Soccer Offside Rule

[SoonerRoy]

Can someone explain the rule to me? Please make it as simple as possible. Are there lines involved like in hockey? If a defender is back closer to her goal than any opponent, is a long downfield pass then okay by the offense?

[tommieharris91]

7n-p44kKaWc

[soonerloyal]

A player is in the offside position if the player is nearer to the opponents’ goal line than both the ball and the last defender.

The offside law is the most argued-over wherever game of soccer/football is played, even though it’s pretty simple. Here’s how it works: A player is caught offside if he’s nearer to the opponents’ goal than both the ball and the second-last opponent when his team-mate plays the ball. In other words, a player can’t receive the ball from a team-mate unless there are at least two players either level with him or between him and the goal.

It is not an offense in itself to be offside. A player is only penalized for being offside if he is deemed to be involved in active play. So a player can only be called offside if he is:

In the opposition’s half.

Interfering with play (that is, he’s part of the attacking move).

Interfering with an opponent (that is, he’s preventing the opponent from defending against the attacking move).

Gaining any advantage by being in that position.

A player cannot be offside from a goal kick, throw in or corner.


An offensive or attacking player can’t be ahead of the ball and involved in the play unless there is a defender between him and the goalkeeper. Or, you can’t hang out at the other team’s goal waiting for the ball.

You can’t be offside if you are standing on your half of the field. Also, the offside rule applies when the ball is kicked, not when the player receives the ball. To accurately judge offside, one has to stay even with the second-to-last defender and not watch the ball. We tell kids to listen for the kick of the ball and judge at the time of the kick whether or not the player was offside.

http://i8.photobucket.com/albums/a14/KevAndLori/Onside_diagram.jpg

[SoonerHoops]

Can someone explain the rule to me? Please make it as simple as possible. Are there lines involved like in hockey? If a defender is back closer to her goal than any opponent, is a long downfield pass then okay by the offense?


It's pretty hard to explain. Compare it to cherry picking in basketball. Let's say Michael Jordan decided he didn't want to play defense, so he stayed on the offensive end of the court by the rim and just waited for someone to pass him the ball. In soccer, that's offsides.


Basically, there has to be two defenders between the attacker and the goal at almost all times. Usually, one of the defenders is the goalkeeper. So, usually, you need one opposing player plus the goalkeeper between you and the net, or else you're offside.


The trick for the offensive players is to be onside (ie, two opposing players between them and the goal) then start running at the same time, or after, a pass is played to them. If you outrun the defenders to get to the pass, you are onside even if now only the goalkeeper is between you and the goal. If you are "behind the defense" before the pass is played to you, you're offside. It all depends on when the pass is made. As soon as the ball leaves the passers foot, the pass receiver can get behind the defense, but not before.


Y
X X X Y X


GOALIE

GOAL/NET


In the above example, pretend the X's are defenders (they are usually going to be exactly even with each other on the field if they are a good team) and the Y's are offensive attacking players. In this example, both Y's are onside because they are either in front of or even with the defenders.




X X X X

Y Y


GOALIE
GOAL/NET


In this example, the offensive players are offsides, as only the goalkeeper is between them and the goal.


Again, it all depends on when the pass is made. As soon as the ball leaves the passers foot, the pass receiver can get behind the defense, but not before.

[Curly Bill]

I understand it fine...and I still think it's the stupidest sports rule in existence. And I defy any of you soccer peeps to convince me otherwise. Some of your number have already tried and failed on that account. :D

[jumperstop]

I understand it fine...and I still think it's the stupidest sports rule in existence. And I defy any of you soccer peeps to convince me otherwise. Some of your number have already tried and failed on that account. :D

I think it would make the game a lot better. Probably higher scoring at least. They could also manage to shrink the field and take about half the people off and it would probably be more interesting.

[tommieharris91]

I think it would make the game a lot better. Probably higher scoring at least. They could also manage to shrink the field and take about half the people off and it would probably be more interesting.

