Question Number: 29972

Law 11 - Offside 12/6/2015

RE: Rec Under 12

John Sendrey of Costa Mesa, California USA asks...

This question is a follow up to question 23340

This question is a follow-up to 23340 and has to do with 'Interfering with the opponent' portion of the offside law.

I was trailing assistant referee (AR) in a playoff game where two similar offside calls were made denying goals. The similarity in the two was that both involved players in an offside position (PIOP) who made no play towards the ball, were not near the ball or path of the ball, nor were they obstructing visibility or movement of any defending players. In one goal, the PIOP was outside the opposite goalpost from where the shot was taken. In the second, the PIOP was merely watching the shot sail in from far outside the penalty area, again standing outside the far goalpost.

In discussing the matter with center referee (CR) and leading AR, it was their opinion; however, that the mere notice of the PIOP by the goalie in his peripheral vision and the goalie's making a slight movement in the direction of the PIOP constituted sufficient grounds for making the offside call. Perhaps it was their opinion that the goalie moving in the direction of the PIOP indicated that the goalie had some concern for the PIOP receiving a pass, so he felt he had to shift over to perhaps intercept the pass, so that somehow constituted interfering with the opponent.

As a follow-up question to the CR, I asked if that then meant that a goalie could always make a movement towards any PIOP and that would constitute sufficient grounds for the offside call, to which he answered, 'if the goalie is smart enough to do that, then yes, the goalie could do that to draw the offside call.'

Answer provided by Referee Richard Dawson

Hi John,
The question you refer to 23340 is over 5 years ago, offside has undergone recent revisions and explanations to -----TRY----- to put the.. easy.. back in a simple concept or is that the ..simple.. back in an easy to understand format that has universal acceptance and understanding? SIGH !

Based on your comments it does appear your CR has incorrectly applied offside law and lacks a primary understanding of the wording associated with it's explanation. The mere fact they present an argument that what a defender does is relevant highlights they really do not grasp offside at all! To INTERFERE based on their position alone as described by you, the PIOPs would have to intervene verbally which is a caution for USB. They are TOO far away from play to be considered as active. Nor do they cause CONFUSION or INTEFERE by clearly IMPACTING the opponent in away that leaves no doubt!

Within the offside law it states CLEARLY it is not an offence to just be in an offside position. The PIOP MUST be involved in active play! Offside involvement is judged ONLY on the actions of the PIOPS ...NOT... the reactions of the defenders.

If you state the PIOPs did not affect the ability of the keeper to see or get to the ball, did not play the ball themselves or prevent any opponent from accessing the ball then by what definition are they offside involved?

I suggest you read the offside explanation provided on this site .

If you reread the official IFAB circular
http://torontosra.com/resources/ifab-law-11-offside-circular-2015/
they speak to that issue and they point out what the PIOP involvement requires, his .. OBVIOUS.. intervention which ..CLEARLY IMPACTS.. an opponent Remember just as in determining offside position, so too in determining involvement! 'When in doubt do NOT wave it about!' 

-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

Offside criteria is present when the CR or AR can see by the OBVIOUS ACTIONS of a PIOP the opposing keeper/defender MUST DELAY his action to decide what to do by waiting to see if the attacking player in an offside position actually touches/plays the ball). In these cases it is obvious the PIOP clearly IMPACTS the opponent even if he DID NOT touch the ball.

Keepers or defenders who make unwise choices to cover offside opponents that have no impact we call those reactions -mistakes- not offside involvement of the PIOP
In my opinion? 2 good goals were lost based on your description of events!!
Cheers

Answer provided by Referee Jason Wright

Hi John,
It seems that those referees were incorrectly applying offside. In a nutshell, whether a PIOP (Player In an Offside Position) impacts upon the decision of a defender is irrelevant. So, if he pulls a defender out of position by making a run - or forces the keeper to adjust his position by standing near the post - this is irrelevant. Unless he touches or plays the ball, or actually physically intervenes with the opponent's capacity to play the ball (say, by blocking their path or simultaneously challenging them), or blocks the view of that player, then he is not actively involved. It's not up to us to decide whether that's a fair approach - that is what the laws require.

The follow-up question you asked that referee is a very concerning misunderstanding of the offside law!

Answer provided by Referee Joe McHugh

Hi John
One of the challenges facing the game is the many iterations of Law 11 over the past number of years. Unfortunately some of those older interpretations still linger in the game including with officials. We can recall the notion of active play and moving towards the ball as previously defining interfering. Not so any longer.
As described these are not offside offences as the player in an offside did not interfere with play or with an opponent. At a recent training evening that I attended this point was raised and some referees viewed these as interfering. Two of the most vocal were ex goalkeepers !!. Now it had to be explained that interfering in an offside context is very specific unlike interfering in a general way. It was once said that being on the field of play was interfering. So just because an opponent makes a decision based on an players offside position does not make it an offside offence until the player plays the ball or interferes with an opponents ability to play the ball through a challenge, line of vision etc as outlined in Law 11 s interpretation.
As regards the referees last comment he is plain wrong. A poor decision by an opponent to move towards a PIOP who does not participate in play can never be offside. It is just poor decision making and one that Law 11 should not compensate for.

The following questions were asked as a follow up to the above question...

See Question: 29973