A&H

This could be fun!

Mike

RefChat Addict
Level 7 Referee
Stevenage V Dagenham & Redbridge.

Ball played through. Striker who is offside, runs through, gets about 1 metre away from the ball and goes to kick it (I think). He then stops and an onside player picks it up.

Lino stands there with his flag up near halfway line. The ball is then played across the box to the striker who 'apparently' was miles offside but obviously the Lino can't tell. Anyway, referee Mr Whitestone overrules and the goal is given to Daggers. I eagerly await the replay and will post here. Not happy.

(To add to it all, one of our players supposedly got bitten at the end and there was a fight, no action taken and statement given to police).
 
The Referee Store
By your description, no offside. Personally, I think the moment the player makes an attempt to play the ball (eg pulling back the leg to kick), it should be offside, but I'm confident it's not. So we're still waiting for him to touch it.

It was a mistaken early flag, by the sounds of it. Though the frustration is that the flag can also manipulate play. Flag doesn't go up, he plays it and is then offside. Flag goes up, he sees, doesn't play it.

there has to be a better way to do this.
 
technically correct I guess as the guy in the offside position didn't touch the ball (no comment on the guy who scored, the angle is not good). "Wait and see" taken to the extreme!

Would I do that? Nope! Got to wonder what the referee had in his mind there ignoring a flag, if for no other reason than his AR was effectively taken out of the play by the referee deciding to overrule. :confused:

Odd one

As for the bite, difficult to see on the video. Heavy on the drama in the sky sports report - nearly lost a finger? Rule 1 applies - picture or it never happened. Surely the ref would have been able to see a bite mark? Pretty easy to spot
 
Last edited:
Cant be offside in law, particularly as the player making the first pass actually then plays the ball himself!!
"A late flag is a great flag". The lino should not be flagging for that IMHO.
Can't see if the scorer is offside, but a poor flag by the lino and the referee right to overrule him.
 
100% I'm going with my Lino on that... Where In the LOTG does it say he has to play the ball to be active?? He must simply interfere with play, interfere with an opponent, or gain and advantage from an offside position...

By running to the ball like that, and getting as close as he did, he is in my opinion interfering with play.

Tell me, if a ball is kicked onto the pitch, and gets that close to the march ball are you stopping play?? Cos I know I am...
 
IMO the attacker hasn't played the ball therefore he hasn't interfered with play, it's certainly not interfering with an opponent.

Judging by the field markings the player is probably onside from the second play. The OP seems a bit exaggerated after watching the video.
 
100% I'm going with my Lino on that... Where In the LOTG does it say he has to play the ball to be active?? He must simply interfere with play, interfere with an opponent, or gain and advantage from an offside position...

By running to the ball like that, and getting as close as he did, he is in my opinion interfering with play.

Tell me, if a ball is kicked onto the pitch, and gets that close to the march ball are you stopping play?? Cos I know I am...

You are wrong in law...I have underlined the key bit
Below
  • “interfering with play” means playing or touching the ball passed or touched by a team-mate
  • “interfering with an opponent” means preventing an opponent from playing or being able to play the ball by clearly obstructing the opponent’s line of vision or challenging an opponent for the ball
  • “gaining an advantage by being in that position” means playing a ball i. that rebounds or is deflected to him off the goalpost, crossbar or an opponent having been in an offside position ii. that rebounds, is deflected or is played to him from a deliberate save by an opponent having been in an offside position A player in an offside position receiving the ball from an opponent, who deliberately plays the ball (except from a deliberate save), is not considered to have gained an advantage.
The attacking player did none of these, therefore he has not committed an offence
I get this all the time on a Saturday...
 
Define playing the ball... Surely there's an argument that by running towards the ball in a clear attempt to play it, he is playing the ball...
 
I can understand the argument of not interfering with play. In my opinion, I think that this highlights why the law 'might' be wrong. In reality (not in law), surely he's made enough of an effort here for it to be sensibly judged offside, especially at the moment in the screen grab. Interestingly, that's also the exact moment when the AR raises his flag, so I believe the striker has a little look across, then stops. Something's wrong whatever. I've got to say, at the exact moment, he's having some sort of impact on the play.
Boro Daggers.PNG
It's just frustrating, at FL level you'd expect:
- Referees to always go with an assistant's flag or
- If the assistant realises he's got it wrong, he carries on and is then in the position where he can accurately judge the assist for the goal (even if it is level)

On the bite, I've a feeling something will come from it from the physical evidence (Ronnie's finger) and the fact that Labadie got a 10 match ban for biting last year while playing for Torquay.
 
Watching it again, the offside position player runs across the defender at the end blocking the route to the ball which is then crossed by his team mate and knocked in. Interfering with an opponent possibly.

Whichever way you look at it, it's poor team work by the officials.
 
Then why specify touching the ball as well??
Don't know. I suppose it is unnecessary repetition as to play the ball you have to touch it. I suppose 'play' is a conscious action, whereas 'touch' could be unconscious if the ball is hits you via a deflection.
Anyway, being involved in active play means physically making contact with the ball.
 
Do note that FIFA and UEFA have put forth some new interpretation recommendations that don't quite match up with the Laws as they are explicitly written (and quoted by @paulwfromtheden above).

http://law-11.com/ presents a number of them which outright state that touching the ball by a player isn't required. These principles have been accepted in the US now (by USSF/PRO) among other places.
 
If any of you have been assistants at Supply League level or above you will recall in pre-match instructions that referees often ask for a delayed flag but they also say if the player in an offside position is the one most likely to play it and no other player seems likely to play it, then signal. This gives the referee the OPTION of adjudging an offence has occurred. This is most often used when it seem likely that the player in an offside position and the goalkeeper may collide.

In the video shown I'd have been happy if offside was given and reasonably ok if play had been allowed to continue.
 
At the level of this game, i.e. the professional game and particularly with PGMO officials, the decision is correct and the goal has correctly been allowed the stand.

The further down the levels you go the harder the task of this being accepted becomes. Rightly or wrongly according to law, if you don't give this as offside at the lower levels of grassroots football then you risk jeopardising match control for the sake of an offside decision that would probably be accepted by all.
 
Then why specify touching the ball as well??
By analogy to other sports' rules: to play the ball is using specifically the foot or lower leg, while to touch the ball is any contact between the ball and the player. Touching the ball is inclusive of playing the ball, but they are not the same thing.
 
Playing the ball can of course be with any legal body part; head, chest, knee etc

:)
 
Back
Top