Question Number: 30953

Law 11 - Offside 10/26/2016

RE: Adult

Danny of Glasgow, Glasgow Scotland asks...

Something I've noticed whilst watching my team recently (Celtic btw)

Whenever we have a free kick from around 25 yards out and closer, our manager sets two players to stand specifically offside. And I'm not talking about running back as the ball is hit, they're about 5 or 6 yards offside each at least, and stay that way even after the free kick is hit.

I'd imagine this is in case the keeper parries it out, then they're there for the rebound, but aren't they offside as soon as the ball is played?

Or do they become active and are no longer offside as soon as the keeper makes a save?

Answer provided by Referee Richard Dawson

Hi Danny,
you are making an astute observation. Spot on mate!
placing players in an offside position is not, in my opinion, a good tactic as you are 100% correct, offside is NOT reset on a deliberate save or deflection or rebound so they are both in fact still RESTRICTED as OPPs. If they are located within the line of sight of the keeper and the placement of the ball they might even be interfering on the original shot never mind gaining an advantage after.

Whether they are there to distract is a criteria the referee might want to investigate given they cannot verbally distract the keeper even if they are far enough away to not intefere with the line of sight .

When FIFA alters the LOTG teams find ways to adapt, perhaps it is becoming a tactical approach to charge in with OPP and non OPP and have the OPP back off just ahead of those who are not restricted allowing them to get to the ball first so as to ward off the OPP possible interference.

I have watched some very interesting goals being awarded by referees who wave off the AR flag for offside as to whether the OPP NEAR the keeper did in fact interfere with the keeper's ability to stop the shot. Personally as a CR I think I would NOT have awarded those goals based on the positioning of the OPP. Even if you make a case the shot PROBALY would have gone in I find it an erroneous assumption to think the OPP out in front of the keeper, where the player has to duck out of the way to permit the ball flight did NOT truly interfere with the keeper.

We can have a OPP duck out of the way of the ball on its way into goal and NOT be guilty of interfering with play or interfering with an opponent if he is by himself in behind or a reasonable distance away from any opponent/keeper so their ability (the opposition) to challenge for the ball is NOT even remotely compromised.

I have seen goals being awarded where in MY opinion the keeper was compromised, if only by a little, but he was interfered with by the CHOICE of the OPP to time his run as he did. I teach that we ONLY punish the ACTIONS of the OPP as to WHAT they do! NOT the reaction of the opponent. So when keepers stop and do the hand wringing shrug or opponents stop and raise the hands pointing, we simply do not care because we were SUPPOSED to be focused on the ACTIONS of the OPP.

I suspect we will see some video review of 2016 goals from the professional leagues being targeted by FIFA for thumbs up or thumbs down on the calls made regarding offside.
Cheers

Answer provided by Referee Joe McHugh

Hi Danny
The players in an offside position are excluded from participating in further play such as a rebound, deflection etc so that is not the purpose.
While I have not seen it I suspect it is a line of sight tactic by trying to restrict the goalkeepers view of the ball. Again if they are in an offside position the referee or assistant can deem it to be offside for interfering with an opponent.

Answer provided by Referee Peter Grove

Hi Danny,

Though not absolutely identical, this sounds quite a lot like a tactic that was tried by Manchester United back in February 2016 (and which they said they had copied from Danish side Midtjylland). United actually used three players and it appeared to be a clearer attempt to obstruct the goalkeeper's line of vision than the tactic you describe being used by Celtic. Still, I think its close enough in concept and in terms of an attempt to ''push the boundaries'' of the Laws that the same response in terms of the Law, could be seen as applicable.

According to an article about the United ploy in a British newspaper:

'To clear up the issue the Premier League has written to its 20 clubs to clarify that such tactics are not permitted in the English top-flight.

'The Premier League has this week written to its clubs to provide guidance regarding the offside law,' said a statement. 'The guidance is in relation to players standing in an offside position when a free-kick is taken.

PGMOL consulted the International Football Association Board (IFAB) as to whether there was an offside offence or not. As a result the PGMOL guidance below clarifies the situation.

'For the avoidance of doubt, similar scenarios in the future will be expected to be given as offside.'

I remember thinking at the time that it was a little odd that this advice was sent in a sort of 'closed loop' between the PGMOL and the IFAB and the final advice was issued by the Premier League in a way that woud seem to make it applicable only to English Premier League games.

It seemed (and seems) to me that if this was something that the IFAB had decided was in breach of the Laws they should have issued a circular to all associations so that the law could be applied equally throughout the world, not just in England.

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

See Question: 30968