another much mis-understood point is the 'at the moment the ball is played' bit. It doesn't say 'played FORWARD'. There are situations when the ball can be played BACKWARDS and a player is offside.
Stay with this.
A referees checklist is: Was the player in the opponents half? Was the player in front of the ball? Was the player interfering with play or seeking to gain an advantage (active) ? Were there less than two defenders between the player and the goal line?
So there is a corner, a hairy center half from the attacking side is jumping up and down in front of the defending goalkeeper, there is a short corner played, all the defenders bar the goalkeeper charge out, leaving the center half still jumping up and down around the keeper. The attacker receiving the corner (the corner taker has rushed back parallel to the defenders), slants the ball back to the edge of the area (when the ball is played!), and at that moment the center half is OFFSIDE.
I should add the goalkeeper and hairy center half are on the goaline, and the forward receiving the short corner is a couple of meters in front of the goaline.
Surely Seth he is only offside if the ball gets played to him though?
If he just moved out of the goalkeeper's way and someone banged the ball into the top right hand side the goal would be given. I understand it being disallowed if he is blocking the GK's view though.
What you don't say is whether he is penalised for being in an offside postion or is in an offside position. It's important to make the distinction as law 11 states 'It is not an offence in itself to be in an offisde position'.
In your example, while he is in an offside position throughout, he is at no time committing an offence. The fact the player was standing next to the goalkeeper does not, as far as the offside law is concerned, make him involved in active play and the fact the ball is played in the opposite direction further underlines this. The only time he could be penalised is, assuming the ball is then played (shot) toward the goal by his own player, if he is in the opinion of the referee, involved in active play.
When you say a player is offside it's important to make it clear whether he is just in an offside position or is being penalised for being in an offisde position.
[cite]Posted By: WSS[/cite]Surely Seth he is only offside if the ball gets played to him though?
If he just moved out of the goalkeeper's way and someone banged the ball into the top right hand side the goal would be given. I understand it being disallowed if he is blocking the GK's view though.
well are you only involved in active play if in control of the ball or receiving a pass? The Center half is active in as much as he prevents the keeper seeing whats going on, and is a blimming big obstruction for the keeper to get past, and dive at the feet of any onrushing forward? Isn't that the center half being active within the play?
One thing that I do fail to see the logic of ........ a player in an offside position close to a defender, is often deemed by the referee to be inactive.
But the very presence of the attacker is a constant distraction to the defender, and therefore (only in my opinion, I know) is influencing the game, even if the referee has deemed him inactive.
You only have to play the game to know what I mean - any defender will tell you this.
Until the active/inactive change to the offside law, the law itself was clear - any player in an offside position was always ruled offside (except as specified in the law) but now varies according to the referee's own personal interpretation.
[cite]Posted By: seth plum[/cite]well are you only involved in active play if in control of the ball or receiving a pass?
Definitely not. A couple of seasons ago FIFA released their usual pre-season list of changes to the Laws and one of the changes was to law 11 - a player would only be penalised for being in an offisde position on receipt of the ball.
That law change was dispensed with before the season even started, to be replaced by what we have now.
It was a pretty dumb proposal in fact. I refereed one preseason friendly with it in place and there was an incident where a long ball was played forward from the attackers half, he was already in an offside position just inside the opposition's half but we had to let play go until he touched it just outside the penalty area.
Bear in mind the resulting free-kick is taken from the point where the offending player is when he was penalised, the defending team lost quite a lot of ground on this occasion.
[cite]Posted By: Oggy Red[/cite]One thing that I do fail to see the logic of ........ a player in an offside position close to a defender, is often deemed by the referee to be inactive.
Butthe very presence of the attacker is a constant distraction to the defender, and therefore (only in my opinion, I know) is influencing the game, even if the referee has deemed him inactive.
Agree. Definitely one for the law makers that one, alas it's the referee that cops it every time.
I don't understand why this is difficult to grasp. The ref made a ricket - the lino clearly thought the ball came off a Burnley head, hence the flag for offside. The ref either wasn't paying attention (leaving it up to the linesman) or for whatever reason wasn't concentrating properly. After the goal was given he then went to the lino afterward to ask him why he'd stuck his flag up. At that point the lino told him he thought it hit the Burnley player's shwede - which would have made it offside. The ref decided to agree with him - probably thinking that the lino had a better view of it. Anything they might have said either to the Burnley players at the time or to anyone else after the game is clearly a result of them panicking, realising they'd made a ricket and concocting some old bollocks about the 'second phase of play' to try and save their own arses.
