Laws/Rules that you didn't know existed until becoming a referee

[wazztie16]

Why oh why make this complicated and make up your own rules?

What level and how serious? Technically, the player is supposed to leave the field to correct the equipment, but if it's simple at lower levels may be common to ignore that. Whether I make it leave the pitch instead of a pocket is going to depend on what it is--just use common sense.

Taken from another recent thread.

 

[socal lurker]

I'm not sure i was ever unclear on the LOTG, until the day i read the book

I took my first ref class when I was 11, so didn't know enough to know what I didn't know. My Dad was taking the class and was thinking it would be outside and he could have me chase balls or something to keep me out of my Mom's hair for the weekend. But it was actually a two day, all day class taught by a former FIFA referee. But for some reason it really fascinated me, so I came back the next day. They let me take the test, and I became the youngest ref for the rec league I played in, starting with U8 games (which back then were 11 v. 11 on a regular field with OS, etc.). Ken Mullen was a remarkable teacher -- I still remember and think about some of the things he talked about in that class more than 40 years ago.

 

[socal lurker]

What level and how serious? Technically, the player is supposed to leave the field to correct the equipment, but if it's simple at lower levels may be common to ignore that. Whether I make it leave the pitch instead of a pocket is going to depend on what it is--just use common sense.

Taken from another recent thread.

Noted. I (obviously) don't agree with the parallel you are drawing, but see your point.

 

[wazztie16]

Just doesn't make sense to your average Joe.

Either practice what you preach, or don't practice.

Imo.

 

[Peter Grove]

Not exactly a rule but until I became a referee and started looking into the history of the Laws, I hadn't realised that there never, ever was an 'old offside law' whereby a player was offside just by being in an offside position.

I used to believe that there actually was a time when the law said a player could be penalised simply for being in an offside position when the ball was struck. Now I know better, of course.

 

[Ganajin]

Not exactly a rule but until I became a referee and started looking into the history of the Laws, I hadn't realised that there never, ever was an 'old offside law' whereby a player was offside just by being in an offside position.

I used to believe that there actually was a time when the law said a player could be penalised simply for being in an offside position when the ball was struck. Now I know better, of course.

You are (as always) 100% right. The IFAB have been banging on for about 100 years that being in an offside position is not an offense. However it is fairly true to say that referees in the 70s and 80s tended to treat it as if it were. When I started out as a club linesman in late 70s the Laws clearly said that a player should not be called for offside if he was not interfering with play. My first referee told me that to him, this meant lying unconscious by the far corner flag! I remember a League cup final between Liverpool and West Ham where the ball entered the goal from a shot, passing over the head of a Liverpool attacker lying on the ground. It was given as a goal because the player was not interfering with play. Brian Clough commentating said: "If a player of mine was in the penalty area and was not interfering with play, I'd want to know the reason why"

 

[WiisardNic]

You are (as always) 100% right. The IFAB have been banging on for about 100 years that being in an offside position is not an offense. However it is fairly true to say that referees in the 70s and 80s tended to treat it as if it were. When I started out as a club linesman in late 70s the Laws clearly said that a player should not be called for offside if he was not interfering with play. My first referee told me that to him, this meant lying unconscious by the far corner flag! I remember a League cup final between Liverpool and West Ham where the ball entered the goal from a shot, passing over the head of a Liverpool attacker lying on the ground. It was given as a goal because the player was not interfering with play. Brian Clough commentating said: "If a player of mine was in the penalty area and was not interfering with play, I'd want to know the reason why"

I always interpreted as not interfering with play meant you weren't offside. But then in the early days of FIFA video games, coding meant that if ANYONE was offside, the game had to call it as offside, or something like that, so it messed with my head a bit.

 

[WiisardNic]

I've only awarded one spot kick on the stroke of HT/FT
Be absolutely sure to publicly announce that the game is over once the PK is complete
Personally, (as players don't know what this means), I'd always allow play to continue until a goal is scored, the ball is cleared, or it goes out of play

See, that's how I understood it to be before I did the LOTG, but I was very mistaken.

However, it just made me remember, that penalty shootout somewhere that someone caught on camera, where the shot was rebounded up high in the air, but then the keeper was celebrating and the ball then landed, it never went out, so it just bounced back into the net, so the ball was still live.

 

[BCMilan]

You are (as always) 100% right. The IFAB have been banging on for about 100 years that being in an offside position is not an offense. However it is fairly true to say that referees in the 70s and 80s tended to treat it as if it were. When I started out as a club linesman in late 70s the Laws clearly said that a player should not be called for offside if he was not interfering with play. My first referee told me that to him, this meant lying unconscious by the far corner flag! I remember a League cup final between Liverpool and West Ham where the ball entered the goal from a shot, passing over the head of a Liverpool attacker lying on the ground. It was given as a goal because the player was not interfering with play. Brian Clough commentating said: "If a player of mine was in the penalty area and was not interfering with play, I'd want to know the reason why"

There was this one, aswell ! lol

 

[Sheffields Finest]

The offside rule originated in 1863. A player was considered offside unless three players of the opposing side are in front of him (includes goalkeeper). So in the above diagram, the player with the ball is considered offside because only two players are in front of him.

 

[Ganajin]

The offside rule originated in 1863. A player was considered offside unless three players of the opposing side are in front of him (includes goalkeeper). So in the above diagram, the player with the ball is considered offside because only two players are in front of him.

