Offside - what's the point, and whatever the point is, is it worth it?
Offside - what's the point, and whatever the point is, is it worth it?
Week in week out, the never ending freeze frame post match, MOTD, discussion over whether it was offside or onside. This week Rondon for Newcastle and Sterling for City. Why don't we just do away with it? Surely the game would be more entertaining. No one could argue that it would most definitely be less controversial.
-
- Posts: 2068
- Joined: Fri Jun 03, 2016 10:18 pm
- Been Liked: 292 times
- Has Liked: 766 times
Re: Offside - what's the point, and whatever the point is, is it worth it?
Because Warnock would have 3 strikers waiting in the penalty areaEspia wrote:Week in week out, the never ending freeze frame post match, MOTD, discussion over whether it was offside or onside. This week Rondon for Newcastle and Sterling for City. Why don't we just do away with it? Surely the game would be more entertaining. No one could argue that it would most definitely be less controversial.
-
- Posts: 8329
- Joined: Thu Jan 31, 2019 10:06 pm
- Been Liked: 2439 times
- Has Liked: 1979 times
Re: Offside - what's the point, and whatever the point is, is it worth it?
The Sterling one, similar to the Kane one at Anfield last season, drives me mad. He’s onside because the defender played the ball but he only played the ball because Sterling is on him. What’s he meant to do, say “After you!”
-
- Posts: 10948
- Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 9:38 am
- Been Liked: 5154 times
- Has Liked: 795 times
- Location: On top of a pink elephant riding to the Democratic Republic of Congo
Re: Offside - what's the point, and whatever the point is, is it worth it?
Offside is okay, just flag it when someone is offside, none of that 'he's not interfering with play' b0llocks.
And none of that waiting until he touches the ball b0llocks. Time wasting shite is that.
And none of that waiting until he touches the ball b0llocks. Time wasting shite is that.
These 2 users liked this post: cricketfieldclarets boatshed bill
-
- Posts: 9443
- Joined: Sun Oct 16, 2016 10:47 pm
- Been Liked: 1180 times
- Has Liked: 778 times
Re: Offside - what's the point, and whatever the point is, is it worth it?
The officials are even more bamboozled with the rules than people not even familiar with the sport but also have a basic understanding of the offside ruling & can easily spot the mistakes, a complete reform is probably well overdue whether a feeling of safe comfortable positions have developed with a lack of referee coming through or experiencing problems attaining the necessary grades I'm not sure. I'm not convinced on the merits of VAR it would be more worthwhile some sort of specsavers certificate prior to officiating.
-
- Posts: 21464
- Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 9:59 pm
- Been Liked: 8585 times
- Has Liked: 11285 times
Re: Offside - what's the point, and whatever the point is, is it worth it?
Completely agree. Although most dont for some odd reason.Bin Ont Turf wrote:Offside is okay, just flag it when someone is offside, none of that 'he's not interfering with play' b0llocks.
And none of that waiting until he touches the ball b0llocks. Time wasting shite is that.
Re: Offside - what's the point, and whatever the point is, is it worth it?
Before VAR comes in they really need to clarify this. When there is doubt, do we go with the officials original decision, or do you give the benefit of doubt to the attacking or defending side?
It took cricket a while to iron out a few issues with DRS and football could learn something from the way they use this system.
It took cricket a while to iron out a few issues with DRS and football could learn something from the way they use this system.
Re: Offside - what's the point, and whatever the point is, is it worth it?
Offside has been in many team sports since the started, including rugby and hockey. Hockey dispensed with it a few years ago.
You need to ask what the consequences for the way football is played would be if offside was abandoned.
https://sportgeschiedenis.nl/sporten/vo ... t-offside/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
http://www.espn.co.uk/football/germany/ ... fside-rule" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
You need to ask what the consequences for the way football is played would be if offside was abandoned.
https://sportgeschiedenis.nl/sporten/vo ... t-offside/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
http://www.espn.co.uk/football/germany/ ... fside-rule" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Re: Offside - what's the point, and whatever the point is, is it worth it?
It'd certainly remove the need for old fashioned wingers, if you automatically disallow every goal where the winger gets to the goalline and pulls it back for the forward.Bin Ont Turf wrote:Offside is okay, just flag it when someone is offside, none of that 'he's not interfering with play' [deleted].
