Category: Law 11 – Offside

Law 11 – Offside

Interpretations/IFAB

LEAVING THE FIELD OF PLAY AND OFFSIDE

Posted on by

Question:
Two players (attacker and defender) momentum take them both out off the field of play by the goal line about 5 yards from the goal. Just prior to going off the pitch, the attacker saves the ball from going out and passes it back to a teammate just inside the box.

The attacker that saves the ball and passes it back goes off the pitch and then comes back on the field in a matter of 1-2 seconds. In the process the teammate that received the pass shots wide and to the feet of the first attacker that just came back on the field. When the ball is struck, he is in front of the keeper and the defender that followed him off the pitch (the defender is still off the pitch when the ball is struck and also received by the attacker). The defending team claim it is offside because the defender was not on the field of play. Then they complained that the attacker didn’t get permission to enter the field of play. What should the call had been? Was I correct by not calling offside and that there was no need to ask to re-enter the field when your momentum takes you off the pitch. Thank you for your help.

USSF answer (June 25, 2009):
If a player accidentally crosses one of the boundary lines of the field of play, he is not deemed to have committed an infringement. Going off the field of play may be considered to be part of playing movement. Players who leave the field during the course of play are permitted to return without the permission of the referee and play the ball.

A recent change to the Laws of the Game (see Interpretations and Guidance for Referees, Laws 2008/2009) makes it clear that “Any defending player leaving the field of play for any reason without the referee’s permission shall be construed to be on his own goal line or touch line for the purposes of offside until the next stoppage of play. If the player leaves the field of play deliberately, he must be cautioned when the ball is next out of play.” You will also find this change in the Memorandum 2008, available through the referee page at the ussoccer.com website:

“USSF Advice to Referees: The new text more explicitly describes how referees are to consider the location of a defender off the field when deciding if an attacker is or is not in an offside position. A defender who is off the field with the referee’s permission (and thus cannot freely return to the field) is not included in determining where the last and second to last defenders are located. A defender whose position off the field was not with the permission of or at the direction of the referee is deemed to be on the goal line or touch line closest to where the defender left the field and must therefore be considered as though still on the field. Furthermore, if the departure from the field is “deliberate,” (i.e., other than during the normal course of play), the defender is to be cautioned for the misconduct.”

So, yes, your decision was correct. Well done!…

"Only in America!"

OFFSIDE AT THE HALFWAY LINE

Posted on by

Question:
While reading through the Law 1 section of the website, I seem to have found a contradiction that I was hoping you could sort out for me.

PLAYER POSITIONING AT THE KICK-OFF
February 19, 2008

“Therefore, if the players stand on the halfway line they are in their own half of the field. If their heads or feet are slightly over the line, it makes no difference.”

Then:

OFFSIDE?
July 30, 2008

“Although it is not specifically stated, this same concept of “nearer to” should be used in determining if an attacker is in his opponents’ end of the field (i. e., if any part of his head, body or feet is past the midfield line.)

As explained, the player is “past the midfield line” in B and C because a part of the body that can legally play the ball is on or beyond the midfield line.”

I’ve had this question come up in a number of games with regards to offside calls (not positioning at kick-off) but the question of whether the midfield line is part of either or both halves still remains.

USSF answer (June 24, 2009):
You are talking apples and applesauce here; two different Laws covering entirely different situations. The halfway line belongs to BOTH halves. Foot position (or body position, for that matter) at the kick-off is treated similarly to the foot position for a throw-in: The foot may be on or behind or hanging over the line. For offside, the only thing that matters is where the parts that can legally play the ball are. However, in all cases, the offense, if any, is TRIFLING.…

Law 11 - Offside

USA VS. ITALY

Posted on by

Question:
If you haven’t heard this question I’m sure you will.  Does US Soccer agree with the decision in the us v italy game on the offsides decision?  I say yes under the distracting clause b/c I believe the defender saw the attacker and would have played the ball differently had he not thought he was beat by the attacker.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MLIc6iMsmU4
2nd clip

USSF answer (June 23, 2009):
The operating rule for ARs in such cases is, “When in doubt, keep the flag down.” The decision was correct…

Law 11 - Offside

FOULING THE PLAYER IN THE OFFSIDE POSITION

Posted on by

Question:
Thanks for a wonderful resource and for the recent elaboration on the interpretations applicable to deliberate handling vs. offside.

I was hoping you could provide some similar guidance with respect to offside (by interfering with an opponent) vs. a penal foul against the player in offside position (OSP).

For example,

(1) an attacker in OSP at the time of a cross goes up alongside a defender to challenge for a header, and is carelessly pushed by the defender — offside for interfering with a player, or push on the defender?

