Question:
As many times as this has been debated in your forum, I am still unclear on a couple of special offside situations. The memorandum on offside seems to leave a few gray areas which raise havoc with teaching offside in the Entry-Level classes. What exactly does, “the actions of the (offside position) attacker influence the actions of a defender …” mean??

For example, a ball is played by an attacker from his/her own end that lands near the penalty area and bounces in the direction of the keeper. A second attacker, in an offside position near the halfway line when the ball was played, begins to run in the direction of the keeper. No other defenders beside the keeper are in the attacking end.

The AR does not signal offside and referee decides to allow the keeper to play the ball. However,the keeper mishandles the ball and it goes into the goal. What is/was the correct procedure for the AR and referee? Can it be assumed that the distant approach of the offside attacker induced the keeper to misplay the ball?

In the same situation, a second attacker running from an onside position joins his teammate in an approach to the keeper. This time the ball bounds away from the keeper and the onside attacker collects the ball and scores.

USSF answer (February 10, 2012):
This response of 29 September 2009 should suffice:
“The attacker is interfering with the opponents — both by drawing the opponent into a competition for the ball and by actively challenging the opponent while both are racing for the ball. Our thoughts? Pop that flag upon the very first indication that the attacker was acting to distract or deceive the opponent while in an offside position.”

However, if there is no interference, as in your first example of the goalkeeper far,far away and the attacker near the halfway line, let play develop until there is some sign of this interference. This also applies to the second scenario: If the player in the onside position is going for the ball and the player in the offside position is behind him, let it go until it is clear that the player in the offside position is interfering.

Two applicable position papers have been issued and are available on the USSF website:

1. August 24, 2005

Re: Law 11: Offside
IFAB advice on the application of Law 11, Decision 2

Date: August 24, 2005

The International Football Association Board (IFAB) revised Law 11 (Offside) effective 1 July 2005 by, among other things, incorporating definitions of what it means to • interfere with play,
• interfere with an opponent, and
• gain an advantage by being in an offside position.

The USSF Advice to Referees section of Memorandum 2005 ended its discussion of the addition of these three definitions by noting:

Referees are reminded that the reference to “playing or touching the ball” does not mean that an offside infraction cannot be called until an attacker in an offside position actually touches the ball.

Because of recent developments which appear to focus on “touching the ball,” there has been some confusion about the above statement. “Touching the ball”is not a requirement for calling an offside violation if the attacker is interfering with an opponent by making a movement or gesture which, in the opinion of the referee, deceives or distracts that opponent. What the International Board has recently emphasized is that, in the unlikely event an attacker in an offside position is not challenged by any opponent, the attacker should not be ruled offside unless and until the attacker physically touches the ball.
This emphasis is both simple and easily implemented:

• An attacker in an offside position who is not challenged by any opponent and not competing for the ball with a teammate coming from an onside position who could, in the opinion of the officiating team, get to the ball first should not be ruled offside for interfering with play or gaining an advantage unless that attacker actually touches the ball. In a close race between an onside and an offside attacker, it would be necessary to see which player touches the ball before deciding if an offside offense has occurred.

• An attacker in an offside position whose gestures or movements, in the opinion of the officiating team, cause an opponent to challenge for the ball has interfered with an opponent and should be ruled offside whether the attacker touches the ball or not.
The International Board issued a Circular on August 17, 2005, which reaffirmed the above approach. As the Board stated (emphasis added): “A player in an offside position may be penalized before playing or touching the ball if, in the opinion of the referee, no other teammate in an onside position has the opportunity to play the ball.” Further, “If an opponent becomes involved in the play and if, in the opinion of the referee, there is potential for physical contact, the player in the offside position shall be penalized for interfering with an opponent.” Finally, the Board confirmed the requirement that the indirect free kick restart for an offside offense is taken “from the initial place where the player was adjudged to be in an offside position.”

