Offside rule quiz

Fraid to say I only scored 60:

http://www.urban75.org/football/offside.html

I got 100% !!

mmm i got 75

Quoted from topuphere666

I got 100% !!

That's why I am a linesman  

These examples are generally straightforward but not as complicated or interesting as yesterday's match example.

75% Got confused by the keeper stepping off the pitch one!

100% for me.

Quoted from mariner91

100% for me.

And so it should be!!! hhahaha

100% for me. Surprised they didn't use the example of an on-side player running through whilst another forward is in an off-side position. This seems to confuse most fans ( and some officials also ! )

Quoted from kamakazebear

75% Got confused by the keeper stepping off the pitch one!

Same here, still don't understand it.

Quoted from 1600

Same here, still don't understand it.

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.

100%, drunk it.

I think the latest changes about interfering and not interfering etc made it confusing for everyone;me; pundits, players etc

Quoted from kamakazebear

75% Got confused by the keeper stepping off the pitch one!

If a defending player steps off the field of play which would in turn leave an attacking player offside and the ball is then played to the striker, he will not be flagged offside as the defending player is acting in an unsporting manner and will be treated as if he is stood on his own goal line, so no attacking player can be deemed offside! Keep smiling it gets easier
UTMM

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?

The only argument I have is the fact that the first Braintree player who initially received the ball was coming back from an offside position which the assistant quite rightly flagged offside. Apparently the referee was able to cover every angle of the incident and was therefore able to wrongly over rule the assistant. I bet the assistant felt very well supported, if it was me I would have put the flag down and told him to do the job as he clearly felt he could do both jobs.

100% can i ref next weeks match?

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?

Having read a couple of referee biographies this point is raised again and again by our officials. TV commentators and pundits are particularly guility and many of their views are years out of date. Be good if they got some ex refs in the commentary box!

I'm a good example. I've read millions of words about football and watched thousands of games but I've never once read the rulebook other than to research a story on things like points deductions. My views on what offside and the other laws of football are has largely come from watching ill-informed pundits on tv. I suspect a large percentage of us have a similar background.

I only got 25% right  but there again, I was sitting in the Pontoon at the time

Quoted from GrimRob

Having read a couple of referee biographies this point is raised again and again by our officials. TV commentators and pundits are particularly guility and many of their views are years out of date. Be good if they got some ex refs in the commentary box!

I'm a good example. I've read millions of words about football and watched thousands of games but I've never once read the rulebook other than to research a story on things like points deductions. My views on what offside and the other laws of football are has largely come from watching ill-informed pundits on tv. I suspect a large percentage of us have a similar background.

Its something that should be included as part of the f.a charter standard. Teach all young kids the rules of the game, its not as if there are lots of them is it?
Lost count of the times i have heard people shout for "backpass" when a ball is played back off the thigh of a player or "offside" when direct from a goal kick.
The Sunday League give each team a rule book every season and they used to also give out a seperate rule change guidance note as well so you could check for any rule changes for the forthcoming season. I how wonder how many players, secretaries, managers have actually read them?
Read the rules and i will guarantee that you will actually realise not all refs are rubbish, they may get things wrong as they are human but you may at least understand what they are trying to apply.

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.

The ball has to be played or touched towards the player in an offside position by his own team mate. This was played away from him but was deflected back to him by Disley.
UTMM

The only one I got wrong was the one with the player standing in front of the keeper at a freekick. Unless I missed it, it doesn't actually state the player was in an offside position. If he's stood in front of the keeper, then surely its possible for a defender to be stood on the goal line as well.