Just go back to the linesman using his best judgement so we can all get on with the football.
New Offside Rule Proposed
- Thread starter esmufc07
- Start date
Love it. Yes some goals will come down to lines drawn but much less and the majority of calls will be much faster.
Perhaps poachers like Chicharito will come back into fashion.
Perhaps poachers like Chicharito will come back into fashion.
I think the offside rule could do with some updating, but I'm a bit afraid that this could pretty much kill high line defending and make the games more closed. On the other hand that may actually be intended: hurt dominant teams by making counter attacking easier.
I don’t think this will help speed things up. Two changes I would like.
Would love to see the interfering with play rule simplified or even just removed. If you are in the penalty box and offside you are by definition interfering with play full stop for example. Or even just if you are in an offside position it’s offside and that’s that.
Use instant decision tech, say it has 5-10s to make a definite call, if it’s too tight to call in 5-10s then the call on the field stands.
Would love to see the interfering with play rule simplified or even just removed. If you are in the penalty box and offside you are by definition interfering with play full stop for example. Or even just if you are in an offside position it’s offside and that’s that.
Use instant decision tech, say it has 5-10s to make a definite call, if it’s too tight to call in 5-10s then the call on the field stands.
Visually on the VAR players are going to look miles offside and have a huge advantage…but as long as 1 pixel is in line with the last defender they are onside.
Won’t stop the discussion, just changes the debate.
I’m against pixel fecking the life out of the game with VAR…but it’s here to stay and the only change I’d make is to use thicker lines purely to quicken the decision making.
Won’t stop the discussion, just changes the debate.
I’m against pixel fecking the life out of the game with VAR…but it’s here to stay and the only change I’d make is to use thicker lines purely to quicken the decision making.
Seems to be one extreme to another. Currently you can have 99.9% of your body planted inline with a defender and be offside. You're doing everything to place your body inline, even your eventual stride could off from the defender but for a split second the tip of your shoulder is technically offside. The new rule allows the tip of your trailing boot to play yourself onside while being a yard or more ahead and way forward in your stride.
I don't see how this proposed rule wouldn't be a horrendous issue for teams that play with a high line, as it would make it so much easier for attackers to beat an offside trap. And in turn I don't see how any rule change that prompts teams to drop deeper is a good one from an entertainment POV.
And you'd still be left with players being ruled offside on mm calls. So if that's what people are complaining about, they'll still be complaining.
And you'd still be left with players being ruled offside on mm calls. So if that's what people are complaining about, they'll still be complaining.
Isn't that essentially how the offside rule worked in reality before we started drawing lines on a freeze-frame image?
In real time linesmen weren't able to distinguish whether someone's 'goalscoring' body part was fractionally ahead or not.
In real time linesmen weren't able to distinguish whether someone's 'goalscoring' body part was fractionally ahead or not.
It just seems the attackers are getting more and more benefits and the laws are changing to create more goals. No wonder strikers are scoring 50 goals a season.
Giving an attacker such an advantage seems more unfair to defenders. It is a huge advantage when attackers make a run and the defender has to turn to chase, this extra yard or two (which it will be if you take into account the length of the stride length of some players) is huge.
Add to that the penalty rule that a fingernail or tip is now deemed a penalty (Grealish against United in the final).
Throw into that players go down when they feel the breath of another player these days
Call me old fashioned but some of these rule changes are just getting crazy
Giving an attacker such an advantage seems more unfair to defenders. It is a huge advantage when attackers make a run and the defender has to turn to chase, this extra yard or two (which it will be if you take into account the length of the stride length of some players) is huge.
Add to that the penalty rule that a fingernail or tip is now deemed a penalty (Grealish against United in the final).
Throw into that players go down when they feel the breath of another player these days
Call me old fashioned but some of these rule changes are just getting crazy
I can see teams like City and Liverpool struggling with this. All it needs a decent ball over the top and you have acres of space to run into.
Is this why we want Onana. Pinging then long balls over the top 
I wonder would it lead defensive lines to drop deeper because it would be harder to step out in time?
So maybe less counter attacking chances?
It's certainly possible. And I wouldn't change the rule without a trial. But I would be surprised, if this led to less goals instead of more goals.
This seems like a massive swing in the opposite direction and instead of getting penalised for stupid little margins and taking forever to draw the lines on tight decisions the attackers are going to be getting a humungous advantage.
why can't they just keep it as is but but have a pre determined buffer distance for the lines. Put three lines up, the two that go up now for attacker and defender and then a third for example 20 CM's away from the defenders line which will be the offside. If the attackers line hits the buffer line it will be super easy and clear to see and no one can complain it's too tight a call to rule off.
