What do we think?
Offside - deliberate play or deflection?
- Thread starter OnlyUseMeWhistle
- Start date
Donate to RefChat
Help keep RefChat running, any donation would be appreciated
But there's a difference between deliberately playing at the ball to block/intercept and a pass, and I think this is more the former than latter
one
RefChat Addict
We recently talked about how AR can keep an eye on the offside line as well as player with the ball when it is played.
The AR here sees the attacker taking the ball forward from hlaf way with no one challenging him. Then the AR solely focuses on the offside line and sees the ball put through. That ball is just like a through ball kicked by an attacker so I can see why the AR raises his flag.
As for the referee, he sees the flag and has a brain fart by blowing the whistle. And from there he just tries to back his decision because he can't fix it.
All an educated guess on how things went wrong.
The AR here sees the attacker taking the ball forward from hlaf way with no one challenging him. Then the AR solely focuses on the offside line and sees the ball put through. That ball is just like a through ball kicked by an attacker so I can see why the AR raises his flag.
As for the referee, he sees the flag and has a brain fart by blowing the whistle. And from there he just tries to back his decision because he can't fix it.
All an educated guess on how things went wrong.
Russell Jones
RefChat Addict
*‘Deliberate play’ (excluding deliberate handball) is when a player has control of the ball with the possibility of:
passing the ball to a team-mate;
gaining possession of the ball; or
clearing the ball (e.g. by kicking or heading it)
The decision here does NOT come down to whether you think the defender deliberately kicked the ball … he clearly did! But whether you believe his action was a deliberate play as defined above. That’s clearly subjective … but given the speed the ball came to him from close range, I’m of the opinion that it was simply an instinctive reaction and he had no real chance of control to do any of the three things listed above.
One thing at least is for certain … it is in no way an “outrageously poor” decision!
passing the ball to a team-mate;
gaining possession of the ball; or
clearing the ball (e.g. by kicking or heading it)
The decision here does NOT come down to whether you think the defender deliberately kicked the ball … he clearly did! But whether you believe his action was a deliberate play as defined above. That’s clearly subjective … but given the speed the ball came to him from close range, I’m of the opinion that it was simply an instinctive reaction and he had no real chance of control to do any of the three things listed above.
One thing at least is for certain … it is in no way an “outrageously poor” decision!
It isn't a consideration in law, but I almost feel it should be, for the amount of impact the defenders touch has made to the trajectory of the ball. Here, the ball played by the attacking player is going absolutely nowhere near to the attacker until the defender boots it forwards. I think in terms of game expectations this should be goal allowed all day, however I can certainly see why, given the limited time the defending player had to react to the ball before stabbing at it, the officials came to the decision to disallow it, and I'd find it hard to say that it's incorrect in law.
I dont support an offside call here.
Considerations are exactly those, considerations.
The ball doesn't come at him with great speed and for me the player is in control of his action. Whilst instinctive, it isn't reactionary, he achieves in my opinion what he set out to achieve with the action of playing the ball and for me the outcome should have been a goal.
Appreciate there is some subjectivity here and we can look to the considerations to find reasons to support the decision but for me this is not a situation that the law is designed to prevent.
Considerations are exactly those, considerations.
The ball doesn't come at him with great speed and for me the player is in control of his action. Whilst instinctive, it isn't reactionary, he achieves in my opinion what he set out to achieve with the action of playing the ball and for me the outcome should have been a goal.
Appreciate there is some subjectivity here and we can look to the considerations to find reasons to support the decision but for me this is not a situation that the law is designed to prevent.
Russell Jones
RefChat Addict
I fully respect the thought that he achieved what he intended to achieve. But for me, all that he could possibly achieve was an instinctive ‘getting something on the ball’ rather than a controlled play as defined in law. What makes this look / feel different to many similar situations is that the contact was so solid rather than a more typical rebound / deflection.
For clarity though, what I posted were NOT the considerations but in fact the general principle of how this law should be enforced. And I can’t see any case that that the defender had control of the ball with the possibility of passing it to a team mate or taking possession of it. The only argument is whether he could / should have been able to clear it (probably over the goal line) rather than kick it as he did.
I think sometimes we have to look around and read the room.
I can almost guarantee that no one outside of refereeing is going to look at this and see anything other than on side. And that is a massive problem either with the law or how we are applying it.
