[Football] Would you support Offside Rule being scrapped ?

[Poojah]

Van Basten's suggestion is an absolute nonsense for me.

A number of years ago I played in an eleven aside tournament where the officials failed to turn up. We managed to find enough people to referee the games, but not to enough to run the line for each and every match and so the decision was taken that the offside rule would be scrapped.

It didn't work - the shape of the game is instantly lost. As a centre half, I found myself having to follow goal hanging strikers irrespective of what was happening elsewhere in terms of play, as failure to do so would have left us open to a long punt up the field to a bloke stood on the edge of the 18 yard box. It completely stretches the game, with loads of open space in areas where it shouldn't and wouldn't normally exist. It barely resembles football anymore.

Can it be improved? Simplified perhaps? Absolutely, but scrapped? That's just crazy talk.

 

[Deleted member 2719]

If you scrapped the offside rule Glenn Murray could play until he is 80.

You have to keep the offside rule, the game would just get silly otherwise.

As an ex-defender, it used to be a skill to get the cocky look at me forward offside, by stepping up and I loved it.

 

[drew]

I would scrap it as it stands now. Offside should not be a marginal call, it should be a clear one. The attacker should be clearly ahead of the defender none of this big toe, shoulder nonsense we have now.

You haven't defined what you mean by 'clearly ahead'!

What I believe should happen is that you are judged on where the torso is. Also, remove the computer graphics from VAR and it should be a couple of checks and if it isn't obviously offside then the benefit of doubt goes to the attacking team.

 

[beorhthelm]

daft idea. everyone thinks it'll lead to hoof and goal hanging, the other side is defence literally parking the bus, with half the team in their 6yd. 6-0-4 would be the goto formation, maybe 6-2-2 for the more refined, 8-0-2 for the less refined.

there's nothing wrong with offside, only details on how its applied.

 

[schmunk]

They actually did an experimental close season competition that did away with the offside rule up in Scotland when I were a nipper. Think it might have been called the Dryborough Cup or similar. Might even have a programme from one of the games. Can't remember a single thing about it tho. Don't think they ever repeated the experiment so presumably wasn't the greatest success

https://web.archive.org/web/2013121...sh-fa-tried-to-revolutionise-the-offside-law/

Another SFA-proposed experiment then followed in the League Cup and Drybrough Cup matches of 1973, which saw the penalty area line extended to join up with the touchlines, creating a solid line across the pitch 18 yards from each goal.

The offside law then only applied when a player was beyond the new penalty area line. The League Cup final of that year, between Dundee and Celtic, was the eventual platform for a final decision on whether the idea was viable.

The premise was simple. "I think it was to encourage more attacking play inside the opposition’s half," explained Tommy Gemmell, who played in defence for Dundee in the final. "But of course you could still be caught offside inside the box if you like and I think that was the idea, to try and keep the game flowing.”

The effect was a reduction in midfield congestion, with attacking players able to receive the ball higher up the pitch and defensive lines forced to drop deeper. Rangers boss Willie Waddell, who was Kilmarnock manager when they were hammered by Hearts, had deduced as much before one of his teams again fell victim to the changed rules, this time in a League Cup semi-final defeat to Celtic, of which goal scorer Harry Hood admitted: “the third goal I scored against Rangers would have been offside in a normal game.”

 

[Stato]

Scrapping the offside rule would turn the game into nothing more than a finishing contest. Why would any Brighton fan be in favour of that?

 

[Stat Brother]

Scrapping the offside rule would turn the game into nothing more than a finishing contest. Why would any Brighton fan be in favour of that?

Much like England fans being in favour of scraping playing San Marino in favour of more matches v Germany.

Why would any be in favour of that.

 

[beorhthelm]

Much like England fans being in favour of scraping playing San Marino in favour of more matches v Germany.

Why would any be in favour of that.

to watch better football, for the games to mean something?

 

[Hamilton]

Ajax / AC Milan & Dutch superstar Marco Van Basten was quoted last week as saying he supports scrapping the offside rule in football as it would make it more interesting .

Do you agree ?

Clarification- Nothing to do with VAR , simply doing away with the offside rule totally .