All referees, instructors, and assessors should review these guidelines carefully. It is important that officials understand and handle the offside offense in a correct, consistent, and realistic manner. Personal interpretations which differ from the approach outlined here can only cause confusion and hard feelings on the part of players, team officials, and spectators.
USSF will shortly distribute to the state associations and place on its website a PowerPoint presentation incorporating this clarification.

2. October 17, 2007

Subject: Offside Myths

Date: October 17, 2007

In response to the suggestion that there is “widespread confusionv regarding Law 11 (Offside), the allegation that referees are being inconsistent in applying the requirements of this Law, and the increasing use of phrases like “passive offside,” we would like to offer the following brief explanation to assist in understanding the meaning and application of Law 11.

There is no such thing as “active offside” or “passive offside” despite the common use of these terms, particularly by commentators. They are, at best, merely shorthand phrases coined for easy reference to the two central concepts in Law 11. Unfortunately, as with so many shorthand phrases, they often confuse rather than clarify what needs to be understood. In general, “passive offside” is used to identify an attacker who is in an offside position but not involved in active play, whereas “active offside” is intended to identify an attacker who has become actively involved in play while in an offside position.
Law 11 has two core threads- these are position and offence. The offside position, has a well-established meaning and its concept is clear:

• A player is in an offside position if he is nearer his opponent’s goal line than both the ball and the second last opponent
• A player is not in an offside position if:
– He is in his own half of the field of play.
– He is level with the second last opponent.
– He is level with the last two opponents
• The judgment as to the offside position is determined at the moment the ball is played by a member of the playerÕs team.

Offside position is factual based on the relative positions of an attacker, the ball, the halfway line, and the second last opponent.
The offside offence is, by contrast, a matter of interpretation by the officiating team and, while the concepts are equally clear, some clarification as to how the officials reach their decision is offered:

• Being in an offside position is not an offence in itself.
• A player in an offside position is only penalized if, at the moment the ball is played or touched by a teammate, he is involved in the active play by interfering with the play, interfering with an opponent or gaining an advantage by being in that position.
• A player who receives the ball directly from a goal kick, throw in or a corner kick has not committed an offside offence.
• A player’s offside or onside position at the time the ball is touched or played by a teammate cannot be changed by any subsequent movement of the player, the opponents or the ball, so long as there has been no intervening play of the ball by an opponent. An offside or onside position is based on where the player is when the playerÕs teammate touches or plays the ball, not where the player becomes actively involved in play.

There must be a clear understanding that an offside position is decided based on a moment in time, when the ball is touched or played by a teammate, whereas the offside offence is judged from that moment onward. In other words, having in effect taken a snapshot of player positions and frozen their onside or offside positions at that moment, the officials must then judge whether players in offside positions become involved in active play. This involves weighing the direction and speed of the ball, the direction and speed of the player in an offside position, the direction and speed of any teammates coming from onside positions and the position and movement of any opponents relative to players in offside positions.

Although this sounds very complex and perhaps beyond the abilities of mortal men and women, in reality the decision-making process of a properly trained official is smooth and calculated to reach a correct interpretation of each situation. What is important to remember is that match officials take into consideration the whole playing scenario across the entire field from where the play started, factoring in the elapsed time, whereas many observers often only focus on a few players, over a short period of time, based on the direction of play and where it ends up.

How is the determination of “active involvement” made leading to a decision to penalize for offside?

“Interfering with play” means touching or playing the ball last touched or played by a teammate. In this context, touching and playing the ball are considered equivalent actions by the player. At a meeting of the International Football Association Board (IFAB) on 11 August 2005, this point was clarified as follows: “A player in an offside position may be penalized before playing or touching the ball if, in the opinion of the referee, no other teammate in an onside position has the opportunity to play the ball.” This clarification means that the player could be penalized immediately rather than having to wait for a physical touch of the ball if, in the opinion of the referee, there was no teammate in an onside position who could compete for the ball. It follows that, if there were a teammate coming from an onside position who could play the ball legally, it would be necessary to wait to see which player actually got to the ball first.
“Interfering with an opponent” means preventing an opponent from playing or being able to play the ball by clearly obstructing the opponent’s line of vision or movement, or by a gesture or movement which in the opinion of the referee deceives or distracts an opponent. We also have to remember that:

• Attackers clearly behind a defender do not interfere with them.
• Merely knowing that an opponent is in offside position does not justify a defender claiming that he was interfered with.
• An attacker raising his hand to signify no involvement does not, by itself, constitute an action which “deceives or distracts.” Indeed, in this context, there is no need for an attacker to signal “no involvement” as his involvement can be objectively determined by what he does, not by what he fails to do.
“Gaining an advantage by being in that position” means playing a ball that rebounds to him off a goalpost, crossbar, or an opponent, having been in an offside position when that phase of play began. In effect, this particular element is an extension of interfering with play, compounded by the rebound of the ball. In cases where this aspect of law is invoked, confusion sometimes arises from the fact that the attacker in an offside position would not have been penalized for offside if the ball had not rebound to him or her in this passage of play.

The approach taken by most match officials is to wait and see. In these circumstances it may appear that the official is late or slow in signaling the offence, but in reality he or she has taken all the evidence presented to him or her, applied the knowledge and understanding of the criteria and come to a balanced decision. This may have included the fact that the player was not initially involved in active play and therefore no signal was given. It is almost universally accepted that, if there is any doubt, then the balance of doubt is given to the attacker.
We have addressed the specific instances in separate correspondence. The purpose of this communication is solely to provide an extended discussion of the elements from Law 11 that we have applied in responding to requests for “rulings”regarding specific offside incidents. We also hope that you actively (rather than “passively”) discourage the use of the phrases “passive offside” and “active offside” as they are not part of the Law and only lead to confusion. If you have any points or queries you wish to raise on this paper, please do not hesitate to contact us.

Question:
As a referee, how do you know if prescription eye glasses would be a problem as “Players may not wear anything that the referee considers dangerous to themselves or to their teammates or opponents.”

In a competitive u15 game last weekend the referee would not let a player play with his glasses, and while I understand it is the referee’s decision, what advice do I give the parents so they can get appropriate eye-wear?

USSF answer (October 25, 2010):
The USSF guidance is contained in the following position paper of March 7, 2003, on player’s equipment.

Memorandum

//deleted//

Re: Player’s Equipment

Date: March 7, 2003

________________________________________________________________________

USSF has received a number of inquiries recently about how officials should handle situations where players wish to wear equipment that is not included in the list of basic compulsory equipment in FIFA Laws of the Game. Referees are facing increased requests from players for permission to wear kneepads, elbowpads, headbands, soft casts, goggles, etc.

The only concrete guidance in the Laws of the Game is found in Law 4:

“A player must not use equipment or wear anything which is dangerous to himself or another player.”

This is followed by a list of required uniform items: jersey, shorts, socks, shoes, and shinguards. Obviously, this language is quite general. USSF suggests the following approach to issues involving player equipment and uniforms:

1. Look to the applicable rules of the competition authority.
Some leagues, tournaments, and soccer organizations have specific local rules covering player uniforms and what other items may or may not be worn on the field during play. Referees who accept match assignments governed by these rules are obligated to enforce them. Note, however, that local rules cannot restrict the referee’s fundamental duty to ensure the safety of players.

2. Inspect the equipment.
All items of player equipment and uniforms must be inspected. However, anything outside the basic compulsory items must draw the particular attention of the referee and be inspected with special regard to safety. USSF does not “pre-approve” any item of player equipment by type or brand — each item must be evaluated individually.

3. Focus on the equipment itself — not how it might be improperly used, or whether it actually protects the player.
Generally, the referee’s safety inspection should focus on whether the equipment has such dangerous characteristics as: sharp edges, hard surfaces, pointed corners, dangling straps or loops, or dangerous protrusions. The referee should determine whether the equipment, by its nature, presents a safety risk to the player wearing it or to other players. If the equipment does not present such a safety risk, the referee should permit the player to wear it.