And none of that waiting until he touches the ball [deleted]. Time wasting [deleted] is that.
But looking on the bright side, it would have disallowed Liverpool's first and third goals.
-
- Posts: 1854
- Joined: Sat Jan 23, 2016 1:33 pm
- Been Liked: 381 times
- Has Liked: 232 times
- Location: Skipton
Re: Offside - what's the point, and whatever the point is, is it worth it?
Bring back goalhanging - my best position
These 2 users liked this post: Clevedon Claret turfytopper
-
- Posts: 15108
- Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 10:47 am
- Been Liked: 3139 times
- Has Liked: 6682 times
Re: Offside - what's the point, and whatever the point is, is it worth it?
This post totally nails it. They've made a complete mess of a very simple (and necessary) rule.Bin Ont Turf wrote:Offside is okay, just flag it when someone is offside, none of that 'he's not interfering with play' b0llocks.
And none of that waiting until he touches the ball b0llocks. Time wasting shite is that.
Re: Offside - what's the point, and whatever the point is, is it worth it?
Thats the answer ..... the buggers who persistently get caught offside ... hang them from the crossbar.... (probably have raise the bar though if its Peter Crouch)Im_not_Robbie_Blake wrote:Bring back goalhanging - my best position
-
- Posts: 1009
- Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2016 8:55 pm
- Been Liked: 308 times
- Has Liked: 350 times
Re: Offside - what's the point, and whatever the point is, is it worth it?
Works in Hockey, totally changed the way in which you attach and defend. Totally prefer our way over your antiquated footballers
Re: Offside - what's the point, and whatever the point is, is it worth it?
I go back a long way when it comes to supporting the Clarets and can recall when they had a season 'curtain raiser' called the Watney Cup. Sponsored by Watney's Beer. Can you still get it? Anyway the idea was to have a trophy to play for before the season started and was meant to replace meaningless friendlies. As an experiment the offside rule was abandoned during this tournament. It did not produce the avalanche of goals expected and defenders soon learnt how to negate any benefits. It had a very short shelf life.
Re: Offside - what's the point, and whatever the point is, is it worth it?
We used to call it 'tartlining'. Anyone else familiar with that term or was it just an Accy thing?Im_not_Robbie_Blake wrote:Bring back goalhanging - my best position
-
- Posts: 2443
- Joined: Wed Feb 17, 2016 8:58 pm
- Been Liked: 970 times
- Has Liked: 232 times
Re: Offside - what's the point, and whatever the point is, is it worth it?
Babylining.groove wrote:We used to call it 'tartlining'. Anyone else familiar with that term or was it just an Accy thing?
These 3 users liked this post: dsr 4:20 groove
Re: Offside - what's the point, and whatever the point is, is it worth it?
They trialled it in the US for a season and games ended up ridiculously stretched. Teams would leave a man permanently upfront which meant that one, or normally two, defenders had to stay with them. Teams just launched long balls to try and get up the pitch as quickly as possible.
-
- Posts: 2201
- Joined: Sun Jan 24, 2016 3:03 pm
- Been Liked: 932 times
- Has Liked: 607 times
Re: Offside - what's the point, and whatever the point is, is it worth it?
Agree.Bin Ont Turf wrote:Offside is okay, just flag it when someone is offside, none of that 'he's not interfering with play' b0llocks.
And none of that waiting until he touches the ball b0llocks. Time wasting shite is that.
Was it the great Bill Shankly who said something like "if a player isn't interfering with play what's he doing on the pitch?"
Re: Offside - what's the point, and whatever the point is, is it worth it?
No, it was Bill Nicholson. Most people say something really stupid in their life, and that was Nicholson's. (Shankley's was the one about football being more important than life or death. Though obviously he wasn't being serious. I hope.)Vintage Claret wrote:Agree.
Was it the great Bill Shankly who said something like "if a player isn't interfering with play what's he doing on the pitch?"
Few people wpuld think it would improve football, anyway. Can you, hand on heart, say that the rule should be changed with the result that Liverpool's first and third goals should both have been disallowed because there was a player in an offside position?