(2) an attacker in OSP at the time of a cross is running towards the far post, but the cross is to the near post, and the attacker is carelessly tripped from behind by a defender chasing to catch up -offside (interfering with the defender by movement that distracted), or tripping foul?

And on a more general note, should the OSP status at the time the ball was played have any influence on the determination of whether contact should be deemed trifling?

USSF answer (June 18, 2009):
(1) Offside for interfering with an opponent. There is always the possibility of a caution for the defending player who pushed, but that would depend on whether the referee needed it for game management purposes.

(2) Offside for interfering with an opponent.

As to trifling, the answer is pretty generally yes.…

Handling

DELIBERATE HANDLING VS. OFFSIDE (REINFORCED)

Posted on by

Question:
RE: DELIBERATE HANDLING VS. OFFSIDE — NEW INTERPRETATION
I read with interest your discussion of deliberate handling by a defender that prevents a pass by an attacker from reaching another attacker in an offside position. You stated that, given new offside interpretations, this should be considered deliberate handling rather than offside. My question involves a slightly different situation that was discussed around 1997 in an issue of Fair Play, if I remember correctly: deliberate handling by a defender that deflects a pass by an attacker, redirecting it to another attacker in an offside position. Assuming that the deflection is not considered control for purposes of resetting the offside situation, should this still be considered offside if the attacker in the offside position plays the ball (but not if he refrains from doing so)? The difference between the new situation and the old one is that in the new situation the handling prevents the player in an offside position from interfering with play, while in the old situation the handling enables the player in an offside position to interfere with play. I believe that the USSF interpretation circa 1997 for the old situation was that when involvement by the player in the offside position eventually occurs, the offside offense is deemed to have occurred at the time of the pass, which predates the handling. In the old situation, however, the handling predates involvement by the player in the offside position.
Thanks, as always.

USSF answer (June 11, 2009):
We see no functional difference (under the current guidelines from the IFAB) between deliberate handling that prevents a ball from going to an attacker in an offside position and deliberate handling that results in the ball going to an attacker in an offside position (who, presumably, would not have been able to even consider playing the ball but for the handling).  Either way, the handling must be called and, either way, the offside offense has not occurred — in the first situation because the ball was redirected and, in the second situation, because the attacker isn’t even given a chance to make contact with the ball because the handling occurred first (and the AR’s flag should not go up in either case for anything related to offside).

Now a simple redirection of the ball from an accidental deflection off the defender is a different matter and the offside would be called.…

Handling

HANDLING VS. OFFSIDE — CAUTION?

Posted on by

Question:
With reference to your recent answer regarding deliberate handling and offside:

A long forward pass is attempted from attacker A1 to attacker A2, who is in an offside position. Defender D1 deliberately handles the ball to prevent it from reaching A2. Defender D2 is near A2, with no other attacker in the vicinity. D2 would have easily controlled the ball, assuming that A2 does not interfere, but for D1’s handling. Should we really caution D1 for a tactical foul, since the handling did not break up an attack? In deciding on whether to caution D1, doesn’t the referee need to determine whether a legitimate attack is possible?

USSF answer (June 11, 2009):
The referee must do what is best for the game in any situation like this. However, if a player gets away with a blatant deliberate handling offense once, he or she will do it again. The intelligent referee will be able to figure out what will happen to their game if that goes on.

In addition, you have introduced a potentially significant element tin your scenario that was not present in the original situation — the caution for a tactical foul presumes that the foul was tactical and this is what the referee has to decide.  The issue you are raising — which must also be taken into account — is whether the foul was intended to be tactical even if, in fact, it turned out not to be tactical.  In other words, the defender may not have taken his teammate into account (didn’t know his teammate was so close, knew his teammate was close but was a klutz, whatever) and thus, in his mind, he was indeed attempting to stop the opponents’ attacking play.  After all, the misconduct is based as much on the clear intentions of the perpetrator as it is on the actual outcome.…

Handling

DELIBERATE HANDLING VS. OFFSIDE — NEW INTERPRETATION

Posted on by

Question:
A pass from a teammate goes to an attacker in an offside position.  Only this attacker is in the area of the pass and it is clear that the pass was intended for this attacker.  While the ball is in the air, a defender reaches up and handles the ball to prevent it reaching this attacker.  Should we call the handling foul even though we know that we will call this attacker for an offside violation if the ball reaches him?

USSF answer (June 9 2009):
ATTENTION!!! All referees please note that this answer involves a change in prior guidance due to the evolving interpretation of the offside offense by the International Football Association (the people who make the Laws).

