

A player is in an offside position if:

he is nearer to his opponents' goal line than both the ball and the second last opponent 

A player in an offside position is only penalised if, at the moment the ball touches or is played by one of his team, he is, in the opinion of the referee, involved in active play by:

interfering with play or

interfering with an opponent or 

gaining an advantage by being in that position

But is there wasnt an offside rule would that just create goalhangers??

TOM22 wrote:

But is there wasnt an offside rule would that just create goalhangers??

That's why I reckon it has to stay. It is a pain though!

**Posted:** Mon Jul 16, 2007 5:34 pm **Author:** £250,000 fan **Post subject:**

I am not sure, I voted for 'Left as it is'

**Joined:** Sat May 19, 2007 6:23 pm **Warnings:** 0

I think we need to have another look at this, following Santa Cruz's goal on Thursday night against Manchester City

**Posted:** Sat Dec 29, 2007 11:39 am **Author:** Noel_Blobby **Post subject:**

It should be left as it is I think. It's really one of the simplest Laws of the Game but people complicate it:

(Took this from a refereeing site)
Basically there are three factors to offside:
1) Is the player in the opponent's half of the field WHEN THE BALL IS PLAYED? This is FACT.
2) Is the player in front of the ball AND the second-last defender (including goalkeeper) WHEN THE BALL IS PLAYED? This is FACT.
3) Is the player interfering with play? This is the REF'S OPINION.

**Joined:** Sat May 19, 2007 6:23 pm **Warnings:** 0

Ref's opinion, exactly. He must have either been a Santa Cruz fan, or was just jealous of Manchester City's perfect home record. Either way, he was wrong for allowing a blatantly offside goal.

**Joined:** Sat Jan 28, 2006 8:00 pm **Warnings:** 0

The question with that goal was whether Dunn was interfering with play (he was onside, Santa Cruz wasn't). I presume the assistant quickly flagged for offside thinking Dunn was indeed interfering with play, but when the cross was headed in by Santa Cruz with Dunn not involved he changed his mind...

Such a change of heart is entirely understandable, and for what it's worth I'd probably say it was a perfectly legal goal, but that rule means the initial decision should have stood.

**Posted:** Sat Dec 29, 2007 1:42 pm **Author:** Noel_Blobby **Post subject:**

Dunn was walking away from goal but TOWARDS the ball. Although he didn't touch it some refs would say it was interfering with play.

Main DOND Site	Play DOND Games	DOND TV Guide	DOND Stats		FAQs	Hall of Fame
Ebay Watch	DOND Merchandise	Be a Contestant	DOND Amazon Store	DOND Blog	Privacy Policy	Contact Us

Offside

Who is online