-
- Posts: 2201
- Joined: Sun Jan 24, 2016 3:03 pm
- Been Liked: 932 times
- Has Liked: 607 times
Re: Offside - what's the point, and whatever the point is, is it worth it?
"No, it was Bill Nicholson"
Ah, ok, thanks,
"Few people would think it would improve football, anyway. Can you, hand on heart, say that the rule should be changed with the result that Liverpool's first and third goals should both have been disallowed because there was a player in an offside position?"
I don't know if it would improve the game overall or not, I guess there's 2 ways of looking at it.
Yes it would have been harsh on Liverpool in Sundays examples (though bloody good for us) but haven't there also been instances when goals have been allowed to stand when players who didn't actually put the ball in the net were deemed not interfering with play when you could argue that they were (e.g. stood right in front of the goalie, taking defenders out, etc.)
At least the "offside is offside" rule would eliminate any debate about interfering with play or not.
Ah, ok, thanks,
"Few people would think it would improve football, anyway. Can you, hand on heart, say that the rule should be changed with the result that Liverpool's first and third goals should both have been disallowed because there was a player in an offside position?"
I don't know if it would improve the game overall or not, I guess there's 2 ways of looking at it.
Yes it would have been harsh on Liverpool in Sundays examples (though bloody good for us) but haven't there also been instances when goals have been allowed to stand when players who didn't actually put the ball in the net were deemed not interfering with play when you could argue that they were (e.g. stood right in front of the goalie, taking defenders out, etc.)
At least the "offside is offside" rule would eliminate any debate about interfering with play or not.
Re: Offside - what's the point, and whatever the point is, is it worth it?
I think a hybrid would be acceptable, if you're in an offside position in the penalty area then you're offside regardless of "interfering with play". It would solve all the problems of whether they were blocking the keeper's view, in the path of the ball, distracting defenders, etcdsr wrote:No, it was Bill Nicholson. Most people say something really stupid in their life, and that was Nicholson's. (Shankley's was the one about football being more important than life or death. Though obviously he wasn't being serious. I hope.)
Few people wpuld think it would improve football, anyway. Can you, hand on heart, say that the rule should be changed with the result that Liverpool's first and third goals should both have been disallowed because there was a player in an offside position?
Re: Offside - what's the point, and whatever the point is, is it worth it?
Well, the third goal would still be offside because Salah was lying on the floor in the penalty area when it went in. The first is arguable because Salah was off the field, albeit having left from the penalty area - would they allow a player to leave the pitch without permission to gain an advantage?aggi wrote:I think a hybrid would be acceptable, if you're in an offside position in the penalty area then you're offside regardless of "interfering with play". It would solve all the problems of whether they were blocking the keeper's view, in the path of the ball, distracting defenders, etc
I don't see any way at all that the laws of football would be improved if those two goals were to be disallowed. Even if it did improve Burnley's record! Can you frame a law that will allow those goals but still take out the controversy of other goals?
Re: Offside - what's the point, and whatever the point is, is it worth it?
The shame when you were playing cuppies and 20 odd folk screamed "BABYLINER!" at you as you toepoked it in whilst stood waiting in the keepers muddy puddle 2ft from the goal lineduncandisorderly wrote:Babylining.
-
- Posts: 6586
- Joined: Sun Jan 24, 2016 9:03 am
- Been Liked: 1981 times
- Has Liked: 3299 times
Re: Offside - what's the point, and whatever the point is, is it worth it?
They have also experimented with moving the "space" on the pitch where you can actually be offside further up the field. i.e. instead of being onside only in your own half, you could be onside until you were either in or down the sides of the penalty area. They tried it in some competition or other and I thought it wasn't such a bad idea, but clearly it didn't work as it was short lived.
-
- Posts: 7065
- Joined: Fri Sep 08, 2017 4:43 pm
- Been Liked: 2238 times
- Has Liked: 1617 times
- Location: Baxenden
Re: Offside - what's the point, and whatever the point is, is it worth it?