Back in “the good old days,” pre-2008, it would have been simple: Punish the offside (interfering with play) and award the indirect free kick to the defender’s team, but caution the defender for unsporting behavior for the deliberate handling of the ball. This was based on the argument that the offside offense occurred first and, since it was going to be called because the pass was clearly “going to” the attacker, the referee’s decision to accept the AR’s flag for the offside stopped play and the handling therefore occurred during a stoppage.  The caution was for unsporting behavior since it was the defender’s intention to “interfere with attacking play.”

Now, however, in the modern, post-2008 era, we are unable to do this because the offside offense has become somewhat more complicated. Under current guidance for deciding if an attacker in an offside position has interfered with play, we look to whether or not the attacker makes contact with the ball (not counting the possibility that the attacker’s actions might be considered to have interfered with an opponent).  We must remember that, despite the intentions of the teammate and despite how clearly the ball is “going to” the attacker, that attacker could still decide not to interfere with play by avoiding all contact with the ball.  That “pass to the attacker” by itself does not constitute interfering with play.  Consequently, based solely on that “pass to the attacker,” the AR should not raise the flag for an offside violation, so we are left with the handling offense — direct free kick (or penalty kick if the handling occurred in the defender’s penalty area).  The referee should still caution the defender for the tactical foul.  If the AR does mistakenly raise the flag based solely on the pass, the referee should wave it down and proceed as indicated to deal with the handling.…

Law 11 - Offside

SORTING OUT THE MARCH MEMO

Posted on by

Question:
Still trying to sort out the March memo.

Attacking team sets up for a DFK from mid-field near the touch line.

Defending team sets their line along the 18. In the corner diagonal from the spot of the DFK, one defender positions himself between two attackers. Prior to the kick, the two attackers move (or are trapped) into an offside position. Kick comes across the field and into the corner where the defender heads the ball out of touch. No other players touch the ball and all other players (both attackers and defenders) are at least 15-20 yards away. What is the correct restart?

USSF answer (June 1, 2009):
If by “out of touch” you mean into touch, i. e., over the touch line rather than over the goal line, the answer is throw-in — unless, in the opinion of the referee, the defender was “distracted” by the two attackers, in which case you have an indirect free kick for offside. The latter does not seem likely, at least not from your description.…

Law 11 - Offside

OFFSIDE OR NOT? NOT!

Posted on by

Question:
Attacking player is past the second to last defender taking advantage of his team’s throw-in, so he does not start the play in an offside position. The second to last defender intercepts the throw in and has control of the ball at his feet. The attaching player now comes back to play the ball.

I was the AR and did not indicate offside as I felt the player did not come back from an offside position to play the ball since he started onside (throw-in). Another ref observing the game (and trying to be helpful) told me I missed the call that once the second to last defender had control of the ball a new play had started thus, the attacking player came back from an offside position to play the ball and should have been called off side.

What would the correct calling be?

USSF answer (May 27, 2009):
There is a throw-in by Team A. At the time, A5 is in an offside position based on the standard definition. A5 does not become actively involved in play (but, even if he had, he would have come under Law 11’s exemption of having received the ball directly from a throw-in). Instead, a defender gains possession of the ball.

At this point, all offside position evaluations have to be redone because there has been a “new” play of the ball. Regardless of where A5 is (or any of his teammates are), there is no danger of an offside violation at that time because the ball has now been last been controlled/played by someone other than a teammate.

In short, there wasn’t the slightest possibility at any time in this scenario of an offside violation.…

"Inventive Coaches"

OFFSIDE?

Posted on by

Question:
Picture this! Last minute of play, Team A is losing 2-1 and is awarded a Corner Kick. The keeper from Team A runs up field to participate in the Corner Kick, leaving 1 defender and 1 attacker (Team B) behind. Corner is taken and Team B defense clears the ball all the way to the other half of the field where the lone attacker (B) was next to the defender(A). The AR promptly signals the attacker for Offside as he made a play for the ball. Team B players and Coach of course, were upset with the referee claiming that there should’ve never been a Offside called because the keeper (A) being up field, put the attacker (B) in play-negating any offside.

USSF answer (May 4, 2009):
Another case of “inventive” coaches and players. We all know that a player on the team attacking the opposing team’s goal may be no nearer that goal than either the ball or at least two opposing players to avoid being in an offside position. There is no requirement that the goalkeeper must be one of those two players.

According to your description, there was only a single defender anywhere near the attacking player (Team B), so the attacking player was clearly in an offside position and must be declared offside if he becomes involved by making a play for the ball. Correct decision: Offside for interfering with play.…