Change to the offside rule

[DA Baracus]

http://www.skysports.com/football/news/11095/9930438/offside-rule-change-explained

So aye, there’s been a change to the offside rule. Makes sense as well I think.

I think the answer is probably ‘no’, but does this cover folk standing in front of the keeper or jumping around in front on them in an offside position just before a free kick is taken?

[parsforlife]

Seems a step in the right direction towards correcting the clusterfuck of the last change.

I think your correct to say it won't stop you're scenario, after all you can't be offside if the ball is not in play.

[Raidernation]

Is that not just the original offside rule?

[parsforlife]

Given you can pass to a teammate in front of you, no.

[Sherrif John Bunnell]

Are you able to give an example of a goal that would have been disallowed last season but will now stand?

“Yes, there was a situation last season in the Scottish Cup I believe – St Johnstone versus Ross County – John Beaton was the referee and the attacker was in an offside position and made an obvious action which impacted on the goalkeeper’s ability to save the ball.

“That was allowed as a goal last year – correctly – but this year it will be penalised as offside.”

Clear evidence that last season's Scottish Cup should be annulled and that the competition should be restarted from the 4th round.

[Airdrie Onions]

Seems a step in the right direction towards correcting the clusterfuck of the last change.

I think your correct to say it won't stop you're scenario, after all you can't be offside if the ball is not in play.

It hurts

[parsforlife]

Good

[Bully Wee Villa]

Seems a sensible move, is it just affecting Scottish football or worldwide?

[stumigoo]

It will take the usual 8 seasons before commentators latch on to this. They are still struggling with the last changes.

[Half Rice Half Chips]

Will women understand it?

[Savage Henry]

Is that not just the original offside rule?

It does seem like it.

[AsimButtHitsASix]

Will women understand it?

A lot quicker than the idiots in the Cow Shed do regarding practically any law.

"THAT'S A PASSBACK!"

"He used his thigh"

"EXACTLY!"

[smpar]

The only issue is trying to establish when one phase of play has finished, and when the next one begins. They used an example from an EPL game last season whereby the ball was played to an offside striker, however the striker recognised this and let the ball travel without moving towards it, and the defender ran to get the ball deep in his own half. However, before the defender had even played the ball, the striker came back into play and closed him down. So how do we establish the next phase of play? When the defender touches it? when he's passed it on? That's the only part that is going to create ambiguity. Otherwise, logical changes.

[cyderspaceman]

New change proposed.

Quote

 

Wenger, FIFA's head of global development, said: "You will not be offside if any part of the body that can score a goal is in line with the last defender, even if other parts of the attacker's body are in front.

 

"That will sort it out and you will no longer have decisions about millimetres and a fraction of the attacker being in front of the defensive line."

 

 

 

Naw, it wullnae.

The millimetres will now be behind the attacker.

[The Stig]

I think that the easiest way to sort it is to say if VAR has to piss about with lines from the player armpits or cocks then the original decision should stand as it is not a clear and obvious error and therefore should not be overturned.

[HibeeJibee]

You'd now be trying to microscopically discern whether a strikers back/shoulder/trailing leg was in line with any part of a defender.

That's probably harder?

[pandarilla]

Margin of error needed, works well in cricket.

A certain percentage or length has to be offside, and that makes folk less raging about marginal decisions. Of course certain ones will still be unbelievably close but you know the attacker /linesman has the benefit of doubt and its properly offside .

[parsforlife]

This needs thrown into the sea. It fixes nothing from a VAR perspective and will negatively impact the way the game is played. Defensively it’s important to be goalside of  the attacker,  there is absolutely no way their going to be happy giving strikers most of a body width head start.   So they’ll drop back, defend deeper and it greater numbers, probably become more physical to prevent any ‘onside’ attacker playing the ball when their unable to cos the law allows the attacker to take such an advanced position.  

the marginal decisions in VAR take too long as things stand(I think it would be less frustrating should we only see a couple of VAR reviews a match due a challenge system)  but i get the impression their are some people who would still be raging if VAR could decide in a few seconds that a player was 2mm offside and the goal disallowed, they seems an odd thing, your either onside or not, and players narrowly offside should still have goals disallowed.   We just need to make the process faster, and if that means allowing for a greater margin of error that’s ok.   I don’t think it would be too difficult/expensive(given the wealth of the leagues that use VAR) to develop an AI system that can draw the lines much faster than a person doing it by hand.

 

[eez-eh]

The law doesn’t need changed. The people in VAR rooms need to stop overturning decisions on the basis that their widely inaccurate pictures show that the attacker might be a bawhair offside.

Why should the laws continue to be changed for VAR when 99% of games every weekend don’t use it?

[Salvo Montalbano]

I'm sure IFAB had already said they were thinking of bringing in a 5cm margin of error?