Obviously it doesn't have to be 20 CM'c but that little cushion of space negates all the problems with the offside rule and VAR we have today.
why can't they just keep it as is but but have a pre determined buffer distance for the lines. Put three lines up, the two that go up now for attacker and defender and then a third for example 20 CM's away from the defenders line which will be the offside. If the attackers line hits the buffer line it will be super easy and clear to see and no one can complain it's too tight a call to rule off.
Obviously it doesn't have to be 20 CM'c but that little cushion of space negates all the problems with the offside rule and VAR we have today.
Given how many of the controversial decisions are concerned with shoulders or knees or whatever, why don't they just restrict it to feet positions?
This could make the game more physical
This will kill the high line
Yep. This will make the game far far more defensive than it is now
Historically speaking every significant change to the offside rule in order to help attackers has invariably led to a defender being added, an attacker being removed, and less goals on average.
I'd disagree that we need more goals but if that's what's needed then just make the goals bigger.
Just don't think this would be good in terms of being able to judge offside as a fan watching, player participating or official on the sideline. It's so much easier to see if someone has breached a line at all than to judge if any part of them hasn't when it comes to watching in real time.
While every goal is checked now, I think we'd end up relying on VAR to inform us more than it currently does when it comes to offside as opposed to confirming what we already thought most of the time. It's going to be so hard to judge without it.
Last edited:
No.
As long as the analysis will be shown on the big screen and at home with lines drawn, it's an irrelevance where or how they draw them. The complaints and arguments will still come down to millimetres and pixels.
And again people will still say "but it is only one mm".
It doesn't need changing.
This could cause teams (especially smaller ones) playing with deep defensive line. Why risk and give strikers like Haaland advantage? Strikers will now have big advantage.
This basically. It was one of good and (with VAR) clean rules. Without if and but explanation.
It'll all be robotic in 10 years with players all wearing chips
The striker should just have to have both feet onside. End of story. Doesn’t matter about upper body position, if they are leaning offside. As long as both feet are onside, it’s onside. Simple, fair, balanced, effective.
More goals would make games more predictable, both beforehand and in-play. Interest and attendances would fall. Counter-intuitive I know, but that's what would happen.
Goal poachers like Ronaldo will thrive in and near the 6-yard box as they'll be able to get ahead of defenders.
The actual solution to the mm calls is for them to make the tech as accurate as possible and then for everyone else to get over it. Sometimes sport comes down to millimetres. Assess it as accurately and quickly as possible, accept the decision, move on.
We now unthinkingly accept goal-line tech for example, which had a 3cm margin of error when introduced, now down to 5mm. The offside tech is similarly becoming more accurate, with the AI-assisted semi-automated offsides they're rolling out a massive improvement on the line-drawing they had before. And that accuracy is guaranteed to get better as the tech gets better.
Meanwhile you have things like the handball law and the inability of some referees to apply the same standards in even consecutive games as actual problems that come with zero guarantees of improvement. Instead of dicking about with the offside rules they should focus on those bigger and far more damaging problems.
We now unthinkingly accept goal-line tech for example, which had a 3cm margin of error when introduced, now down to 5mm. The offside tech is similarly becoming more accurate, with the AI-assisted semi-automated offsides they're rolling out a massive improvement on the line-drawing they had before. And that accuracy is guaranteed to get better as the tech gets better.
Meanwhile you have things like the handball law and the inability of some referees to apply the same standards in even consecutive games as actual problems that come with zero guarantees of improvement. Instead of dicking about with the offside rules they should focus on those bigger and far more damaging problems.
Didn’t they briefly bring something like this in years ago, pre VAR? Remember the commentators going on about “clear daylight” or something at the time.
VAR, and all technology, is merely a decision support system, and it should be used in that manner, This means the final decision should be left to human, referee, judgement. He should be the one deciding whether that's too much, or too little, of the attacker's body ahead of the defender's.
However, if we still decide to stick strictly to VAR and its drawn lines, then I prefer this proposed new rule to the current one where an attacker is considered offside because of his advanced big toe!
However, if we still decide to stick strictly to VAR and its drawn lines, then I prefer this proposed new rule to the current one where an attacker is considered offside because of his advanced big toe!
Global shortage of salt and pepper now.
This might reduce the high defensive line just as when we are getting a sweeper keeper.
This is pretty much the same thing, just other way around. It will always be about mm. One way or other.
They should first do something about hand rule and about quality of referees before they change other things.
They should first do something about hand rule and about quality of referees before they change other things.
This rule makes it a lot easier to train an AI to decide offside.
Yep time to get Big Dave on a new deal.
That's actually a very, very good idea.
Feels like a horrible change.
You can be 95% off but just plant a 1mm of your foot in line to stay on.