Offside rule quiz

Quoted from moosey_club

100%

The issue here as some posters have admitted already is that  a good percentage of supporters dont actually understand the rules of the game they dedicate so much time to watching.
Its ludicrous.
The uproar over yesterdays decision even from the players and coaching staff never mind supporters beggars belief. There was clearly nothing wrong with the goal, the ref acted correctly both initially and after in just double checking what the assistant had seen.
What had happened was that the assistant got it wrong, not the ref.
What should be asked is why the hell do 11 professional footballers, two coaches and hundreds if not thousands of supporters not know the rules of the game they play?

Apologies for repeating what I've written on another thread, but I'm genuinely slightly bemused by this.

I'm happy to admit that I'm one of the people who does not know how the offside law is worded.  I thought that the referee had got it right, but when I looked up the laws ([url]http://tinyurl.com/czxq28u[/url]), I came to the conclusion that he got it wrong (and the linesman got it right).

Law 11 states that:
A player is in an offside position if... blah blah blah.
I think we are all agreed the player who received the ball from Disley was in an offside position.

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 [blah or blah or] gaining an advantage by being in that position
He was certainly in an offside position when the ball was played by one of his team.
As "gaining an advantage by being in that position" is defined in the official interpretation of the laws as (among other things) "playing a ball that rebounds to him off an opponent having been in an offside position", it seems fairly clear that he was gaining an advantage by being in that position. The only point for argument is how you define the word "rebounds".

I can happily accept that I've missed or misinterpreted something in the laws, but can anyone tell me what?  But telling me "you can't be offside unless the ball is played forwards by a team-mate" won't wash, because the laws don't say that!

Ultimately I don't care one way or the other what the "correct" decision was - the only important fact from Town's viewpoint is that the ref decided he was onside and the goal stood.  But I'd be much happier if the correct decision actually matched what was written in the Laws of the Game.

Quoted from mike502

Apologies for repeating what I've written on another thread, but I'm genuinely slightly bemused by this.

I'm happy to admit that I'm one of the people who does not know how the offside law is worded.  I thought that the referee had got it right, but when I looked up the laws ([url]http://tinyurl.com/czxq28u[/url]), I came to the conclusion that he got it wrong (and the linesman got it right).

Law 11 states that:
A player is in an offside position if... blah blah blah.
I think we are all agreed the player who received the ball from Disley was in an offside position.

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 [blah or blah or] gaining an advantage by being in that position
He was certainly in an offside position when the ball was played by one of his team.
As "gaining an advantage by being in that position" is defined in the official interpretation of the laws as (among other things) "playing a ball that rebounds to him off an opponent having been in an offside position", it seems fairly clear that he was gaining an advantage by being in that position. The only point for argument is how you define the word "rebounds".

I can happily accept that I've missed or misinterpreted something in the laws, but can anyone tell me what?  But telling me "you can't be offside unless the ball is played forwards by a team-mate" won't wash, because the laws don't say that!

Ultimately I don't care one way or the other what the "correct" decision was - the only important fact from Town's viewpoint is that the ref decided he was onside and the goal stood.  But I'd be much happier if the correct decision actually matched what was written in the Laws of the Game.

You have missed the bit where the player has to be infront of the ball, which does actually mean he cannot be offside if it is passed backwards

Quoted from supertown

You have missed the bit where the player has to be infront of the ball, which does actually mean he cannot be offside if it is passed backwards

No, it means he can't be offside if it is passed backwards and doesn't touch a defender.  Are you telling me that he wasn't nearer our goal-line than the ball was when his team-mate played it?

Quoted from mike502

No, it means he can't be offside if it is passed backwards and doesn't touch a defender.  Are you telling me that he wasn't nearer our goal-line than the ball was when his team-mate played it?

im not telling you anything, i wasnt there. I was just pointing out that you missed a bit of the offside rule out.

The problem is these are just the basic rules and are not very detailed. An additional imporant thing is an interpretation of the rules. It has been decided somewhere that "at the moment the ball touches or is played by one of his team" does not include a ball comes off an opponent. It does not explicitly say this in the rules, or if it does I can;t see it.

