One for the refs

[Caversham Green]

The goal around 0.50 - offside or not?
http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/16673359.stm

I thought the rule was about seeking to gain an advantage, and the interpretation was if he made a move towards the ball he would be offside. As a side issue I thought the guy who scres was also off side, but that's not clear from the footage.

[Hibernian Verse]

You can't really see either, but they both made a move towards the ball anyway so they're both culpable if they were offside.

[HibeeMG]

The Reading manager said afterwards that when he spoke to the ref after the game that there was a new directive saying they should not give offside unless the player actually touched the ball. He was saying that he hadn't heard of that directive and hoped that the other 91 league managers were taking note.

[Caversham Green]

You can't really see either, but they both made a move towards the ball anyway so they're both culpable if they were offside.

I was at the game and I can assure you that the guy who didn't touch the ball was in an offside position - far more so than you can see from the pictures. I'm less sure about the scorer because my eyes were on the first guy.



The Reading manager said afterwards that when he spoke to the ref after the game that there was a new directive saying they should not give offside unless the player actually touched the ball. He was saying that he hadn't heard of that directive and hoped that the other 91 league managers were taking note.

I'm not convinced that there is a new directive, but if there is:

a) Surely the clubs should have been made aware of it and
b) This goal shows it's a daft directive in any case.

[StevieT]

Caversham Green. This document explains the position fairly clearly.

http://www.fifa.com/mm/document/worldfootball/clubfootball/01/37/04/27/interpretation_law11_en.pdf

Page 102 describes interfering with play whereas page 105 shows a diagram and explains a similar position to the one you saw last night.

Obviously if both players were in an offside position then no goal, but remember it is not an offence to be in an offside position.

[Twa Cairpets]

The relevant parts of the law are:


Offence
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

and


Definitions
In the context of Law 11 – Offside, the following definitions apply:
• “nearer to his opponents’ goal line” means that any part of a player’s
head, body or feet is nearer to his opponents’ goal line than both the
ball and the second-last opponent. The arms are not included in this
definition
• “interfering with play” means playing or touching the ball passed or
touched by a team-mate
• “interfering with an opponent” means preventing an opponent
from playing or being able to play the ball by clearly obstructing
the opponent’s line of vision or movements or making a gesture or
movement which, in the opinion of the referee, deceives or distracts an
opponent
• “gaining an advantage by being in that position” means playing a ball
that rebounds to him off a goalpost or the crossbar having been in an
offside position or playing a ball that rebounds to him off an opponent
having been in an offside position

So, technically, the decision is correct, but the directions given to refs is that for example if a player is clear through but obviously offside, award the offside to avoid a last ditch tackle by a keeper for example. You'd be then a sitaution where you may have to book a defender or send them off but still need to award the free kick to the defendign team.

I usually will tend to defend referees but this decision is just plain wrong in my view.

I cant wait for the next time something similar happens in one of my games. Oh joy.:rolleyes:

[Caversham Green]

Caversham Green. This document explains the position fairly clearly.

http://www.fifa.com/mm/document/worldfootball/clubfootball/01/37/04/27/interpretation_law11_en.pdf

Page 102 describes interfering with play whereas page 105 shows a diagram and explains a similar position to the one you saw last night.

Obviously if both players were in an offside position then no goal, but remember it is not an offence to be in an offside position.

Fair enough, it seems the goal was legit if the scorer wasn't in an offside position. The offside guy's action also suggests he knew about this interpretation (or someone else did and gave him a shout). In this case (and others such as blocking the keeper's view) the interpretation doesn't really follow the wording of the law itself as there is no way the guy wasn't "interfering with play" or "seeking to gain an advantage". Are referees obliged to follow these interpretations or can they use their own initiatives in extreme cases (which I think this was)?

Edit: Answered by TwoCarpets as I typed.

[The Green Goblin]

That bit about "gaining an advantage" now... Shortly after the rules were changed some years back, i am sure I remember van nistelroy scoring a goal for holland in the world cup where he was well behind the last defender and walking back after a failed attack, when the ball was won by holland in midfield and played back down the wing, whereupon VN turned round and scored from the resulting cross, having surely "gained an advantage" on his marker, who had further to track back and had little or no chance of blocking the cross or beating VN to the ball. The goal was given though. Does anyone else remember this?

[StevieT]

That bit about "gaining an advantage" now... Shortly after the rules were changed some years back, i am sure I remember van nistelroy scoring a goal for holland in the world cup where he was well behind the last defender and walking back after a failed attack, when the ball was won by holland in midfield and played back down the wing, whereupon VN turned round and scored from the resulting cross, having surely "gained an advantage" on his marker, who had further to track back and had little or no chance of blocking the cross or beating VN to the ball. The goal was given though. Does anyone else remember this?

I think it was Edgar Davids pass to Arjen Robben, maybe against Croatia. Was one of the clips I saw during my referee training.

[Caversham Green]

Just to follow this up, Reading had an almost identical break against Bristol City yesterday and the ref immediately blew for offside - the Reading player never touched the ball in the whole incident. It looked like the right decision and before last week would have passed without comment, but as it was the ref got pelters from the home crowd and McDermott's heid went bright red as he was 'discussing' it with the fourth official.

In a way I have sympathy with both refs involved and I think the directive quoted by our resident refs is faulty and misleading for incidents like this.