It's exactly these situations stakeholders point at us and say we've never played the game.
Even if you look at the criteria there is more for me that says this is a deliberate play:
The ball was not moving quickly - true.
The direction of the ball was not unexpected - true
The player had time to coordinate their body movement, i.e. it was not a case of instinctive stretching or jumping, or a movement that achieved limited contact/control - true
A ball moving on the ground is easier to play than a ball in the air - true
It's really important to emphasise that a player does not have to be in possession to be in control:
*‘Deliberate play’ (excluding deliberate handball) is when a player has control of the ball with the possibility of:
...
gaining possession of the ball; or
clearing the ball (e.g. by kicking or heading it)
+ Most importantly for this one:
"If the pass, attempt to gain possession or clearance by the player in control of the ball is inaccurate or unsuccessful, this does not negate the fact that the player ‘deliberately played’ the ball"
I can almost guarantee that no one outside of refereeing is going to look at this and see anything other than on side. And that is a massive problem either with the law or how we are applying it.
It's exactly these situations stakeholders point at us and say we've never played the game.
Even if you look at the criteria there is more for me that says this is a deliberate play:
The ball was not moving quickly - true.
The direction of the ball was not unexpected - true
The player had time to coordinate their body movement, i.e. it was not a case of instinctive stretching or jumping, or a movement that achieved limited contact/control - true
A ball moving on the ground is easier to play than a ball in the air - true
It's really important to emphasise that a player does not have to be in possession to be in control:
*‘Deliberate play’ (excluding deliberate handball) is when a player has control of the ball with the possibility of:
...
gaining possession of the ball; or
clearing the ball (e.g. by kicking or heading it)
+ Most importantly for this one:
"If the pass, attempt to gain possession or clearance by the player in control of the ball is inaccurate or unsuccessful, this does not negate the fact that the player ‘deliberately played’ the ball"
disagree with this, the motion is definitely instinctive for me.
hmmmm watching it more...i'm disagreeing with myself actually
Russell Jones
RefChat Addict
I think it's a great point that the standard of football / expected skill level of the player will impact our view as to Deliberate vs Deflection. In the Premier League, I'd absolutely see this as a Deliberate Play. On a Sunday morning, 100% as a Deflection. So our view on this particular situation comes down to whether we think a defender at this Level could / should have 'done better' than he did. On balance, I think he did as much as you could expect at this level ... but I respect the view put forward that he could / should have done better or different
Russell Jones
RefChat Addict
I've said before, I think the rewrite to Deliberate vs Deflection is a nightmare for officials. Not least because the actual law definition of a "Deliberate Play" is fundamentally different to typical language usage. It's no surprise therefore that all other football stakeholders will look at many 'Offside' situations and conclude that 'the defender deliberately kicked / headed it, therefore can't be offside'. Sometimes those stakeholders will be right (in law) and sometimes wrong.
In essence though, I get the intent of what IFAB are trying to achieve ... we shouldn't 'bail out' defenders if they have messed up but nor should we penalise them for doing the best they can in difficult circumstances. Though for this to work better and not cause regular controversy, as a minimum it needs a change in wording away from Deliberate Play to Controlled Play
Good luck with that
Being too clever here serves no purpose at any level
I entirely understand your thought process, but maybe you're just in too deep!
In ideal world (from which I fall foul of leaving on occasion), always give the decision the game expects as long as doing so is 'supportable'
Play on is supportable on multiple levels and is 'the path of least (no) resistance'
Last edited:
i described it above as a 'stab' which is what i think it is (you're right it's not a stretch), the ball happened to be played within reach (from close proximity) so he shoved his leg at it. i'm really torn with this one
This is a really tricky one. The expectation of everyone who isn't a referee would be no offside, but I don't really think the defending player knew a great deal about it and certainly had no intention of the ball going anywhere near where it ended up. Think I'd be going with no offside but it would need a lot of thinking through.
I also strongly suspect the goal scorer wasn't in an offside position at the time the pass was made. You can't see at the time, but move forward a bit and you seem to have the attacker moving towards goal and the defender stepping out, that makes it extremely unlikely he was offside at the time of the pass.
I also strongly suspect the goal scorer wasn't in an offside position at the time the pass was made. You can't see at the time, but move forward a bit and you seem to have the attacker moving towards goal and the defender stepping out, that makes it extremely unlikely he was offside at the time of the pass.