Quoted from GrimRob

The problem is these are just the basic rules and are not very detailed. An additional imporant thing is an interpretation of the rules. It has been decided somewhere that "at the moment the ball touches or is played by one of his team" does not include a ball comes off an opponent. It does not explicitly say this in the rules, or if it does I can;t see it.

In the pdf I linked to, the rules (50 pages or so) are followed by 75 pages of interpretation.  This is where the definition of "gaining an advantage" that I quoted comes from.

Quoted from supertown

You have missed the bit where the player has to be infront of the ball, which does actually mean he cannot be offside if it is passed backwards

The player was infront of the ball though, it may have been passed backwards but it still bounced through to someone in an offside position due to a pass from a player on their team.

Quoted from mike502

Apologies for repeating what I've written on another thread, but I'm genuinely slightly bemused by this.

I'm happy to admit that I'm one of the people who does not know how the offside law is worded.  I thought that the referee had got it right, but when I looked up the laws ([url]http://tinyurl.com/czxq28u[/url]), I came to the conclusion that he got it wrong (and the linesman got it right).

Law 11 states that:
A player is in an offside position if... blah blah blah.
I think we are all agreed the player who received the ball from Disley was in an offside position.

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 [blah or blah or] gaining an advantage by being in that position
He was certainly in an offside position when the ball was played by one of his team.
As "gaining an advantage by being in that position" is defined in the official interpretation of the laws as (among other things) "playing a ball that rebounds to him off an opponent having been in an offside position", it seems fairly clear that he was gaining an advantage by being in that position. The only point for argument is how you define the word "rebounds".

I can happily accept that I've missed or misinterpreted something in the laws, but can anyone tell me what?  But telling me "you can't be offside unless the ball is played forwards by a team-mate" won't wash, because the laws don't say that!

Ultimately I don't care one way or the other what the "correct" decision was - the only important fact from Town's viewpoint is that the ref decided he was onside and the goal stood.  But I'd be much happier if the correct decision actually matched what was written in the Laws of the Game.

I think that sums up why the ref got it right. It was a backpass. The Braintree player passed the ball backwards, Disley stuck his foot out and put their player through. If we are going to penalise players for offside for putting pressure on the goalkeepers then defenses and timewasters are going to be big winners. If one of their players had put him through I'd have been very annoyed but that wasn't the case. Two points dropped just hope for something from Fleetwood.

Quoted from rancido

Technically a player cannot leave the pitch without the referees permission especially if it gains an advantageby doing so. Obviously leeway has to be given when players accidently leave the pitch eg when making a tackle or challenging for a ball.

Gotcha, cheers for explaining.

Quoted from mike502

Apologies for repeating what I've written on another thread, but I'm genuinely slightly bemused by this.

I'm happy to admit that I'm one of the people who does not know how the offside law is worded.  I thought that the referee had got it right, but when I looked up the laws ([url]http://tinyurl.com/czxq28u[/url]), I came to the conclusion that he got it wrong (and the linesman got it right).

Law 11 states that:
A player is in an offside position if... blah blah blah.
I think we are all agreed the player who received the ball from Disley was in an offside position.

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 [blah or blah or] gaining an advantage by being in that position
He was certainly in an offside position when the ball was played by one of his team.
As "gaining an advantage by being in that position" is defined in the official interpretation of the laws as (among other things) "playing a ball that rebounds to him off an opponent having been in an offside position", it seems fairly clear that he was gaining an advantage by being in that position. The only point for argument is how you define the word "rebounds".

I can happily accept that I've missed or misinterpreted something in the laws, but can anyone tell me what?  But telling me "you can't be offside unless the ball is played forwards by a team-mate" won't wash, because the laws don't say that!

Ultimately I don't care one way or the other what the "correct" decision was - the only important fact from Town's viewpoint is that the ref decided he was onside and the goal stood.  But I'd be much happier if the correct decision actually matched what was written in the Laws of the Game.

The player who received the ball was not active or interfering with play when his player passed the ball towards another player on his team, to be actively offside you have to be actively seeking the ball from your team mate, or looking to gain an advantage, whilst in an offside position...he was clearly not looking to receive the ball. Once Disley had intercepted the pass you have entered another phase of play.
If the pass had been intended for the striker but Disley got a toe on it then yes he would have been actively offside from the initial pass.