A&H

Northampton vs Mansfield

The Referee Store
Player runs from onside position and picks up the ball. It’s never touched by the offside player whom nobody bothers to track. Goal is good.

Had the other player touched it, or been the only one to chase the ball it’s a different story.

Defence has gone to sleep instead of playing to the whistle.
 
‘I know the rules are the rules but it’s my understanding that …’ stop there Mr commentator, your understanding is wrong and you shouldn’t be allowed to comment if you don’t know the laws
 
A fun one. Given offside for exactly the same at the other end of the pitch about 10 minutes later too.
If someone was given offside for doing exactly the same thing as depicted in this clip, then that was an incorrect decision, given that there's no offside offence here.
 
The most onside of onside clips and well done AR, its looking easy in the clip but there is always that nervy twitch real time
 
The player who gets the assist in the end, is clearly onside.

Poor tracking from the defence who let the player through and unmarked leading to the goal.

I can see the argument made by the defence, as the attacker from the offside position looks as though he’s going to play it, meaning the defence would’ve left it under the presumption he was offside, however they’ve let the other player through and that’s on them.

Onside to me?
 
Is the player who runs but doesn't get the ball not 'active' enough to be classed as offside?

Surely chasing and getting THAT close is active?
 
Is the player who runs but doesn't get the ball not 'active' enough to be classed as offside?

Surely chasing and getting THAT close is active?
As I often do when these things pop up I stress the importance of reading the whole lotg. Not just law 1-17.

The answer to your question is found at the back of the book in the guidance:

Screenshot_20220519-122941.png
As you can see the lotg guidance is that this is not an offside offence as two players are moving towards the ball, one from onside and one from offside position.
When this happens you have to wait to see who interferes with play before deciding if an offside offence is committed by the offside positioned player.
If he does not play the ball, then he does not commit the offside offence and play should continue.
 
I think it's one of them with 2 answers.

What the laws say, and what football expects.
 
The pundits/commentary team stunk of purely arguing against the decision for a story.

I'm 99% certain that if it had been given offside, they'd have clipped it up and said "we all know that being in an offside position is not an offence in itself. He doesn't play the ball, his teammate does who was onside. The officials have had a nightmare with that one".
 
In either respect @wazztie16, (what the laws say and what football expects) this is not an offside offence.

The players know it as it has been the case for a long time.
Player reaction tells you everything, not one player asking for offside, so I agree football expects no offside.

This is pundits looking for a story... No referee on hand tonight to tell them the truth of the law either by the sound of it...
 
The pundits/commentary team stunk of purely arguing against the decision for a story.

I'm 99% certain that if it had been given offside, they'd have clipped it up and said "we all know that being in an offside position is not an offence in itself. He doesn't play the ball, his teammate does who was onside. The officials have had a nightmare with that one".
Pundit/commentary team were just enjoying the airtime I think. The last ten seconds of the below he calls for a red card a couple of times, followed by “it’s reckless, it is reckless”…

 
Pundit/commentary team were just enjoying the airtime I think. The last ten seconds of the below he calls for a red card a couple of times, followed by “it’s reckless, it is reckless”…

Thoughts on that challenge?

For me, studs are down with an attempt to play it. Certainly reckless and yellow, but could probably be justified for a red, SFP. Think it's a borderline for me. The speed of the tackle doesn't help him.
 
I've said it before, but I'm not perturbed by the football community using the dictionary definition of the word 'reckless' to describe serious foul play.
The fault lies with IFAB for heir their terminology IMHO
When describing an incident to a non-referee, I would never use the word 'reckless', because by doing so I'd be contradicting myself that audience. Besides, we all know that the on the vast majority of occasions, the first criteria we use to identify foul play, is whether the ball is won or not (although obvs. not always the case). Yes, my comments are not always popular with R's. But I lean towards the rest of the football community quite frequently when it comes to the divide between 'them & us'
 
Last edited:
Thoughts on that challenge?

For me, studs are down with an attempt to play it. Certainly reckless and yellow, but could probably be justified for a red, SFP. Think it's a borderline for me. The speed of the tackle doesn't help him.
Point of contact isn’t that high. I don’t think the wet pitch has done him any favours and makes it look worse, but reckless and yellow for me. The slow mo you can see he immediately buries his head in the grass, think he was expecting a different colour.
 
Point of contact isn’t that high. I don’t think the wet pitch has done him any favours and makes it look worse, but reckless and yellow for me. The slow mo you can see he immediately buries his head in the grass, think he was expecting a different colour.
Yeah, think it could swing either way really. Up to interpretation, as to me, it's tight
 
Back
Top