Active/not active offside rule

mike65

Anyone watching the Brum/Pool game will have seen a free kick goal (very well taken too by Larsson) which had as its star turn, a brum defender (Jahidi) standing on the peno spot making himself very obvious to Reina. This distraction won't have made any difference to the goal but its nuts that he could stand well offside and not be considered interfereing with play.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/0903/mike65/Active.jpg

Mike.

PHB

That was an absolute joke of a decision. Of course he is active, he is distracting the goalies line of sight on purpose.

Anderson was doing a similar thing a while ago against Arsenal, and Tevez came up to him and pulled him back to an onside position.
It was just stupid from the linesman.

pickarooney

Was there not originally a condition whereby the player was not offside if he was making a genuine effort to get back onside? Quite apart from costing teams valuable goals this rule-fudging is making a lot of blokes look bad when 'er indoors is asking to explain the offside roal.

Malice

I think it's pretty simple. If you're on the pitch, you're interfering with play. Simple as that. Never mind all that rubbish about active/passive!

Anderson's antics in the Arsenal game was the first time I had seen the tactic in use. Is it going to end up like shepherding the ball out over the end line i.e. being done by every team?

Thanx 4 The Fish

I know that it would have made little difference anyway, it was a super free kick but yes Jaidi was interfering by virtue of the fact that he was distracting with the goalkeeper.

Zapp Brannigan

I'd say it will be addressed over the summer. But yeah even without Jaihdi I doubt Pepe was getting that ball!

Bubs101

The linesman would have had to have the testicular fortitude of 10 men to disallow that goal

Galvasean

PHB wrote: »

That was an absolute joke of a decision. Of course he is active, he is distracting the goalies line of sight on purpose.

I agree. I say we abolish these inconsistent 'interpretations' and just make it one of two things, either;
a) he's offside
b) he's onside
Simple as.

PHB

I don't want to abolish the new rules. I think it makes sense in a lot of cases. I think if a player gains any advantage from being offside he should be flagged offside.

If that is interferring with what the defenders are doing then that counts (like say Babel against Chelsea)

Malice

I think a lot of problems, not just in this active/passive area, could be addressed by having the referee's explain their decisions afterwards. Obviously they wouldn't be hauled up in front of a packed press conference and given a grilling over their eyesight but just to say "I sent him off because he used foul and abusive language" or, to go with this thread's example, "In my view the goal should have stood because, although Jaidi was offside, he wasn't interfering with play".

At the moment we just don't know what justification referees have for making certain decisions. Some (Howard Webb) seem to interpret the rules one way and others almost the complete opposite.

mike65

FA have instructed all such positioning to be flagged offside immediatedly.

Mike.

Galvasean

Good, its about time.

Insect Overlord

Graehem Poll mentioned this in his (typically dodgey) Daily Mail column today, calling for it to be banned, but did not mention anything about the FA.

citytillidie

An Fhile wrote: »

Graehem Poll mentioned this in his (typically dodgey) Daily Mail column today, calling for it to be banned, but did not mention anything about the FA.

The radio said that it was to be flagged offside during the commentry of the Fulham Brum game on saturday

Sherifu

It would be nice to have an end to this madness.