A&H

Made up rules

The Referee Store
“Well Premier League players are allowed to swear at refs” - Sunday league U15 manager
 
I sent a player off for booting the ball at a prone opponent:

"You can't send him off as you didn't blow the whistle, the ball's still in play and he's entitled to kick it that's why it's called football!"

Eh, okay then...
 
I sent a player off for booting the ball at a prone opponent:

"You can't send him off as you didn't blow the whistle, the ball's still in play and he's entitled to kick it that's why it's called football!"

Eh, okay then...
Was the ball in play?
 
Benefit of doubt to striker in offside scenario
While this is not a rule/law it is common practice and a good one too for me.

Best practice in general is, if you are not sure something has happened (doubt) you move forward on the assumption it didn't happen.

Offside is factual (either on or off). That combined with flash lag effect means in most cases if you have doubt the striker should be assumed onside. However, this works in reverse if the striker is coming from an certain offside position to become onside (similar to Man City first goal on the weekend). In that situation the striker should be assumed offside if there is doubt.
 
Benefit of doubt to striker in offside scenario

While this is not a rule/law it is common practice and a good one too for me.

Best practice in general is, if you are not sure something has happened (doubt) you move forward on the assumption it didn't happen.

Offside is factual (either on or off). That combined with flash lag effect means in most cases if you have doubt the striker should be assumed onside. However, this works in reverse if the striker is coming from an certain offside position to become onside (similar to Man City first goal on the weekend). In that situation the striker should be assumed offside if there is doubt.
Exactly. So, I'd argue that 'benefit of the doubt to the striker' is actually enshrined in law. But only in the sense that 'benefit of the doubt goes to not stopping play'. No different to being unsure if there was a trip, a handball, if the ball went out before curving back in.

Problem is, too many people think that means 'any close offside shouldn't be called'. No - depending on your position and the relative position/movement of the players there might be an inch in it and you're 100% certain.....or they could be several yards off and you've missed it so you have doubt.
 
Exactly. So, I'd argue that 'benefit of the doubt to the striker' is actually enshrined in law. But only in the sense that 'benefit of the doubt goes to not stopping play'. No different to being unsure if there was a trip, a handball, if the ball went out before curving back in.

Problem is, too many people think that means 'any close offside shouldn't be called'. No - depending on your position and the relative position/movement of the players there might be an inch in it and you're 100% certain.....or they could be several yards off and you've missed it so you have doubt.
While I understand what you are saying about 'benefit of the doubt goes to not stopping play', it is not the same as what you have highlighted in my post. Take my second example when the striker is running back from an offside position . With your principle play should not be stopped while with my principle (using flash lag) it should be stopped. This is the logic using my principle for the two different directions:
  • Striker is onside running forward, did he just get offside as the ball was kicked? I doubt it so assume he didn't. Keep going.
  • Striker is offside running back, did he just get onside as the ball is kicked? I doubt it so assume he didn't. Stop play and give offside.
 
The oddest one I've had is a goalkeeper claiming he was allowed to pick up a pass back as the ball had been volleyed back to him.
 
Back
Top