Question Number: 29613

Law 11 - Offside 8/18/2015

RE: Adult

S of Syd, Nsw Aus asks...

Is the new epl interpretation of offisde rule. Now universal and used in australia or?

Answer provided by Referee Joe McHugh

Hi
The change to the Interpretation of Law 11 is worldwide and it came into force on the 17th July
This is a copy of the IFAB circular

** To all football associations, confederations and FIFA
Circular no. 3
Zurich, 17 July 2015 SEC/2015-C051/bru
ADDITIONAL GUIDANCE ON LAW 11 – OFFSIDE
Dear Sir or Madam,
Following requests from a number of football associations and confederations regarding offside, The IFAB would like to provide additional clarification and/or guidance relating to the definition of the offside offence of 'interfering with an opponent' and also to the definition of 'save' in the context of offside (Laws of the Game, p. 110).
This clarification follows detailed deliberations between our Technical Sub-Committee and the Technical Advisory Panel, which consists of refereeing experts from all the confederations.
Please be informed that this clarification replaces any non-IFAB instructions or guidance received previously with respect to this matter. We trust that this clarification will ensure a higher uniformity in the application of Law 11.
1. "Interfering with an opponent"
Clarification
In addition to the situations already outlined in the Laws of the Game, a player in an offside position shall also be penalised if he:
# clearly attempts to play a ball which is close to him when this action impacts on an opponent or
# makes an obvious action which clearly impacts on the ability of an opponent to play the ball

Guidance
# 'clearly attempts' – this wording is designed to prevent a player who runs towards the ball from quite a long distance being penalised (unless he gets close to the ball).
# 'close' is important so that a player is not penalised when the ball goes clearly over his head or clearly in front of him.
# 'impact' applies to an opponent's ability (or potential) to play the ball and will include situations where an opponent's movement to play the ball is delayed, hindered or prevented by the offside player.
However, just because a player is an offside position it does not always mean that he has an impact. For example:
# if the ball is on the right-hand side of the field and an 'offside' player in the centre of the field moves into a new attacking position he is not penalised unless this action affects an opponent's ability to play the ball # where a player tries to play the ball as it is going into the goal without affecting an opponent, or in situations where there is no opposition player near, he should not be penalised

2. "Save"
Clarification
Law 11 outlines situations when an offside player is penalised by becoming involved in active play and these include (p. 110):
# "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.

As indicated in the last sentence a 'save' can be made by any player and is not limited to the goalkeeper. Therefore, The IFAB wishes to clarify that: A 'save' is when a player stops a ball which is going into or very close to the goal with any part of his body except his hands (except for the goalkeeper within his own penalty area).

NB: This clarification is consistent with the use of the word 'save' in Law 12 – Offences by the Goalkeeper (p. 122).

Additional information: change of FIFA Quality Program logos Unrelated to Law 11, we would like to take this opportunity to mention the change to the FIFA quality marks on footballs (p. 16), which was not part of the previous correspondence. This change is already reflected in the printed editions of the Laws of the Game 2015/16, which you received recently.

Thank you for your attention and please feel free to contact us should you have any questions or enquiries.

Yours sincerely,
On behalf of the Board of Directors
Lukas Brud Secretary **

Answer provided by Referee Richard Dawson

Hi S,
it might seem incongruous but the rearrangement of the descriptions of offside criteria are not truly a change in understanding they try to detail the thinking into an easier digestive pabulum of understanding.


The ACTIONS of defenders play NO part in deciding involvement of an offside opponent.
An offside restricted player can do nothing on their own to reset their restriction.

The question to be asked and answered by the referee is,

WHAT DOES THE PIOP (player in offside position) /ORP(offside restricted player) actually DO to be considered as INVOLVED?

To be guilty of interfering with play we ask that the PIOP actually TOUCH the ball to be guilt of involvement! There is a caveat however that permits an offside call for involvement if the ORP is the only opposition player who is in pursuit of a ball, and that he WILL definitely get to that ball before ANYONE else or before the ball can exit the field of play!

If there is another onside attacker in pursuit of that ball we WAIT until a PHYSICAL touch of the ball occurs before we could conclude the PIOP interfered with play.

However that does not mean a ORP could not be guilty of interfering with an opponent while chasing a ball only that he must impede or make contact by screening thus causing the opposition interference by those actions

To be guilty of interfering with an opponent we do not require a physical touch of the ball! Instead we gauge the PIOP proximity to an opponent and the actions he employs as being effective in truly interfering with the opponent's ability to get to and play the ball. JUST because he is NEAR is NOT the reason, ask, what is he DOING??

A PIOP running after a ball does not prevent or impact the opposition unless he impedes, physically screens, actually challenges for control of the ball or makes contact with the ball himself.

A late arriving PIOP who is not blocking the opponents' sight or access to the ball may not be preventing defenders from their attempt to play the ball despite his CLOSE proximity! Make no mistake, a defender under PRESSURE to clear or play a ball, feels that nerve tingling adrenalin, knowing the opposition is closing him down. That pressure though is part of normal match conditions, pressure itself is not a factor, when we equate close versus actual involvement where the process of challenging for ball possession creates offside involvement because it impacts the defender from clearly accessing the ball.

The Save aspect, placing a deliberately played ball that ELSEWHERE on the field ...WOULD reset offside ... is instead treated as a deflection or rebound! I do worry slightly as the verification process of deciding if ANY shot towards the goal that is blocked is in essence a save! Especially if there are other defenders or team mates in between the ball and goal. I must assume we must be certain that without that particular deliberate save intervention that goal could likely score. I will go out on a limb here and suggest that almost any defenders' clearance of a ball directed into the penalty area by the opposition is to some extent a save attempt when they deliberately try to knock the ball away from their goal. If we understand the FIFA explanation, only shots directed into or at the goal itself reflects a SAVE possibility.

Cheers