[Football] The disallowed goal

[drew]

Thanks

I’m not disagreeing with you and appreciate your answer but it’s a bit picky isn’t it

Cheers

I think you need to remember that being in an offside position doesn't necessarily mean that an offside offence has been committed. That is, if you are in an offside position but don't get involved with play then no offence has been committed. Once play has developed and you are now onside then you can get involved again. I don't necessarily agree with the current interpretation. As an example, Stuani's goal against us at the Riverside shouldn't have stood because when the cross came in he was in front of our goal in an offside position but the ball went over him and was pulled back from where he scored. He gained an advantage from being in the offside position but the interpretation seems to favour the attacking team far too much.

 

[Acker79]

I'm another who thought that you couldn't be offside from a back pass. I'm sure it was a rule once.

You can't, and it's still a law. You're not offside, if the ball is deliberately played in your direction by the opposition - excluding a rebound from a save.

"A player in an offside position receiving the ball from an opponent who deliberately plays the ball, including by deliberate handball, is not considered to have gained an advantage, unless it was a deliberate save by any opponent."

I don't know if this is confusion on Albionalbino's part, on your part, or on mine (missing a joke or something).

Back pass - as in pass from a defender to his own goalkeeper - no you can't be offside. the ball is played by an opponent, so you can't be offside.

Backwards pass - as in a pass by your own team mate that is played directionally toward your own half - you can be offside if you were in an offside position when the ball was played.

Given the context of this thread and the goal that was disallowed, I believe albionalbino meant the backwards pass?

 

[albionalbino]

I don't know if this is confusion on Albionalbino's part, on your part, or on mine (missing a joke or something).

Back pass - as in pass from a defender to his own goalkeeper - no you can't be offside. the ball is played by an opponent, so you can't be offside.

Backwards pass - as in a pass by your own team mate that is played directionally toward your own half - you can be offside if you were in an offside position when the ball was played.

Given the context of this thread and the goal that was disallowed, I believe albionalbino meant the backwards pass?

Yes that's what I meant.
Player in possession cuts the ball back to player behind the line of play.

 

[perseus]

Thanks Drew, really didn’t know that -


sorry quoted the wrong post - meant the ball going backwards


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

A player is in an offside position if:
any part of the head, body or feet is in the opponents’ half (excluding the halfway line) and
any part of the head, body or feet is nearer to the opponents’ goal line than both the ball and the second-last opponent

Anyone got a link?

 

[Easy 10]

I've always believed you cannot be offside if (a) you are behind the ball when its passed and/or (b) the ball is passed backwards or pulled back.

I swear I've seen numerous balls put across the box or pulled back for a tap-in when the scorer is ahead of the last defender. Man City do it every bloody week.

 

[Joey Jo Jo Jr. Shabadoo]

I've always believed you cannot be offside if (a) you are behind the ball when its passed and/or (b) the ball is passed backwards or pulled back.

I swear I've seen numerous balls put across the box or pulled back for a tap-in when the scorer is ahead of the last defender. Man City do it every bloody week.

Only a) is correct you cannot be offside if you are behind the ball when it’s played. The direction the ball travels is irrelevant. In the above scenario if the goal scorer is behind the ball when it is played to him the position of the defenders do not matter, he is onside even if the ball travels forward.

 

[One Teddy Maybank]

A player is in an offside position if:
any part of the head, body or feet is in the opponents’ half (excluding the halfway line) and
any part of the head, body or feet is nearer to the opponents’ goal line than both the ball and the second-last opponent

Anyone got a link?

The issue is the direction of the ball, I always thought the ball had to go forward, in this case it went backwards and Moder came towards it.

 

[AmexRuislip]

The issue is the direction of the ball, I always thought the ball had to go forward, in this case it went backwards and Moder came towards it.

I blame the ball manufacturers, we always seem to get ones that resemble bowling balls, where when they're set off, they have this habit of listing to one side away from its intended target, like the opposition's goal.

 

[McTavish]

No. It has been many years since the direction the ball is played was relevant when whether someone was offside or not.

I don't think it's ever been relevant. This is the original 1863 offside law:

When a player has kicked the ball any one of the same side who is nearer to the opponent’s goal line is out of play and may not touch the ball himself nor in any way whatever prevent any other player from doing so until the ball has been played; but no player is out of play when the ball is kicked from behind the goal line.

 

[Acker79]

I don't think it's ever been relevant. This is the original 1863 offside law:

When a player has kicked the ball any one of the same side who is nearer to the opponent’s goal line is out of play and may not touch the ball himself nor in any way whatever prevent any other player from doing so until the ball has been played; but no player is out of play when the ball is kicked from behind the goal line.

You know it's changed several times since then, right?

Maybe it hasn't. I know I was introduced to it in the 80s as needing to be played forward, but can't remember who told me that? Possibly my dad? But the first time I actually looked up the laws of the game, which would have been early aughties (is that a thing? "aughties"? 2000-2009) it wasn't part of the law. So I know it isn't a requirement now, and hasn't been for a long time. But my efforts to find the full laws of the games from previous years to see if it ever was has been unsuccessful. So maybe it hasn't ever been part of the law and it is just such a rare thing for someone to come from an offside position back to collect a ball that it hasn't come up before and that misconception was allowed to persist.