Not completely accurate. In 1863 the original offside Law was brutally simple - if you were in front of the ball you were offside. Any where on the whole pitch. This is pretty much what it still is in Rugby. It didn't work well in Football. Goal kicks would have been a problem with this Law, as virtually the whole team would have been in front of the ball. So this is why offside has never applied at goal kicks. After struggling along with this Law for three years they gave up and in 1866 brought in the three man offside Law you mention. As defenders got too clever and started using offside traps, the three man Law was strangling the game, so in 1925 they reduced it to 2 as it is now.

Incidentally Sheffield tried to persuade the young FA to do away with offside completely. For a while Sheffield tried this...they had a couple of goal hanging players (called "kick throughs") that stood around waiting for long balls to be thumped up to them. It never caught on and Sheffield dropped the idea.

 

[Grayson]

Typical Sheffield eh?!

 

[socal lurker]

You are (as always) 100% right. The IFAB have been banging on for about 100 years that being in an offside position is not an offense. However it is fairly true to say that referees in the 70s and 80s tended to treat it as if it were. When I started out as a club linesman in late 70s the Laws clearly said that a player should not be called for offside if he was not interfering with play. My first referee told me that to him, this meant lying unconscious by the far corner flag! I remember a League cup final between Liverpool and West Ham where the ball entered the goal from a shot, passing over the head of a Liverpool attacker lying on the ground. It was given as a goal because the player was not interfering with play. Brian Clough commentating said: "If a player of mine was in the penalty area and was not interfering with play, I'd want to know the reason why"

In the 70s Law 11 also included “seeking to gain an advantage.” That word seeking created a lot of opportunity to broadly find an OS offense. (And was way players would step off the field or raise an arm in the air and turn a back to the play to make clear they were not seeking to gain an advantage from their OSP.)

 

[Peter Grove]

In 1863 the original offside Law was brutally simple - if you were in front of the ball you were offside. Any where on the whole pitch. This is pretty much what it still is in Rugby.

True, but even in 1863 (just as now and throughout the entire history of the law) it didn't say there was an offence just because the player was in an offside position. Law 6 as was, said only that a player in such a position, "may not touch the ball himself nor in any way whatever prevent any other player from doing so..."

So even then, the player still had to be involved in active play to offend against the law.

 

[Ganajin]

True, but even in 1863 (just as now and throughout the entire history of the law) it didn't say there was an offence just because the player was in an offside position. Law 6 as was, said only that a player in such a position, "may not touch the ball himself nor in any way whatever prevent any other player from doing so..."

So even then, the player still had to be involved in active play to offend against the law.

This is true. But we must remember that at that stage there was no way to penalize any offence anyway. Players were expected, as gentlemen, to just avoid doing it. Free kicks (other than the kick originally given for making a fair catch) never arrived until 1871-2 when they were introduced for deliberate handling.

 

[Sheffields Finest]

We gave you most of the basic laws but their were quite a few other City Rules at the time and the new FA were just putting them in a common form and listing them properly. I was still playing in the goal hanger role from my very early days!

 

[Peter Grove]

This is true. But we must remember that at that stage there was no way to penalize any offence anyway. Players were expected, as gentlemen, to just avoid doing it. Free kicks (other than the kick originally given for making a fair catch) never arrived until 1871-2 when they were introduced for deliberate handling.

Yes, but my point was that it was still not considered that a player was doing anything wrong just by being in an offside position, so long as they did not touch the ball nor prevent an opponent from doing so. I've often said that football in 1863 was more akin to modern rugby than the current-day form of association football.

Similarly, in the original version of the FA Laws, the "out of play" (offside) law was pretty much the same as in modern rugby where basically, anyone in front of the ball is in an offside position but as the Rugby Union Law says:

Being in an offside position is not, in itself, an offence, but an offside player may not take part in the game until they are onside again.

If an offside player takes part in the game, that player will be penalised.

 

[Peter Grove]

The IFAB have been banging on for about 100 years that being in an offside position is not an offense. However it is fairly true to say that referees in the 70s and 80s tended to treat it as if it were.

You're right that the 70's and 80's were a particularly bad time for this particular failing and I think it's where people who talk about "the old offside law" nowadays, got the idea from. But as you say, it's been a problem for a long, long time. Looking back at the history of offside, even before the IFAB started issuing edicts on this, the FA was at pains to point out the error.

As early as 1903, we find the following:

"It is not a breach of Law for a player simply to be in an off-side position, but only when in that position, he causes the play to be affected." (Council of the Football Association, December 14, 1903).

Then just a few years later:

"Some Referees award a free kick when a player is simply in an off-side position. This must not be done." (Council of the Football Association, December 10, 1910).

 

[socal lurker]

And we still have players and coaches who think if any opponent was in OSP the goal has to come back . . .

It seems to name that the last few decades have seen a ongoing consistent narrowing of what can be considered sufficient involvement that warrants an OS offense. And players and coaches (and, alas, too many of our ref colleagues) have consistently been years or decades behind in their understanding.

 

[Dave Ambrose]

Until reading the laws, I didn’t realise that a player can’t be offside from a goal kick. Not a lot of teams try it, would probably catch the AR out. Also didn’t realise the player taking a PK can’t receive the ball when rebounding off the post or crossbar (or from a corner/FK). Have never seen it happen though.