While we're at it, let's raise the goals, make the goals much smaller than they are now, and allow players to use their hands. Let's disallow goalkeeping too.

[SoonerHoops]

I understand it fine...and I still think it's the stupidest sports rule in existence. And I defy any of you soccer peeps to convince me otherwise. Some of your number have already tried and failed on that account. :D


Sorry, but that's just ridiculous. Should we eliminate the offsides rule in football as well? Just allow our wide receivers to stand in the endzone and not return to the huddle? That makes about as much sense as eliminating offsides in soccer.

[tommieharris91]

Sorry, but that's just ridiculous. Should we eliminate the offsides rule in football as well? Just allow our wide receivers to stand in the endzone and not return to the huddle? That makes about as much sense as eliminating offsides in soccer.

I'd like to see the play where the defensive end stands right next the QB before the ball is snapped.

[Eielson]

Sorry, but that's just ridiculous. Should we eliminate the offsides rule in football as well? Just allow our wide receivers to stand in the endzone and not return to the huddle? That makes about as much sense as eliminating offsides in soccer.

Football and soccer are not similar sports at all. STOP MAKING THIS COMPARISON, PEOPLE!

[SoonerRoy]

Thanks for the replies to my question. I rarely watch soccer but when I do I don't understand much of what is happening.

[SoonerHoops]

Football and soccer are not similar sports at all. STOP MAKING THIS COMPARISON, PEOPLE!


So just because the sports aren't comparable, you can't use a similar theoried rule to prove a point?

[Jmorales22]

There ought to be a better way of preventing the cherry-picking, such as a 5 second rule or something like that. The way it's set up now, it precipitates two problems: first that the refs have a difficult time judging it, and second that it penalizes an offensive player for being faster or for slipping behind a defender who isn't paying attention.

[silverwheels]

I understand it fine...and I still think it's the stupidest sports rule in existence. And I defy any of you soccer peeps to convince me otherwise. Some of your number have already tried and failed on that account. :D

There is no convincing you. You're just wrong.

[SoonerHoops]

There ought to be a better way of preventing the cherry-picking, such as a 5 second rule or something like that. The way it's set up now, it precipitates two problems: first that the refs have a difficult time judging it,.


So a 5 second rule wouldn't be difficult for a ref to judge?



and second that it penalizes an offensive player for being faster or for slipping behind a defender who isn't paying attention


No, it doesn't unless an incorrect call is made. It happens, but not enough to even consider changing the rule

[Eielson]

So just because the sports aren't comparable, you can't use a similar theoried rule to prove a point?

It's not similar at all. They're two completely different sports.

And if you want to go there, basketball doesn't have an offsides rule.

[SoonerHoops]

It's not similar at all. They're two completely different sports.

And if you want to go there, basketball doesn't have an offsides rule.


Yes, I realize the sports are not similar. The rules however, are. They were both designed to prevent the exact same strategy. Therefore, the rules are comparable.


Basketball doesn't have an offsides rule? Who knew?? :eek:

[Curly Bill]

Sorry, but that's just ridiculous. Should we eliminate the offsides rule in football as well? Just allow our wide receivers to stand in the endzone and not return to the huddle? That makes about as much sense as eliminating offsides in soccer.

As I've said in another thread: totally apples to oranges comparison, related in name only. Try harder.

[Curly Bill]

Football and soccer are not similar sports at all. STOP MAKING THIS COMPARISON, PEOPLE!

It's the easy way out for the thoughtless.

[SoonerHoops]

As I've said in another thread: totally apples to oranges comparison, related in name only. Try harder.


I like how you make a conclusion and tell me to "try harder" when you don't use any argument to support your opinion and why mine is incorrect. Regardless, the comparison was an effort to show you how absolutely stupid it would be for a soccer fan to suggest to a football fan that they should ban the offsides rule and not require everyone return to the line of scrimmage after a play. It's equally dumb for a football fan to suggest to a soccer fan to eliminate the offsides rule in that sport.

