Question Number: 30954

Law 11 - Offside 10/26/2016

RE: Rec Adult

Russell of Sydney, Australia asks...

This question is a follow up to question 30939

Line of sight - part 2

In the replies from Refs McHugh and Dawson (30939), Ref McHugh asks a worthy question if a AR has an appropriate angle of view to make a call on 'line of sight' moments, as well as questioning if a keeper is in fact disadvantaged.

Each case will have its own merits, which is clearly the case in this (heated) local derby in the Australia FFA Cup played just recently.

This clip is as good an example as you can have of what Ref McHugh mentions.

http://theworldgame.sbs.com.au/article/2016/10/25/controversial-brattan-goal-helps-city-victory-fiery-ffa-cup-derby

Coincidentally, there have been other recent matches in the past week around the globe that have line of sight question marks on some goals awarded.

Answer provided by Referee Richard Dawson

Hi Russell,
a vey astute point well done! I just answered something very similar in a question just ahead of yours. Shows that common thinking that is derived from watching world events.

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
I believe this was sufficient grounds here for a line of sight offside. The PIOP had to duck to avoid the ball and he appears in line with the goalkeeper. The factors that decide otherwise is that PIOP is a distance away from the GK plus the GK nearly gets to the ball which suggests that he had a clear view of it.
I think that the better mechanics here would have been for the AR to stand still and not make any signal. That informs the referee that all is not well. When they consult the CR can decide based on what the AR tells him to call the offside or not. If the goal is good the AR makes the goal signal. If it is offside the flag is raised for that offence.
Ultimately it is the CR decision to make