Van Basten has been on the whacky backy again.

 

[southstandandy]

I'd scrap linesmen/women as any contentious offside is always now referred to VAR and most people running the line rarely bother flagging these days leaaving it up to VAR.

 

[marlowe]

Been tested before in the Watneys Cup and all you need to know is that the change was never taken forward.

It wasn't entirely scrapped for that tournament it was merely altered to apply further forward from the edge of the penalty box instead of from the half-way line.

Looking at the scorelines from that tournament, while it certainly seems to have increased goals scored it was not by huge amounts.

Over its three year run the tournament averaged four goals per game.

https://www.footballsite.co.uk/History/The Watney Cup.htm

 

[Chicken Run]

I would scrap it as it stands now. Offside should not be a marginal call, it should be a clear one. The attacker should be clearly ahead of the defender none of this big toe, shoulder nonsense we have now.

Agreed

 

[The Large One]

I would scrap it as it stands now. Offside should not be a marginal call, it should be a clear one. The attacker should be clearly ahead of the defender none of this big toe, shoulder nonsense we have now.

For me, that doesn't get to the nub of the matter.

The relative position of the forward to the defender would still be up for debate in the lineman's naked eye. Changing the law from 'behind the defender' to 'level with the defender' did nothing for the quality of the linemen's decision-making. I'm not so sure that being able to be a yard ahead will make that much difference to the accuracy of decision-making, especially when - for example - the ball is played from deep. The linesman still has to make the call as to when the ball was kicked (so he/she is looking over THERE) to where the forward was at the moment the ball was kicked (given that he/she wasn't looking over THERE).

As for those who claim it will only lead to hoofball, I am not so sure. It will open the game out, of course. But in recorded history, lumping a ball up to an attacker's head has rarely worked given that the keeper always has the height advantage. An attacker standing on the penalty spot is a waste, esp given that - assuming hoofball is counter-productive (and I think it will be) - the attacker is needed in the build up.

Managers would also adjust their tactics appropriately. And we have a forward-thinking manager to cope with that - better than most, I suspect.

I'd reckon that the first season or two might be a bit farcical with scorelines, but eventually the game would settle down - though basketball scores? Nah. Not even rugby scores.

The only thing we'd have to consider is the fact that it will be a brand new type of game.

But do we need to tinker? Not really. It's been as good or as bad as it has ever been since offside was first introduced - very shortly after the first set of rules were drawn up.

 

[Change at Barnham]

Arsene Wenger's suggestion which is being trialled in the Chinese 3rd Division next season.

 

[Baldseagull]

Offsides rule should be tweaked, not scrapped. I would suggest a player is not offside if the thickness of those lines they put up for VAR cause them to overlap at all, and is offside if the lines have any space between them, thickness of the lines can be increased if you want the "clear daylight" rule to apply.

 

[Shropshire Seagull]

Can't do away with it completely.

I'd like to see it focused entirely on feet alone - the attacker must have both feet [grounder or raised] beyond the back foot of the defender to be in an offside position - yes there will still be marginal calls, but ....
None of this arm outstretched stuff - feet are what we stand / run on, that should be all that matters.

 

[haardman]

Offsides rule should be tweaked, not scrapped. I would suggest a player is not offside if the thickness of those lines they put up for VAR cause them to overlap at all, and is offside if the lines have any space between them, thickness of the lines can be increased if you want the "clear daylight" rule to apply.

I've been advocating this method since VAR came in. It makes perfect sense. I've always thought that a balls width would be about right. Any overlap of the lines then it's onside. Any gap - it's off. Also means that the basic offside rule doesn't need to change for all the non-VAR competitions.

 

[schmunk]

I've always thought that a balls width would be about right..

FFSMurray...

 

[Birdie Boy]

I've been advocating this method since VAR came in. It makes perfect sense. I've always thought that a balls width would be about right. Any overlap of the lines then it's onside. Any gap - it's off. Also means that the basic offside rule doesn't need to change for all the non-VAR competitions.

Some people have bigger balls than others. [emoji39]

 

[DavePage]

should be measured by the torso not arms or legs