[sappstuf]

There ought to be a better way of preventing the cherry-picking, such as a 5 second rule or something like that. The way it's set up now, it precipitates two problems: first that the refs have a difficult time judging it, and second that it penalizes an offensive player for being faster or for slipping behind a defender who isn't paying attention.

This is one of the biggest problem. Any rule that the refs get wrong 30% of the time needs to be changed, regardless of the sport. It is exacerbated in soccer because the sport is set up to be so difficult to score.

My biggest beef is the floppers in the men's game. A flopper will get the call 25% of the time, but in the box or near the box it is huge because of the difficulty to score.

That fix is so easy it is pathetic. Have a Ref up in the box that can review the game as it is played. Flop in the field and get a yellow. Flop in the box, get a red. Flopping would end overnight. That ref could also, review goals that have been missed in the past.

Purists will say it could disrupt the game. I say it takes TV about 10 seconds to pull up a HD feed of a flop. A flopper will take up 3 minutes writhing in mock pain until they carry him off. Which is more disruptive? After the players know they will be carded the practice would end. Quickly.

The Premier League plays tougher, I give them credit. They routinely fight through contact that would have an Italian sprawled on the ground in agony... Until the other player gets a card of course.

[Eielson]

I like how you make a conclusion and tell me to "try harder" when you don't use any argument to support your opinion and why mine is incorrect. Regardless, the comparison was an effort to show you how absolutely stupid it would be for a soccer fan to suggest to a football fan that they should ban the offsides rule and not require everyone return to the line of scrimmage after a play. It's equally dumb for a football fan to suggest to a soccer fan to eliminate the offsides rule in that sport.

There is no offsides penalty in football once the ball is snapped. You can run as far down the field as you want. If football were a continuous sport with no stops, there would be no such things as offsides. Of course, there are stops after every play in football...which is one of the many reasons why football and soccer can't realistically be compared.

Basketball is like soccer in that it doesn't stop after every play. They don't have an offsides in basketball. Why can you dismiss the basketball/soccer comparison, but use the basketball/football comparison?

I'm not siding with or against the offsides rule, but comparing football to soccer is nonsense.

[Jmorales22]

So a 5 second rule wouldn't be difficult for a ref to judge?

I think it'd be easier than the offsides rule, as long as a ref is assigned specifically to that task. In international play that shouldn't be very difficult to do.





No, it doesn't unless an incorrect call is made. It happens, but not enough to even consider changing the rule
Please elaborate on why you think it doesn't. The way I see it, if the rule were changed, I could picture a man-on-man defense where a defender is trying to keep pace with a striker, while the ball is in play on the opposite end of the field. The striker stands still for a moment, lulling the defender, then slips behind him wide open for a pass and breakaway chance to score a goal. Excitement is enhanced.



There is no offsides penalty in football once the ball is snapped. You can run as far down the field as you want. If football were a continuous sport with no stops, there would be no such things as offsides. Of course, there are stops after every play in football...which is one of the many reasons why football and soccer can't realistically be compared.

Basketball is like soccer in that it doesn't stop after every play. They don't have an offsides in basketball. Why can you dismiss the basketball/soccer comparison, but use the basketball/football comparison?

I'm not siding with or against the offsides rule, but comparing football to soccer is nonsense.


good points

[sappstuf]

There is no offsides penalty in football once the ball is snapped. You can run as far down the field as you want. If football were a continuous sport with no stops, there would be no such things as offsides. Of course, there are stops after every play in football...which is one of the many reasons why football and soccer can't realistically be compared.

Basketball is like soccer in that it doesn't stop after every play. They don't have an offsides in basketball. Why can you dismiss the basketball/soccer comparison, but use the basketball/football comparison?

I'm not siding with or against the offsides rule, but comparing football to soccer is nonsense.

Rugby would be closer.. You can be offsides, but the game is more freeflowing.

