FIFA new Offside Rule , Vote is coming

Ironically I can't see your video either.

Mine was Inter Milan v Sienna Freekick taken by Ibrahimovic, in case you want to find a copy that works in USA.
I accidentally quoted the wrong video - try to see if you can view the corrected link:


Both Jon Champion and Taylor Twellman thought that this goal was going to be disallowed due to offside - I thought that it wouldn't be because I had the advantage of seeing the replay and seeing the defender try to play the ball... anyhow, this is why I dislike the current offside rule.
 
Last edited:
I saw the first video - I don't get your point. I was unable to watch the 2nd video (not available to view in the USA).

This is quintessential to why I think a rule change is in order:


How on earth is Lukaku's goal allowed - why? - because under current rules the defender tried to make a play on the ball. IMO - this is why the offside rule needs to be changed.

Sorry can't agree with this. You can't have an insurance policy for the defenders making a play for the ball and miskicking or misdirecting off their thigh, knee, buttocks etc and then getting the benefit of an offside trap.
 
Last edited:
Sorry can't agree with this. You can't have an insurance policy for the defenders making a play for the ball and miskicking or misdirecting of thigh, knee, buttocks etc and then getting the benefit of an offside trap.
Sorry you can't see the video - Google Belgium v. Russia first goal - I'm sure you'll find something you can watch.

The problem with >> You can't have an insurance policy for the defenders making a play for the ball and miskicking or misdirecting of thigh, knee, buttocks etc and then getting the benefit of an offside trap >> is that the defender may not know what's behind him and may not know if for sure the person behind him is offside and even if he's offside - if the refs will agree that he's offside. As a defender you will try to play the ball - 100%.

It seems that you think this is fine though - I disagree - but there's no right or wrong here - it's just a matter of opinion on what seems most fair/is better for football.
 
Sorry you can't see the video - Google Belgium v. Russia first goal - I'm sure you'll find something you can watch.

The problem with >> You can't have an insurance policy for the defenders making a play for the ball and miskicking or misdirecting of thigh, knee, buttocks etc and then getting the benefit of an offside trap >> is that the defender may not know what's behind him and may not know if for sure the person behind him is offside and even if he's offside - if the refs will agree that he's offside. As a defender you will try to play the ball - 100%.

It seems that you think this is fine though - I disagree - but there's no right or wrong here - it's just a matter of opinion on what seems most fair/is better for football.

I was able to see the video, should have confirmed that. It's not easy to always be aware of where attackers are, but it's their job as defenders to communicate and make each other aware as best as they can.

Yes, I'm happy with this situation. Nothing against you thinking the opposite of me. Although I think the rule change you advocate is actually going back to a time when the offside rule was more strict, and encouraged more defensive play at the expense of attacking football, goals and excitement.
 
Sorry you can't see the video - Google Belgium v. Russia first goal - I'm sure you'll find something you can watch.

The problem with >> You can't have an insurance policy for the defenders making a play for the ball and miskicking or misdirecting of thigh, knee, buttocks etc and then getting the benefit of an offside trap >> is that the defender may not know what's behind him and may not know if for sure the person behind him is offside and even if he's offside - if the refs will agree that he's offside. As a defender you will try to play the ball - 100%.

It seems that you think this is fine though - I disagree - but there's no right or wrong here - it's just a matter of opinion on what seems most fair/is better for football.
I see nothing wrong with Lukaku's goal, he wasn't goal-hanging as such, he made his initial run too early and strayed offside but then the defender makes an absolute hash of clearing or controlling the ball(I can't tell which it was supposed to be!) and presents it on a plate to Lukaku. There's no reason why Lukaku should be penalised for the defender's error.
 
I was able to see the video, should have confirmed that. It's not easy to always be aware of where attackers are, but it's their job as defenders to communicate and make each other aware as best as they can.

Yes, I'm happy with this situation. Nothing against you thinking the opposite of me. Although I think the rule change you advocate is actually going back to a time when the offside rule was more strict, and encouraged more defensive play at the expense of attacking football, goals and excitement.
Cheers mate. I enjoyed the conversation with you :-)
 
Laws of the Game: Continued focus on the offside rule, especially in the era of replay, to encourage more offense. Currently testing in China and South America

:
This will be onside after the Rule change.

Goals with the new Rule change :

1) Give matches more goals
2) Give Teams opportunity for different playing style
3) Encourage more effective Counter Attacking and transitional play

When/is this coming in?

If the rule changed to this example and/or there had to be clear space between the defender and the attacker, it'll be raining goals....and, imo, be a good move....no more 0-0 and 1-0
 
Previously it was said that the Stockley Park Game Manipulators under their still mysterious Match Commander would be using a thicker line for checking offsides. I am still puzzling over this because a thinner line would be more precise and accurate.
Thicker line means bugger all. ‘Where exactly on that line are you measuring from? The front edge, back edge or the centre?’
Of course if it’s the leading edge (which it should be), then may as well be a massively wide solid block. Makes no difference then.

It’s all about the definition of exactly what is specified as needing to be measured, and how ambiguously that can be interpreted.
 

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top
  AdBlock Detected
Bluemoon relies on advertising to pay our hosting fees. Please support the site by disabling your ad blocking software to help keep the forum sustainable. Thanks.