Prev: "Lord of War" Unsophisticated Prediction Contest
Next: The Best World Cup RSS *contest* so far (bicycle kick now worth 3)
From: Evan Kirshenbaum on 16 Jun 2010 13:36
HASM <netnews(a)invalid.com> writes:
> Deeppe <tutall(a)hotmail.com> writes:
>>> And again, this has always been the case, as far as I remember,
>> Your memory is lacking. Or things have come full circle since the
>> time when you were still active. Bruce accurately describes the
>> change that's occurred over the last decade.
>> Would you like me to refer you to a referee email lists?
>> No need to rely on our word, you can check it for yourself.
> Here's the full text of "Law 11 - offside" from the "2000/2001 Laws
> of the Game" official FIFA book, the oldest one I could find (not
> sure where I put my older ones).
[snip Law 11]
> This is 2000/2001, the book is 10 years old. Pretty much the same
> as it is today.
The FIFA web site, at
seems to imply that (essentially) this wording went in in 1995.
The original law was
6. When a player has kicked the ball, any one of the same side who
is nearer to the opponent's goal line is out of play and may not
touch the ball himself, nor in any way whatever prevent any other
player from doing so, until he is in play; but no player is out of
play when the ball is kicked off from behind the goal line.
By 1889, the notion of the defensive players mattering is there:
6. When a player plays the ball, or throws it in from touch, any
player of the same side who at such moment of play or throwing-in
is nearer to his opponents' goal line is out of play, and may not
touch the ball himself, nor in any way whatever interfere with an
opponent, or with play, until the ball has again been played,
unless there are at such moment of playing or throwing-in at least
three of his opponents nearer their own goal-line.
(I see it called "Off-side" in a 1915 edition
that has the same wording.)
So pretty much the same as today (except for the definition of what it
meant to be in an offside position and the application to throw-ins)
or perhaps a little looser about what was allowed. Then, you could
sit offside all you wanted as long as you didn't touch the ball or
trip an opponent. I couldn't find a version from just before 1995 to
compare the wording.
Evan Kirshenbaum +------------------------------------
HP Laboratories |The law of supply and demand tells us
1501 Page Mill Road, 1U, MS 1141 |that when the price of something is
Palo Alto, CA 94304 |artificially set below market level,
|there will soon be none of that thing
kirshenbaum(a)hpl.hp.com |left--as you may have noticed the
(650)857-7572 |last time you tried to buy something
http://www.kirshenbaum.net/ | P.J. O'Rourke
From: HASM on 16 Jun 2010 15:27
Futbolmetrix <futbolmetrix(a)yahoo.com> writes:
> Right. But consider the following example: the ball is played in the
> direction of attacking players A and B. A is not in an offside
> position, but B is. A gets to the ball first and scores.
> As you can see, this example does not fall under any of the
> descriptions given by FIFA.
One really needs to be there, but strictly as you describe it, it is quite
an easy call.
If, in the opinion of the referee,
- B interferes with an opponent, the goal is called back and restart is IFK
- if B is deemed to not have interfered, the goal stands and restart is KO.
From: HASM on 16 Jun 2010 15:29
Evan Kirshenbaum <kirshenbaum(a)hpl.hp.com> writes:
> So pretty much the same as today
As I've been saying all along ...
From: Futbolmetrix on 16 Jun 2010 16:50
On Jun 16, 10:27 pm, HASM <netn...(a)invalid.com> wrote:
> One really needs to be there, but strictly as you describe it, it is quite
> an easy call.
> If, in the opinion of the referee,
> - B interferes with an opponent, the goal is called back and restart is IFK
> for offside
> - if B is deemed to not have interfered, the goal stands and restart is KO.
> -- HASM
Exactly. I think that what people are trying to say is that in recent
years referees have tended to (have been instructed to?) use a
narrower interpretation of "interfering with an opponent." To some
extent, a player running toward the ball is clearly "making a gesture
or *movement* which, in the opinion of the referee, deceives or
distracts an opponent."
And yet, it looks as if refs nowadays are unlikely to sanction the
offside position if the player doesn't play the ball.
From: HASM on 16 Jun 2010 17:59
Futbolmetrix <futbolmetrix(a)yahoo.com> writes:
> in the opinion of the referee, deceives or distracts an opponent."
Taking the above slightly out of context, to make a point.
I started refereeing very young kids, and later on transitioned to older
kids, high school, college, amateurs, semi-pros. The notion of distracting
an opponent, in the opinion of this and most referees, is not clear cut
across all ages and skill levels. In the extreme cases a 10 year old GK
will be distracted by almost any player around him, and a WCup GK should
know better what to do, seriously.