We were ridiculously lucky - lets leave it at that and move on. if people think that decision was bad I dread to think how they reacted when the worst lino decision I can remember at the Valley was allowed to stand (Ashley Ward scoring from at least three yeards offside the first year we went up to the prem)
Oggy, the ref did see the flag and over-ruled it, signalling play on at the time. He even pointed back to the middle, giving the goal, before going over to talk to the lino after some gentle persuasion by our boys. Then he corrected the decision. Although he was right to do so, it felt ridiculously lucky at the time.
Mind you, we didn't exactly capitalise on the luck, but carried on playing in a day dream until we did let them score...
The simple fact is the law states 'in the opinion of the referee'. Like it or not this means interpretation comes into it so it could've gone either way and we're lucky it went for us. If the decision had gone the other way the ref could've jusitifed it just as easily.
[cite]Posted By: C_f_W[/cite]The simple fact is the law states 'in the opinion of the referee'. Like it or not this means interpretation comes into it so it could've gone either way and we're lucky it went for us. If the decision had gone the other way the ref could've jusitifed it just as easily.
Comments
Stay with this.
A referees checklist is:
Was the player in the opponents half?
Was the player in front of the ball?
Was the player interfering with play or seeking to gain an advantage (active) ?
Were there less than two defenders between the player and the goal line?
So there is a corner, a hairy center half from the attacking side is jumping up and down in front of the defending goalkeeper, there is a short corner played, all the defenders bar the goalkeeper charge out, leaving the center half still jumping up and down around the keeper. The attacker receiving the corner (the corner taker has rushed back parallel to the defenders), slants the ball back to the edge of the area (when the ball is played!), and at that moment the center half is OFFSIDE.
Strange but true.
Seth
If he just moved out of the goalkeeper's way and someone banged the ball into the top right hand side the goal would be given. I understand it being disallowed if he is blocking the GK's view though.
In your example, while he is in an offside position throughout, he is at no time committing an offence. The fact the player was standing next to the goalkeeper does not, as far as the offside law is concerned, make him involved in active play and the fact the ball is played in the opposite direction further underlines this. The only time he could be penalised is, assuming the ball is then played (shot) toward the goal by his own player, if he is in the opinion of the referee, involved in active play.
When you say a player is offside it's important to make it clear whether he is just in an offside position or is being penalised for being in an offisde position.
But he might have been played on....LOL!!
It all comes down to interpretation.
But the very presence of the attacker is a constant distraction to the defender, and therefore (only in my opinion, I know) is influencing the game, even if the referee has deemed him inactive.
You only have to play the game to know what I mean - any defender will tell you this.
Until the active/inactive change to the offside law, the law itself was clear - any player in an offside position was always ruled offside (except as specified in the law) but now varies according to the referee's own personal interpretation.
That law change was dispensed with before the season even started, to be replaced by what we have now.
It was a pretty dumb proposal in fact. I refereed one preseason friendly with it in place and there was an incident where a long ball was played forward from the attackers half, he was already in an offside position just inside the opposition's half but we had to let play go until he touched it just outside the penalty area.
Bear in mind the resulting free-kick is taken from the point where the offending player is when he was penalised, the defending team lost quite a lot of ground on this occasion.
Excuse me, I understand it perfectly.
Well, I did until I read all this...! ;-)
;o)
We were ridiculously lucky - lets leave it at that and move on. if people think that decision was bad I dread to think how they reacted when the worst lino decision I can remember at the Valley was allowed to stand (Ashley Ward scoring from at least three yeards offside the first year we went up to the prem)
The lino had a clear view, saw the Burnley player in an offside position and active when the ball was played - and signalled immediately.
And TV highlights proved he was correct at the time.
The referee didn't have the same view as his assisant, didn't see the flag - but had the common sense to communicate with his linesman.
Nothing ridiculously lucky about the correct decision being made and the officials doing their job sensibly.
Mind you, we didn't exactly capitalise on the luck, but carried on playing in a day dream until we did let them score...
Correct...we were lucky on this occasion.
They're not Chirpy's legs there are they?