There was a time when there was no offside rule (many of the so-called great goal scorers of the past played then, Dixie Dean I think was one, his 60 goals in one season was put down to that I think). I don't think scrapping it would in any way improve the game. The purists who moan about the long ball game would have nightmares, with strikers just hanging around on the goal line waiting for a punt and a defender with him meaning at least two players taking no real part in the game. I think the above post has it spot on in saying that offside should, as it was when I played, be simply offside regardless of the players position and whether he has touched the ball. When I played at school if you wandered past the last defender and the linesman or referee noticed they blew for offside, simples. Much is made of the rules of football but if left alone they are very simple, it's only the dreaded 'interpretation' that makes things difficult, like the ball to hand thing, if it hits your hand it's handball regardless of whether there was 'intent'. I sometimes think they have made things more complicated to give the so-called 'experts' on TV something to talk about.
-
- Posts: 7065
- Joined: Fri Sep 08, 2017 4:43 pm
- Been Liked: 2238 times
- Has Liked: 1617 times
- Location: Baxenden
Re: Offside - what's the point, and whatever the point is, is it worth it?
At one point years ago with the old league in the US they had a line that was about halfway between the halfway line and goal line and you could only be offside on the goal side of that. I don't think that worked very well either.Dark Cloud wrote:They have also experimented with moving the "space" on the pitch where you can actually be offside further up the field. i.e. instead of being onside only in your own half, you could be onside until you were either in or down the sides of the penalty area. They tried it in some competition or other and I thought it wasn't such a bad idea, but clearly it didn't work as it was short lived.
Re: Offside - what's the point, and whatever the point is, is it worth it?
It may have been an incentive for Salah to get up quicker ....dsr wrote:Well, the third goal would still be offside because Salah was lying on the floor in the penalty area when it went in. The first is arguable because Salah was off the field, albeit having left from the penalty area - would they allow a player to leave the pitch without permission to gain an advantage?
I don't see any way at all that the laws of football would be improved if those two goals were to be disallowed. Even if it did improve Burnley's record! Can you frame a law that will allow those goals but still take out the controversy of other goals?
It depends whether you prefer allowing goals such as those (although I suspect that if the rules were different then the players wouldn't have been offside) and also allowing stuff such as this https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nptwXLD ... u.be&t=170" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; with a player deemed to be onside even though he could easily distract the keeper.
-
- Posts: 815
- Joined: Sat May 12, 2018 4:08 pm
- Been Liked: 232 times
- Has Liked: 21 times
Re: Offside - what's the point, and whatever the point is, is it worth it?
houseboy wrote:At one point years ago with the old league in the US they had a line that was about halfway between the halfway line and goal line and you could only be offside on the goal side of that. I don't think that worked very well either.
If memory serves, FIFA put an end to that idea, citing that if you upstarts want to play our game, you’ll play by our rules, not yours.
The Yanks have been known to change rules to suit their own agenda, ya know!
-
- Posts: 2704
- Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2016 10:22 pm
- Been Liked: 481 times
- Has Liked: 2290 times
Re: Offside - what's the point, and whatever the point is, is it worth it?
The purpose is to prevent babylining.
Just go back to the old rules.
Just go back to the old rules.
-
- Posts: 8929
- Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 9:57 am
- Been Liked: 1986 times
- Has Liked: 2877 times
Re: Offside - what's the point, and whatever the point is, is it worth it?
Pretty sure it was tar lining... or is that cos we were posh in 70’s Bash?groove wrote:We used to call it 'tartlining'. Anyone else familiar with that term or was it just an Accy thing?
This user liked this post: groove
-
- Posts: 8929
- Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 9:57 am
- Been Liked: 1986 times
- Has Liked: 2877 times
Re: Offside - what's the point, and whatever the point is, is it worth it?
It was originally brought in because it was hoof, goal scramble, hoof, goal scramble... repeat
-
- Posts: 7065
- Joined: Fri Sep 08, 2017 4:43 pm
- Been Liked: 2238 times
- Has Liked: 1617 times
- Location: Baxenden
Re: Offside - what's the point, and whatever the point is, is it worth it?
Didn't they have bigger goals at one time as well?exilecanada wrote:If memory serves, FIFA put an end to that idea, citing that if you upstarts want to play our game, you’ll play by our rules, not yours.
The Yanks have been known to change rules to suit their own agenda, ya know!