A&H

Southampton offside

Austin doesn't attempt to play the ball though, he ducks out of the way? His virtue of being in that position is still not enough in law for me to warrant such a decision.
And I agree with that. I acknowledge this as an incorrect decision. I was just offering a possible viewpoint from the ref on the day
 
The Referee Store
In this case the question revolves around the 4th clause "making an obvious action which clearly impacts on the ability of an opponent to play the ball". The obvious action can be avoiding the ball and this impacting an opponent. Anyway, I agree with pretty much everyone. This isn't offside IMO.
 
In this case the question revolves around the 4th clause "making an obvious action which clearly impacts on the ability of an opponent to play the ball". The obvious action can be avoiding the ball and this impacting an opponent. Anyway, I agree with pretty much everyone. This isn't offside IMO.

You're right that it impacts an opponent. Crucially, however, it doesn't impact their ability to play the ball. Nothing Austin does physically stops the ability of any other player there. That would require something physically blocking them.
 
Having played a lot of games in goal (not a keeper but we only had one and he was notorious for not turning up if he had a hangover ..!) any movement in front of you is in your vision and will affect you. The classic example is when an in swinging cross comes in towards the far post and you don't know whether to dive and keep it out or stand up in case an attacker (or defender) gets a touch. That doesn't mean that a player stood in a position where he might head it is committing an offside offence, but as a keeper that is impossible for you to know.

The crucial thing here is, as is the case with the OP, the presence of the attacking player doesn't prevent the keeper from playing the ball. It almost certainly puts doubts in his minds, but under the current law that isn't enough to make it offside.
 
Having played a lot of games in goal (not a keeper but we only had one and he was notorious for not turning up if he had a hangover ..!) any movement in front of you is in your vision and will affect you. The classic example is when an in swinging cross comes in towards the far post and you don't know whether to dive and keep it out or stand up in case an attacker (or defender) gets a touch. That doesn't mean that a player stood in a position where he might head it is committing an offside offence, but as a keeper that is impossible for you to know.

The crucial thing here is, as is the case with the OP, the presence of the attacking player doesn't prevent the keeper from playing the ball. It almost certainly puts doubts in his minds, but under the current law that isn't enough to make it offside.

If he attempts to play the ball, and this delays the keepers movement then an offside offence occurs. Iirc this was the exact reason the current wording was introduced in 2015...

But I agree that in this scenario, there was no attempt at the ball so no offence.
 
If he attempts to play the ball, and this delays the keepers movement then an offside offence occurs. Iirc this was the exact reason the current wording was introduced in 2015...

But I agree that in this scenario, there was no attempt at the ball so no offence.

Yes, but what I meant is when the attacker stands still. The keeper doesn't know whether to dive until late because of his presence, and then has no chance of keeping it out of the bottom corner. Still a valid goal under current law though, even though it seems unfair on the keeper.
 
Back
Top