A&H

Interfering in play

You've kind of answered your own question. If the player is blocking line of sight, they are interfering with an opponent. And therefore, committing an offside offence.

Key words here are "must be penalised"
Well, playing devil's advocate here.
In that image, the keeper's has no vision of the kicker - so he has no chance of knowing when the ball is kicked or where it's going.

That's a bit different to the keeper's view being blocked of the ball for a split second while the ball is in midair.

Just an observation on that image worth considering :)

I think this is a good discussion - the ins and outs of this aspect of law don't get discussed a lot
 
The Referee Store
Well, playing devil's advocate here.
In that image, the keeper's has no vision of the kicker - so he has no chance of knowing when the ball is kicked or where it's going.

That's a bit different to the keeper's view being blocked of the ball for a split second while the ball is in midair.

Just an observation on that image worth considering :)

I think this is a good discussion - the ins and outs of this aspect of law don't get discussed a lot



Ok let me throw more confusion into the mix, a free kick 25 yards out, the gk cant even see the ball due to his own defenders in the wall, so is line of sight and blocking the view really that important to the gk? If it is, then why does he on purpose block his own view of everything at the set piece?
Easy to say, so he thinks the free kick taker will aim for the other corner of the goal, but the principles are the same, gk sets it up in such a way that he cant see the ball, and wont see it until it bypasses the wall
 
Personally I think these are impossible to judge. Thankfully it seems they are 1 in 500 games. There is just enough in the offside law to put players off goalhanging - no player wants to be that guy facing Ronaldo in the dressing room after a disallowed goal - but the law and idea of direct line of sight does not enable refs to be able to make a realistic decision.

For that reason I would like to see the definition of interference widened a lot relating to the GK. This would also legitimise early offside flags to stop GK collisions and make it easy to deem any PIOP around the GK or goal interfering.
 
Well, playing devil's advocate here.
In that image, the keeper's has no vision of the kicker - so he has no chance of knowing when the ball is kicked or where it's going.

That's a bit different to the keeper's view being blocked of the ball for a split second while the ball is in midair.

Just an observation on that image worth considering :)

I think this is a good discussion - the ins and outs of this aspect of law don't get discussed a lot

True. I think you have to determine whether the player impacts the opponents ability to play the ball by "interfering", that's the key. There is no cut and dry answer. For example, if it took a deflection on the way through and the keeper is unsighted due to the interference of the attacker, at the point of deflection, I think you would have to penalise that as they have become involved in active play by doing so. Where as, if the keeper sees the attacker kick the ball, and an attacker, who was IOP comes across his line of sight after ball was played I don't neccessarily believe that has to be an offence.
 
Am disallowing that as ref, and flagging if as AR and giving my advice to ref
One player, maybe am ok with, but, three players, one in the six yard box, the other two as good as, and imo easily justified disallowing it for offside, interfering and in line of sight. Line of sight is one thing but Hart also cant dive to save it (even if he had the ability to) as the forward most attacker would be blocking his view mid flight, I have not explained that very well but tried my best!

Call it a cop out but public park etc, no goal for me, offside
The clip in question, yes, you can explain it slow mo and justify giving the goal
You certainly didn't explain it very well. Number of player in an offside position has nothing to do with it. And the fact you say "even if he had the ability to" mean you know he didn't have the ability to, so if no ability, no impact.

No offside for me I don't see how you could justify offside here using the current definition, let alone the definition in 2014 when impact was not a criteria.
 
Ok let me throw more confusion into the mix, a free kick 25 yards out, the gk cant even see the ball due to his own defenders in the wall, so is line of sight and blocking the view really that important to the gk? If it is, then why does he on purpose block his own view of everything at the set piece?
Easy to say, so he thinks the free kick taker will aim for the other corner of the goal, but the principles are the same, gk sets it up in such a way that he cant see the ball, and wont see it until it bypasses the wall
I'm not sure I can think of a better example of comparing apples and oranges.
 
Back
Top