The Footie Thread

  • Thread starter Thread starter Deleted member 15344
  • Start date Start date
The last change, not tweak to the offside law was over 10-15yrs ago, players have had more than enough time to know them, most were young lads.

I agree the Offside Laws aren’t 100%, but I doubt they ever will or could be.

It's down to interpretation of the rules and we've seen on many occasions how refs interpretate rules differently.

That one last night was ludicrous.
 
Actually the offside laws were extremely clear in the past, maybe 80s?

If someone was offside, they were offside, didn't matter if they were lying in a crumpled heap 50 yards away from the play, they were offside and it was black and white.

Then the "is he interfering with play?" discussions came in so the crumpled mess would be ignored, then it became "active or inactive", then they brought in various phases so you could be inactive in phase 1 so that then you can join in again, and finally we arrived at this mess we're in now.

Apart from someone on the floor with his leg hanging off, if any player offside was flagged, it would eradicate all the issues. They've tried to evolve it but it hasn't really worked.

Yep, for all my playing days someone was always offside or not and as the quote says " if he isn't interfering with play then he shouldn't be playing" . Yes, sometimes someone on the field was clearly not anywhere near the action but the flag would go up, annoying, but only against the person who was offside. I also cannot understand the allowing play to continue when someone is clearly offside and then taking the action back, the referees assistant should just be there to decide on throw ins!
 
Yep, for all my playing days someone was always offside or not and as the quote says " if he isn't interfering with play then he shouldn't be playing" . Yes, sometimes someone on the field was clearly not anywhere near the action but the flag would go up, annoying, but only against the person who was offside. I also cannot understand the allowing play to continue when someone is clearly offside and then taking the action back, the referees assistant should just be there to decide on throw ins!
And even in the championship games I have seen and a couple of cup games recently they don’t even do that if it’s a close call. They wait for the ref to point and then they raise their flag.
 
Actually the offside laws were extremely clear in the past, maybe 80s?

If someone was offside, they were offside, didn't matter if they were lying in a crumpled heap 50 yards away from the play, they were offside and it was black and white.

Then the "is he interfering with play?" discussions came in so the crumpled mess would be ignored, then it became "active or inactive", then they brought in various phases so you could be inactive in phase 1 so that then you can join in again, and finally we arrived at this mess we're in now.

Apart from someone on the floor with his leg hanging off, if any player offside was flagged, it would eradicate all the issues. They've tried to evolve it but it hasn't really worked.
Sorry mate, you’re looking at this through rose tinted glasses, the first issue I can remember with Offside was early to mid 70’s when Leeds v West Brom ( I think) and a player ran from his own half with the ball while one of his team mates was stood clearly offside in the opposition half.

The defence stopped and the player with the ball ran on and scored, this then led to all sorts of complaints, discussions etc.

The biggest issue has been the tweak whether “level” is onside or not.

Edit: Here it is 1971:eek:
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Don't get me wrong, I agree with you and Papas that Watkins was offside. It was the commentator that explained the decision as I did above as to the reason that VAR didn't even look at it. Apparently the law as it stands means that Watkins wasn't offside.

I was wondering what would happen with the Watkins goal that WAS given offside later in the first half, if the ball played through had actually come off the outstretched toe of a defender who was trying to prevent the through ball....from my understanding of the letter of the law then the goal would have stood in that instance.

Football just isn't the same game any more.
 
I don’t follow the issue about the Watkins goal. When the ball was crossed in from the flank he, Watkins, was level or behind the ball? The fact that Schar touches it, doesn’t matter. Am I missing something?? Have I got the right incident?
 
I don’t follow the issue about the Watkins goal. When the ball was crossed in from the flank he, Watkins, was level or behind the ball? The fact that Schar touches it, doesn’t matter. Am I missing something?? Have I got the right incident?

He was ahead of Schar on my TV
 
Top