Question Number: 15349

Law 11 - Offside 5/1/2007

RE: Adult

Tony of Sydney, Australia asks...

This question is a follow up to question 15298

I refer to question 15298.
In Ref Contarino's answer to that deflected header question Ref Contarino used the term "describing a PLAY ON THE BALL and there should be no offside".

I looked up again the US advice to referee's and on the laws of the game and it states there under section 11.6 Gaining an advantage "....It also means being near enough to the play to capitalise imediately on a defenders mistake, having gained the advantage solely by being in an offside position. It is most often seen in situations where the ball rebounds from the crossbar, goalposts or keeper (whose contact with the ball is not controlled)"

Making a play on the ball, eg the keeper making a save deflects the ball into the path of an offside player who puts it into the back of the net. The keeper did make a play on the ball BUT did not have controlled possession so no goal offside.

Surely the same is true in the case where a defender jumps to head the ball but it comes off the back of his head straight to an attacker standing in an offside position behind him. No control therefore no reset in play therefore offside.

I really would like to understand this because from this great wed-site I thought that I had learnt that "making a play on the ball" was not the criteria to reset offside, controlled possession is what is required.

I would guess a number of your other enthusiasts are similarly a little confused and unsure now how to call this deflected header to a player standing in an offside position.

Thanks for your help

Answer provided by Referee Richard Dawson

Hi Tony,
I tend to hold your view and think the skill and time required to control a ball as if a keeper parry whereby a physical touch of the ball grants me the opinion of ball possession and control have been achieved only with the head by an opponent requires a quality technique. A bounce of the ball off the chest and then nodded back to the keeper rather than a high jump with ball skimming off some damp hair as he flicks the ball on!

I checked the responses while I failed to respond you did note that Ref Fleischer had a slightly a different opinion than Ref Contarino? The criteria of gaining an advantage by the recipient of a deflected ball does not necessarily forgive a mistake or a poorly played ball. As it remains an opinion to what "played? means in the mind of each referee it would follow controlled possession must factor into it.

An example might be an easy ball headed for the touchline that if left would clearly go out for a throw in favor of the opponent but the opponent chooses to nod it back to the keeper. As he sets and crouches arms wide head snapped to guide it on its way, only it is a softened arc allowing an offside player 20 yards away to challenge for ball possession. The opponent was not off balance or challenged to the point where it could ONLY be described as a deflection because of the opinion of all that the referee sees in the event. This in my opinion could be considered a controlled ball clearly targeted to the keeper but poorly done no offside. In retrospect could have taken the throw in
Another referee might see the ball was too high to be easily controlled and see it as a deflection, as an opinion if he was match referee then that is an offside.
Terminology means a lot as it puts a picture into the mind that could alter the idea being conveyed into a different shape.

I admittedly have a tougher time considering the ATR to be different than the law
ATR 11.6 Gaining an advantage "....It also means being near enough to the play to capitalize immediately on a defenders mistake, having gained the advantage solely by being in an offside position
Law 12 Gaining an advantage by being in that position means playing a ball that rebounds to him off a post or the crossbar having been in an offside position or playing a ball that rebounds to him off an opponent having been in an offside position.
I see nothing of a mistake mentioned in law, in my opinion the ATR is trying to picture the event in your mind to make a distinction in what is a deflection rather than a mistake. Close proximity to an opponent TRYING to play the ball by an offside player is more likely interfering with an opponent. But certainly if the ball deflects off opponent and then to offside positioned player definite gaining an advantage. The fact an opponent tried to play it does not mean it was not deflected only that it could be controlled

Cheers