 

[One Teddy Maybank]

When Webster played the ball, Moder was in an offside position. So when he interfered with play based on Webster's play, he was offside.

When Rodriguez played the ball, Wood was in an offside position, so he stood aside and let Rodriguez carry on. When Rodriguez played the ball again, Wood had got himself back onside, so he was allowed to interfere with play on the later play.

But, whilst you’re correct, Webster headed the ball backwards and Moder came towards the ball from an offside position, he didn’t gain any advantage from Webster’s header.....

All very persnickety I know, but Wood arguably gained more of an advantage than Moder.......

Oh well.....


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Jesus Gul]

Running the line for the kids' football teams over the past six or so years I've flagged a few 'coming back from an offside position' - often sparks wild accusations of cheat from opposition parents. Then I give it the coming back from the offside rainbow wave and it gives me a sense of enormous wellbeing...PARKLIFE

 

[McTavish]

You know it's changed several times since then, right?

Maybe it hasn't. I know I was introduced to it in the 80s as needing to be played forward, but can't remember who told me that? Possibly my dad? But the first time I actually looked up the laws of the game, which would have been early aughties (is that a thing? "aughties"? 2000-2009) it wasn't part of the law. So I know it isn't a requirement now, and hasn't been for a long time. But my efforts to find the full laws of the games from previous years to see if it ever was has been unsuccessful. So maybe it hasn't ever been part of the law and it is just such a rare thing for someone to come from an offside position back to collect a ball that it hasn't come up before and that misconception was allowed to persist.

Yes, I know it has changed several times. My point is that it has always been the position of the player when the ball is played by a teammate that is important; not the direction of the ball or the position of the offside player when he plays the ball. Whoever told you it was the case was mistaken.

This is one of the great rules myths along with 'you can't say "mine"' and fines go in the middle and are collected by whoever lands on Free Parking.

Edit: This was the law in 1977:
A player is off-side if he is nearer his opponents' goal-line than the ball at the moment the ball is played unless:
(a) He is in his own half of the field of play.
(b) There are two of his opponents nearer to their own goal-line than he is.
(c) The ball last touched an opponent or was last played by him.
(d) He receives the ball diresct from a goal-kick, a corner-kick, a throw-in, or when it was dropped by the Referee.

So still position of the player receiving the ball when it is played - not direction of the ball.

 

[Arthritic Toe]

More correctly he was offside when the ball was played to Webster. That is what doesn't negate it.

Moder's position when the ball was played to Webster is irrelevant.

 

[dennis]

I think you need to remember that being in an offside position doesn't necessarily mean that an offside offence has been committed. That is, if you are in an offside position but don't get involved with play then no offence has been committed. Once play has developed and you are now onside then you can get involved again. I don't necessarily agree with the current interpretation. As an example, Stuani's goal against us at the Riverside shouldn't have stood because when the cross came in he was in front of our goal in an offside position but the ball went over him and was pulled back from where he scored. He gained an advantage from being in the offside position but the interpretation seems to favour the attacking team far too much.

No I accept it all but Chris Wood was basically offside but due to the position of Rodriguez and the nearest defender Wood became a non deliberate barrier allowing Rodriguez an unchallenged run to the ball.

It’s all done and dusted now of course but it does seem open to interpretation more often than not

 

[keaton]

I used to think it was the case you didn't need offside if the ball was played backwards.i think it must be one of those things like"clear daylight" that enough ignorant commentators have said over the years you just accept it's true

 

[Pogue Mahone]

Why would you think that?

Reading through the thread, it would seem that many thought the same as me. I feel less stupid now.

 

[Bodian]

Reading through the thread, it would seem that many thought the same as me. I feel less stupid now.

Well - interestingly, you are far from the only one.

https://www.football-stadiums.co.uk/articles/what-is-the-offside-rule-in-football/
There are three other important points that need to be born in mind when discussing whether or not a player is offside:

• A player cannot be offside if he is in his own defensive half of the field.
• Being offside is not, in itself, an offence. It only becomes one if the player attempts to touch the ball after it has been played forward by a team-mate.
• The opposition’s goalkeeper counts as one of the players, but he doesn’t have to be one of their players

 

[Reagulls]

I couldn't understand why Cavani wasn't offside for this? I asked my man U supporting mate and he said it was because it was played backwards, I'd not heard of that..
I assumed it was because he played for Manchester United

 

[Baldseagull]

I couldn't understand why Cavani wasn't offside for this? I asked my man U supporting mate and he said it was because it was played backwards, I'd not heard of that..
I assumed it was because he played for Manchester United

View attachment 136167

he is behind the ball, so not off side, if he was in front of the ball and the ball was played to exactly the same place on the field, and he had to turn back to get it, he would have been offside.