Question Number: 15216

Law 11 - Offside 4/19/2007

RE: Competetive Under 18

Paola Morneau of Bloomingdale, NJ USA asks...

Ball is at about the 30 yard line in posession of attacking team.

Attacking Player A is standing at about the 6 yard line about halfway between the goal box and sideline. Player A is caught about 5 yards offside as the defense pulls up.

A through ball is played toward him, but realizing he is offside, he makes no attempt to receive the ball and instead attempts to get back onside.

At the same time, attacking Player B (who was onside) converges on it, receives it and scores. While this happened Attacking player A continued to run back onside.

Ref ruled Player A was passive offside and the goal stood.

Coach of defending team protested that even though Player A didn't touch the ball he was offside because 1. the ball was played into his area. 2. His presence there caused a defender leave his mark (Player B) to cover him and 3. his presence drew the attention of the GK.

Who was right?

Answer provided by Referee Steve Montanino

I would have to side with the referee on this one. It is well known that the attacker may decide to take himself out of the play, and so long as he doesnt' interfere with play, interfere with an opponent, or gain an advantage by being in that position then there is no offense.

This case is a you-had-to-be-there situation, as we can't see the exact dynamics of the play so it makes it difficult to refute the referee's judgment.

In this case, if in the referee's opinion the player in an offside position didn't do one of the three things I listed above then there is no offense. The defender shouldn't have left the man he was marking to try to defend against a player who was running away from the ball and going the wrong direction, and the goalkeeper should be worrying about the ball, not the other attacker who is running away from his goal while the rest of the attack is coming down. As far as the ball being played into A's area - you have already indicated that the attacker made no attempt to play the ball and instead ran up field to take himself out of the play, so it sounds to me like the referee made the right decision.

Of course, without being able to see it for ourselves we'll never know for sure. And remember, if the referee had felt that the A was actively involved in the play then it would be offside. It's all up to the opinion of the referee and they were on the field watching the play, so I defer to their judgment.

Answer provided by Referee Richard Dawson

Hi Paola,
It is funny how such buzz words are adopted into offside folk lore Passive is a needless word that only confuses it represents or replaces not involved but by position a player can be offside even if passive as in not doing anything except being there.

Player A was offside positioned!
It is not an offence to be offside positioned!
You likely know the three criteria we watch for when the player is offside positioned
-interfering with play
-interfering with opponent
-gaining an advantage
Offside is only considered by the ACTIONS of the offside attacker not by the thoughts of the defenders!
Player A was not involved as determined by the opinion of the AR and referee thus any decision by the defenders to mark him were unneccessary. While we do look at proximity as the position of an offside player as it could affect the line of sight or interfere with an opponent s ability to get to the ball. however, the decision for defenders to go towards a player who simply cannot participate in active play is a tactical mistake

An attacker in an offside position whose gestures or movements, in the opinion of the officiating team, cause an opponent to challenge for the ball has interfered with an opponent and should be ruled offside whether the attacker touches the ball or not.

An attacker in an offside position who is not challenged by any opponent and not competing for the ball with a teammate coming from an onside position who could, in the opinion of the officiating team, get to the ball first should not be ruled offside for interfering with play or gaining an advantage unless that attacker actually touches the ball. In a close race between an onside and an offside attacker, it would be necessary to see which player touches the ball before deciding if an offside offense has occurred.

ONLY if the offside positioned player does something to involve himself in play could he be guilty of an offside offence. He could be simply standing in the way or running across the line of sight forcing defenders to adjust their challenges to the ball.
A defender running to mark an offside positioned player making no attempt to be involved is not something the offside player did but a choice by an opponent and we do not consider that criteria.
Cheers

Answer provided by Referee Keith Contarino

Hi Paolo. I hope the referee never used the word "passive". It doesn't mean anything and only confuses. The player in offside position cannot put himself onside but he certainly can indicate he is trying to avoid being actively involved in play, which he did. The coach is wrong. Marking a player in offside position is a choice the defense makes. Unless this player actually DID somnething like block the keeper's view or impede an opponent's ability to get to the ball, there is no offside.