One for the Law Historians

[Peter Grove]

now i re read it, i do see how it can be taken wrongly as fact

man on street terms rather than lotg was ( as good as) offside was offside

Very true. You still hear the phrase today from pundits on TV, harking back to those non-existent times when the law said anyone in an offside position should be penalised.

 

[lincs22]

I think what you are referring to (and what he's looking for) may be the changes that came in 1995, when they added the phrase about active involvement, as follows:



At the same time, the offside phrase "seeking to gain an advantage by being in that position" was subtly changed to "gaining an advantage by being in that position."

The difference being that whereas previously a player only had to be trying to gain an advantage to be penalised, the new phrase implied that an advantage actually had to accrue before a player was to be penalised.

@Peter Grove - Thanks was the phasing I was looking for. Before, running forward or even standing still could have resulted in an offside - particularly after a long shot and the attacker chased in.

 

[bester]

Can't find out when the famous Brian Clough quote was, beyond it came out when there was a 'change to the offside law'.

"If any one of my players isn't interfering with play, they're not getting paid."

 

[Peter Grove]

Can't find out when the famous Brian Clough quote was, beyond it came out when there was a 'change to the offside law'.

"If any one of my players isn't interfering with play, they're not getting paid."

I think there are different versions of that wording - and attributed to different managers.* The version I remember is, "If a player isn't interfering with play, what's he doing on the pitch?"

I think it may have been partly in response to sayings like that, that the IFAB narrowed the definition of "interfering with play" to mean only touching or playing the ball.

Which was a mistake, in my opinion. For me, what they should have done (and should do now) was just remove the phrase altogether, along with the equally non-helpful phrase, "gaining an advantage."

*Edit - a quick Google search shows the phrase (or variations of it) also being attributed to Bill Shankly, Bill Nicholson and Danny Blanchflower, to name but three.

 

[PinnerPaul]

I'm not quite sure what you mean by that, but let's be clear about one thing.

It has never, ever been the case in the entire history of the laws of the game that the Law called for a player to be penalised simply for being in an offside position.

Even from the very beginning, the original Laws issued in 1863 did not call for a player who was in an offside position to be penalised, unless he were to ''touch the ball himself or in anyway whatsoever prevent any other player from doing so.''

From then on, down the years there have been several occasions when the law-making authorities have issued specific instructions to referees or included wording in the Laws, to emphasise the point that a player needs to do more than just be in an offside position, to be guilty of an offside offence.

For instance, in 1903 the FA Council issued the following statement: ''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.''

In 1910 the FA council stated: ''Some Referees award a free kick when a player is simply in an off-side position. This must not be done.''

The following wording was included in the Laws document in 1920: ''Play should not be stopped and a player given off-side [...] because the player is in an off-side position. A breach of the Law is only committed when a player who is in an offside position interferes with an opponent or with the play.''

On June 14, 1924, an IFAB decision was issued saying: "It is not a breach of the Law for a player to be in an off-side position, but only when in that position he interferes with an opponent, or with the play."

In 1956, another IFAB decision was issued, stating that a player who was in an offside position should not be penalised if it was clear to the referee ''that he is not interfering with play.''

In 1978 the laws stated: ''A player shall not be declared off-side by the Referee [...] merely because of his being in an off-side position.''

And ever since 1997, the very first sentence of the Offside Law has been: ''It is not an offence (in itself) to be in an offside position.''

Now, if you want to argue that there was a time in the 70s and 80s when many officials applied the law as if it was an offence simply to be in an offside position then I would not disagree with you but I hope the various excerpts from the laws, along with the pronouncements from the FA and the IFAB that are given above show that this was never at any time, in either the wording or the intent of the law.

Some of you may remember the (in)famous offside incident in 1971 in the Leeds v West Brom game when referee Ray Tinkler correctly allowed play to continue with Colin Suggett in a clearly offside position but not interfering with play. The decision caused outrage at the time (you can hear it on the YouTube clip below) and there was an ongoing controversy about it for many months if not years. However to my mind, while Tinkler's decision may have been against the way that a large number of referees and linesman were applying the law at the time, it was not against the way the law itself was written, even back then.

Excellent research and quotes, thanks very much for that