[SouthCarolinaSooner]

I understand it fine...and I still think it's the stupidest sports rule in existence. And I defy any of you soccer peeps to convince me otherwise. Some of your number have already tried and failed on that account. :D
I've never met a serious soccer fan who thinks offsides is a bad rule, I think perhaps you are the average "RAH AMERICA GO WORLD CUP WE R SUPREME" soccer fan with no real knowledge or appreciation of the game. Not only does offsides add an additional tactical element to the game, but without it, you'd have guys hovering around their opponents goal waiting for the long-ball. The technical passing and movement of soccer that make it "the beautiful game" would be lost or drastically changed. And for what, a few more goals?

Soccer isn't a high scoring game and I don't think high scoring means more entertaining or a better game. If you want to watch something with 10 or 12 goals scored, you have lacrosse. If you want to see something with 4 or 5 goals scored, you have hockey.

I defy you to find any relevant soccer player/manager/official who thinks offsides should no longer be a rule.

[GKeeper316]

I understand it fine...and I still think it's the stupidest sports rule in existence. And I defy any of you soccer peeps to convince me otherwise. Some of your number have already tried and failed on that account. :D

its there for the same reason the 3 second rule is in basketball... to keep people from just hangin out by the goal waiting for a feed ball into the box.

[sappstuf]

Wasn't the passive offside rule specifically put in to increase goals and attacking?

[Lott's Bandana]

Offsides is simply a rule designed to severely limit scoring. Goals would significantly interrupt the singing and vandalism carried out by the hooligans in the stands.

Can't have that, Mate.

[sappstuf]

Offsides is simply a rule designed to severely limit scoring. Goals would significantly interrupt the singing and vandalism carried out by the hooligans in the stands.

Can't have that, Mate.

Soccer is a very exciting sport. For the announcer...

6ixwKBwfT38

[Curly Bill]

I've never met a serious soccer fan who thinks offsides is a bad rule, I think perhaps you are the average "RAH AMERICA GO WORLD CUP WE R SUPREME" soccer fan with no real knowledge or appreciation of the game. Not only does offsides add an additional tactical element to the game, but without it, you'd have guys hovering around their opponents goal waiting for the long-ball. The technical passing and movement of soccer that make it "the beautiful game" would be lost or drastically changed. And for what, a few more goals?

Soccer isn't a high scoring game and I don't think high scoring means more entertaining or a better game. If you want to watch something with 10 or 12 goals scored, you have lacrosse. If you want to see something with 4 or 5 goals scored, you have hockey.

I defy you to find any relevant soccer player/manager/official who thinks offsides should no longer be a rule.

LOL...a soccer snob. That's funny. :D

[Eielson]

its there for the same reason the 3 second rule is in basketball... to keep people from just hangin out by the goal waiting for a feed ball into the box.

The three second rule sucks, and it's never called.

[Eielson]

Rugby would be closer.. You can be offsides, but the game is more freeflowing.

Rugby probably would be a little closer. Still not really comparable.

[Curly Bill]

its there for the same reason the 3 second rule is in basketball... to keep people from just hangin out by the goal waiting for a feed ball into the box.

Wrong, the 3 second rule is there to prevent clogging the lane. Other than that the offensive team can position where they want to. They don't even have to make sure the defensive team has a player between them and the basket. :rolleyes:

[Curly Bill]

Offsides is simply a rule designed to severely limit scoring. Goals would significantly interrupt the singing and vandalism carried out by the hooligans in the stands.

Can't have that, Mate.

Too much scoring would also interrupt the flow of the beautiful game. You know, to stop play to reposition the ball at midfield after a score and all that. :P

[SouthCarolinaSooner]

LOL...a soccer snob. That's funny. :D
LOL...an ad hominem. Do you actually have any valid arguments or are you just going to make personal attacks and neg jihads?

[sappstuf]

Too much scoring would also interrupt the flow of the beautiful game. You know, to stop play to reposition the ball at midfield after a score and all that. :P

This is true. That time has already been allotted to players rolling on the ground faking injuries.. Any more goals and the TV contracts would have to be renegotiated...