Offside experiment

[socal lurker]

So what do folks think of the upcoming OS trial that apparently willrequire the entire attacker to be past the 2LD to be in OSP? (I hate it and think it will cause a lot more deep defense and bunkering, as well as being appreciably harder for ARs .)

 

[es1]

All it does is change the offside line, we'll still have mm decisions. Also reckon it would be significantly harder at grassroots to call

 

[Viridis1886]

All it does is change the offside line, we'll still have mm decisions. Also reckon it would be significantly harder at grassroots to call

I agree. I think it is (marginally) easier to spot part of a player past the 2LD than all of them past.

 

[lincs22]

So what do folks think of the upcoming OS trial that apparently will require the entire attacker to be past the 2LD to be in OSP? (I hate it and think it will cause a lot more deep defence and bunkering, as well as being appreciably harder for ARs .)

Won't make the slightest difference for the referee on their own at grassroots level, will only really apply (in a meaningful way) at the higher level and VAR availability.
The referee will give his decision and the players will complain that their where in line, like they do at the moment.

 

[CaptainsPlease]

I think it is significantly harder for a referee operating alone to see whether the whole of the attacker's body has passed the whole of the defender's body, than just a part of it.

 

[one]

All it does is change the offside line, we'll still have mm decisions. Also reckon it would be significantly harder at grassroots to call

Depends on what you call the offside line. I would have called the closet part of the 2LD or the ball to the gola line the offside line which remains the same as before. But that is irrelevant really.

I would go against the grain here. I think it would be easier to call it for an AR in general. From a distance it's much harder to tell the body part furthest back belonging to which player unless there is clear contrast (only enforced for shirts) than detecting clear air between players.

 

[santa sangria]

If this is already planned for implementation in entire leagues (u21 swe and u19 italy, right?) then this must have been trialled extensively behind closed doors.

Seems like this is just the beginning…

 

[santa sangria]

Depends on what you call the offside line. I would have called the closet part of the 2LD or the ball to the gola line the offside line which remains the same as before. But that is irrelevant really.

I would go against the grain here. I think it would be easier to call it for an AR in general. From a distance it's much harder to tell the body part furthest back belonging to which player unless there is clear contrast (only enforced for shirts) than detecting clear air between players.

Easier for an AR maybe… but harder for a lone ref at grassroots was the point I think

 

[bester]

If this is already planned for implementation in entire leagues (u21 swe and u19 italy, right?) then this must have been trialled extensively behind closed doors.

Seems like this is just the beginning…

https://twitter.com/x/status/1675890165556936704

 

[es1]

Depends on what you call the offside line. I would have called the closet part of the 2LD or the ball to the gola line the offside line which remains the same as before. But that is irrelevant really.

I would go against the grain here. I think it would be easier to call it for an AR in general. From a distance it's much harder to tell the body part furthest back belonging to which player unless there is clear contrast (only enforced for shirts) than detecting clear air between players.

I guess the line doesn't move actually! It's still the rearmost point on the 2nd rearmost defender...its the attacker that now moves and could be further forward

I do disagree though, you can generally tell when an attacker is ahead of the defensive line wherever they are. If this now becomes 'daylight' then this will be next to impossible in congested areas especially

 

[JamesL]

I guess the line doesn't move actually! It's still the rearmost point on the 2nd rearmost defender...its the attacker that now moves and could be further forward

I do disagree though, you can generally tell when an attacker is ahead of the defensive line wherever they are. If this now becomes 'daylight' then this will be next to impossible in congested areas especially

Not withstanding accounting for flash lag.

 

[es1]

Not withstanding accounting for flash lag.

Yeah, although in theory the principles remain, just the application changes to account for the new attacking position

 

[Mr Dean]

Defenders can't afford to give attackers a head start. This will just lead to deep defending. I think IFAB has forgotten that the purpose of the offside law is to encourage attacking football.

 

[GraemeS]

Spot on @Mr Dean . People get so worked up about the downsides of the current offside law, they forget what benefits we're currently getting from it.

And when the proposed "solution" gets rid of those benefits, makes it harder for officials to get right live and doesn't actually meaningfully fix any of the issues (mm offside will still be a thing), it all seems like pointless tinkering.

 

[JamesL]

Spot on @Mr Dean . People get so worked up about the downsides of the current offside law, they forget what benefits we're currently getting from it.

And when the proposed "solution" gets rid of those benefits, makes it harder for officials to get right live and doesn't actually meaningfully fix any of the issues (mm offside will still be a thing, it all seems like pointless tinkering.

Its an unintended consequences matter imo..I totally agree that this will see a more defensive tactic deployed by many teams to counteract the ability of forwards to steal a march. Days of defenders pushing up to the halfway line will be gone. What that might produce is greater goals, so more long range shots at goal producing more moments of magic. Hopefully these would get ironed out and the pros and cons properly assessed.

Fwiw, whilst not being a fan of the new offside I think a mm offside where the attacker is completely ahead of the defender would be more palatable than the current toenail offsides we see.

But that could be fixed by someone coming to a conclusion without the lines and having an on field decision stands.

But that needs buy in from everyone... It needs broadcasters to stop looking for drama and incorrect calls and for football people (players manager spectators and fellow referees) to understand the difficulty of, and the relative accuracy that assistant referees display, on determining onside/offside.

 

[one]

Defenders can't afford to give attackers a head start. This will just lead to deep defending. I think IFAB has forgotten that the purpose of the offside law is to encourage attacking football.

In theory this stands. But football tactics and strategies have moved a long way since the late 1800s. Only a lengthy experiment at a decent level can tell if it leads to teams defending deep any more than the current law.

 

[GraemeS]

I can't think of any possible reason why it wouldn't?

 

[one]

I can give you one. To win a game you need to score goals. In general teams chances of scoring goals and hence wining a game is reduced when defending deep.

It's all about play style, manager's football philosophy...

 

[socal lurker]

We’ll see. To win you also have to not give up goals. And when attackers can be behind the defenders, playing high is giving up a lot.

I think an area we’ll particularly see that is on FK service into the PA. Trying to hold the line on defense won’t seem such a great strategy when the attacker gets to be behind you and onside.

 

[one]

To win you also have to not give up goals.

Hmmm. True but you can have no goals scored against you and still not win. In fact you can have zero goals against for the whole season and end up in the bottom half of the table.

A draw getting only a third of the available points does have a big say in this.