So offside when I was growing up, the offensive player was always supposed to be given the benefit of the doubt. If it's close, don't call offside. If it's even, don't call offside.

And before VAR, the focus has been on changing rules that allow for more offense. Example, in my day, offside was immediately called on players that were obviously offside. Now they let play continue to see if the offside player becomes involved in the play before calling offside.

In the spirit of wanting to allow for more offense, and with VAR being used to gauge if a person is an inch offside, I would propose the following.

A player is offside only when their whole body (excluding arms) is behind the 2nd to last defender (including keeper).

As an example, Cameroon goal would have stood because part of the player's body was even with the 2nd to last defender.

It boggles my mind that this is not already the rule.

Almost posted on this same topic. I also think they need to go back to when the ball was played regardless of if the defender touches it. Defenders should not be penalized for atempting to play a ball. Was always taught play to the whistle.

The part that makes no sense to me, is how they are determining the offsides player is "part of the play"

The only real way you can be offsides and not part of the play, is if you are on the opposite side of the field from where the ball is played to, imo. Almost every other example I can think of, your presence would impact the defender and gain an advantage

Meh. I think the game is doing fine and I'm not in favor of changing the offsides rule, or at least that aspect, to try to produce more goals.

I also don't think I was always given the benefit of the doubt as a forward.


My suggestion is that they need to make VAR quicker.

Some of the referees at the WWC have been taking a minute or more listening to discussion through the headset only to decide they need to jog over and look at the replay themselves. It takes 2 or 3 minutes even though they can generate definitive graphics in seconds.

I also think the current implementation of the rule is going to lead to some players getting severely hurt on a play that should have already been blown dead

this is hilarious. people are complaining that VAR is getting offside correct.

Cardiff got absolutely railroaded against Chelsea because there was no VAR.



Swansea got shafted in the FA cup against Man City even though VAR was being used. but only used in EPL stadiums. Absurd!

https://www.mirror.co.uk/sport/football/no-var-man-citys-controversial-14147215

Sadly, I think this suggestion simply moves the goalpost. You'll end up with strikers timing their runs sooner and still end up with a ton of situations where VAR calls a player fractionally offside.

PatAg said:

---

The part that makes no sense to me, is how they are determining the offsides player is "part of the play"

The only real way you can be offsides and not part of the play, is if you are on the opposite side of the field from where the ball is played to, imo. Almost every other example I can think of, your presence would impact the defender and gain an advantage

---

I agree. Short of a drastic revamp of the rule, I think this one can be made better quite simply:

1) There's no such thing as "interference" outside of the penalty area. Only the player touching the ball matters.

2) The opposite is true inside the penalty area. Any offensive player offside in the penalty area is offside, whether they touch the ball or not.

Quote:

---

this is hilarious. people are complaining that VAR is getting offside correct.

---

PatAg said:

---

I also think the current implementation of the rule is going to lead to some players getting severely hurt on a play that should have already been blown dead

---

I agree. Also I've seen situations where an attacking play with offside gets quickly broken up by a defender/keeper deflecting the ball out for a corner and they inexplicably allow the corner even though the attacking move should've been blown dead.

I think the real issue at the heart of offside is the fact that it's very hard for human eyeballs to see.

If I could make a drastic rule change, I would try to do something that uses a line or lines in the field to make it easier on the refs. I wonder what it would be like if you had a line on the 18 or 24 and made the rule really simple: when a ball is played forward from anywhere on the field the number of offensive players beyond the line needs to be lower than the number of defenders. If those defenders aren't in the right spot in that space, that's their problem. AR's would literally just need to stand on that line and count bodies. Foot placement over the line is the delineation.

Basically what I'd like is for the soccer offside rule to do is copy the hockey offside rule where as long as one skate is onside, the player is onside. The soccer rule is different. If one toe is offside, the player is offside. I guarantee that before VAR, linesman were not looking for a toe being offside.

Quote:

---

2) The opposite is true inside the penalty area. Any offensive player offside in the penalty area is offside, whether they touch the ball or not.

---

Wouldn't this disallow a lot of goals off of corners and other set pieces?

bagger05 said:

---

Quote:

---

2) The opposite is true inside the penalty area. Any offensive player offside in the penalty area is offside, whether they touch the ball or not.

---

Wouldn't this disallow a lot of goals off of corners and other set pieces?

---

No. It'd be no different than current offside rules for the player that touches the ball.

This idea gets rid of the arbitrary "interference" or "involvement in the play" that the current offside rules have for players without the ball. My idea makes it simple and clear... they're not involved if outside the box, and they are involved by virtue of entering the box.

No, I mean in a situation like Landon Donovan's goal against Algeria in 2010, according to what you're saying wouldn't this be disallowed since the two players circled in blue (and maybe the player in red -- can't tell if he's past the keeper) are in an offside position in the penalty area?



I mentioned corners and set pieces since I feel like this kind of thing happens on those plays a lot.


Or let's say a player is dribbling near the goal line in the penalty area and gets clear of defenders. They pass backwards. Now that player is in the penalty area and in an offside position so his teammates can't do anything until he gets back into an onside position.

bagger05 said:

---

No, I mean in a situation like Landon Donovan's goal against Algeria in 2010, according to what you're saying wouldn't this be disallowed since the two players circled in blue (and maybe the player in red -- can't tell if he's past the keeper) are in an offside position in the penalty area?



I mentioned corners and set pieces since I feel like this kind of thing happens on those plays a lot.


Or let's say a player is dribbling near the goal line in the penalty area and gets clear of defenders. They pass backwards. Now that player is in the penalty area and in an offside position so his teammates can't do anything until he gets back into an onside position.

---

Funny you mention this.

Would Clint Dempsey's goal earlier on in the game stood as a goal if VAR was around?

bagger05 said:

---

No, I mean in a situation like Landon Donovan's goal against Algeria in 2010, according to what you're saying wouldn't this be disallowed since the two players circled in blue (and maybe the player in red -- can't tell if he's past the keeper) are in an offside position in the penalty area?



I mentioned corners and set pieces since I feel like this kind of thing happens on those plays a lot.


Or let's say a player is dribbling near the goal line in the penalty area and gets clear of defenders. They pass backwards. Now that player is in the penalty area and in an offside position so his teammates can't do anything until he gets back into an onside position.

---

I want to touch on a different angle... VAR is killing the emotion of the game.

For example, imagine that same moment, only the whistle is immediately blown and the players never pile up on the corner flag. Then, after two minutes of standing and four minutes of review... the goal is given. Still hugely significant, but the reaction wouldn't be nearly the same.

The beauty of the sport lies in the joy immediately following a huge moment, and we're starting to lose that in spades

Quote:

---

The beauty of the sport lies in the joy immediately following a huge moment, and we're starting to lose that in spades

---

Yep. I realize I'm in the minority here but I feel like instant replay in all sports is a significant negative to the fan experience. The in-the-moment joy of an incredible TD or goal is significantly watered down by the potential for that play to be reviewed and reversed.

Most of our sports were developed by Victorian Englishmen interested in character development and virtue. Life isn't fair and sports aren't fair, but we've made fairness the end goal, so the technological interference and interruptions will only continue.

Thanks for the clarification. Yeah it would have implications in those situations. Honestly, I feel like even in those situations it's hard to argue that they're not "influencing the play." I suppose in short, it comes down to whether you think influencing the play matters at all. It might not. But if it does matter to the powers that be, I don't like the subjectivity.

After further thinking, I like Van Basten's idea: get rid of offside altogether if the passer is inside the 18 yard line.