Question Number: 30029

1/18/2016

RE: Select Under 12

Brad of Plymouth, Michigan United States asks...

We were running a dual system and I was the lead at this moment. There was a direct kick from almost dead-center in front of goal and 20-22 yards out. White defense set a wall, which defined offside line. One blue player 'jumped' prior to the kick and was thus 2-3 yards past offside line at the point of the kick. White GK had been on the goal line in preparation, but jumped forward two steps, seemingly as a reaction to the blue attacker.

Ball was kicked over the wall for a goal.

Blue team was celebrating while White coach is lobbying for offside. My first concern was that blue player may have interfered with GK's line-of-sight, so I had a conference with my fellow referee, as he had that angle. Attacker had come from (as GK sees it) about 2-3 yards from the right side of the kick; the kick had sailed only slightly to the left. Fellow referee said 'definitely no vision obstruction' (and pointed out for this quite short GK that even if there had been vision obstruction he felt the GK would not have been able to save it at that height). As ball sailed over GK's extended arms, it was too high for blue attacker to play even if he had been closer to it to make an attack.

Given the circumstances, the qualifier 'clearly attempts to play a ball which is close to him when this action impacts on an opponent' does not apply.

Game ended in 1-1 tie. I had stated to white coach 'If this had been a few years ago, this was likely offside, but by today's rules it is not.' Post-game, white coach asked to discuss and understand. He was very gracious, but pointed out 'We always teach the kids not to rely on a whistle, but to play what is happening. My keeper moved in response to the blue player, which pulled him forward.'

In the case of this being a short keeper, this possibly did make a difference in that being a few yards closer probably put him closer to the peak of the ball's flight. I understood his point, but my understanding of the current rules is that this is moot.

The 2nd qualifier for offside is 'makes an obvious which which clearly impacts on the ability of an opponent to play the ball.' So at question is 'does this player's motion--which seemed to impact the GK's decision--qualify as that impact? I think for the 2015 guidelines that it does not--they note that 'impact' applies to ability or potential to play the ball, rather than impacting the player's actual decision.

This was a tight call, and the call influenced the outcome, resulting in a tie rather than a win/loss for the respective teams. I think I got it right, but I'd like the opinions of the referees.

One additional question: this was not the case in our situation, but it came up in our discussion: if blue player HAD BEEN in GK's line of sight but GK is too short to actually get the ball, does offside qualify? My fellow ref felt 'no', but I think I'm giving benefit of doubt to a GK; I don't want to guess GK's vertical jump.

Answer provided by Referee James Sowa

Brad,

From the sound of it, you were correct. Let's run through the process though. You have a free kick from 22 yards out. This means that the wall is ' 12 yards from goal (so at the penalty spot). The kick was straight on, so that means that no matter where the players line up, they will be in the goalkeepers field of vision. Sound right so far?

So blue takes the free kick and one of their players leaves early. The kick is taken and goes directly into the goal. In your description, you say the blue attacker was 2 to 3 yards past the line, so he had to have left real early. Regardless, that still puts him 9 to 10 yards from goal, still a long way away. If the goalkeeper is reacting to a player 10 yards away, before the ball is kicked, then I would say the issue is with the goalkeeper.

Was the blue attacker in an offside position? Yes

Did the blue attacker gain an advantage by being in that position? No, the ball went directly into the goal.

Did the blue attacker play the ball? No, the ball went directly into the goal.

Did the blue attacker interfere with the GK or his ability to play the ball? From your description, and hopefully mine above, NO. Award the goal.

Just a couple quick points.
1) Unless the players are physically screening the goalkeeper (standing a yard or two in front), a goal directly from the free kick will likely never result in offside.

2) Height is irrelevant to awarding the goal. If the player is guilty of the offside infraction, it does not matter if the keeper could not reach the ball.

Hope that helps!

Answer provided by Referee Joe McHugh

Hi Brad
From your description it reads like you got this correct. The key here is did the player in an offside position interferes with the goalkeeper view of the ball and it dos not read like he did.
Also goalkeeper size does not make a difference. If he cannot see the ball because of the PIOP then it is offside. Obviously the further away the PIOP is from the goalkeeper the less likely that it to happen.
Now in respect of the new guidelines we have to see that the PIOP meets a number of conditions which is that he is close to the ball, he makes an attempt to play it and that attempt interferes with an opponent who is close at hand. All three conditions has to be met and I dont believe they were met in this situation.
I came across these guidance definitions which seem to have been given to EPL refs.
*Clearly attempts*: this wording is designed to prevent a player in an offside position 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 in an offside position is not penalised when the ball goes clearly over his head or clearly in front of him
*Impacts*: 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.
A poor choice by a defender / goalkeeper to react to a PIOP who is a distance away and not close to the ball is not interfering in an offside context and that should not be called.
See here around 2.50
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nptwXLDrxSs&feature=youtu.be