The referee should not forbid the equipment simply because it creates a possibility that a player could use it to foul another player or otherwise violate the Laws of the Game. However, as the game progresses, an item that the referee allowed may become dangerous, depending on changes in its condition (wear and tear) or on how the player uses it. Referees must be particularly sensitive to unfair or dangerous uses of player equipment and must be prepared to order a correction of the problem whenever they become aware of it.

The referee also should not forbid the equipment because of doubts about whether it actually protects the player. There are many new types of equipment on the market that claim to protect players. A referee’s decision to allow a player to use equipment is not an endorsement of the equipment and does not signify that the referee believes the player will be safer while wearing the equipment.

4. Remember that the referee is the final word on whether equipment is dangerous.
Players, coaches, and others may argue that certain equipment is safe. They may contend that the equipment has been permitted in previous matches, or that the equipment actually increases the player’s safety. These arguments may be accompanied by manufacturer’s information, doctor’s notes, etc. However, as with all referee decisions, determining what players may wear within the framework of the Laws of the Game and applicable local rules depends on the judgment of the referee. The referee must strive to be fair, objective, and consistent ˆ but the final decision belongs to the referee.

This, of course, includes eyeglasses of any sort.

Back in 2001 USSF gave this advice to all referees: “Referees must not interpret [a statement from the IFAB — the people who make the rules of our game] to mean either that “sports glasses” must automatically be considered safe or that glasses which are not manufactured to be worn during sports are automatically to be considered unsafe. The referee must make the final decision: the Board has simply recognized that new technology has made safer the wearing of glasses during play.”…

Question:
I have been looking for clarification on how referees should consider a ball released by the goalkeeper. The Laws of the Game Guide states “It is an offence for a player to prevent a goalkeeper from releasing the ball from his hands.” My situation: attacker within yards of keeper leaps at the punted/thrown ball in hopes of intercepting it at the beginning of its trajectory. The ball has been physically “released,” but is it considered released under the Law? At what point in the above situation is the act of releasing completed?

USSF answer (April 26, 2010(:
There has been considerable interest in this topic since Jaime Moreno of D. C. United violated the Law by cavorting and gesturing to interfere with the goalkeeper’s release of the ball into general play. This memorandum on the matter was issued by USSF on April 14, 2010:

Subject: Interfering with the Goalkeeper’s Release of the Ball
Date: April 14, 2010

Law 12 (Fouls and Misconduct) includes the words “prevents the goalkeeper from releasing the ball from his hands” as an offense punishable by an indirect free kick. By tradition and interpretation, this violation is described more generally as any action by a player which interferes with the opposing goalkeeper’s ability to get the ball back into active play freely and quickly.

A goalkeeper is considered to be in the process of “releasing the ball” from the first moment when he or she has clearly taken hand control of the ball until the moment when the ball has been clearly released into play. This includes any time when the goalkeeper is:
· bouncing the ball
· running with the ball
· in the process of dropping the ball in preparation for kicking it
· throwing the ball.

During the time the goalkeeper has control of the ball and is preparing to release it into active play, an opponent may not stand or move so close as to restrict the direction or distance of the goalkeeper’s release.

In the 70th minute of a match between D.C. United at Philadelphia Union on April 10, 2010 (clip found here), D.C. forward Moreno followed, moved in closer to, waved arms at, and made various head and body “movements” toward Philadelphia goalkeeper Seitz while Seitz was holding the ball and preparing to distribute it. During the course of this interference, Seitz dropped the ball and Moreno shot the ball into the net. These actions by Moreno constituted a violation of Law 12. The goal should not have been allowed and an indirect free kick should have been given where Moreno interfered. Moreno’s behavior additionally could have been cautioned as unsporting behavior.

Whenever a goalkeeper has taken possession of the ball and an opponent is either nearby or begins moving toward the goalkeeper, referees and assistant referees must recognize the possibility of interference and allow their attention to continue to focus on the goalkeeper. More proactively, a quick word to the opponent might well prevent this sort of offense.

The most important part of the memorandum is the final paragraph, reminding referees to be proactive in controlling the movement of opposing players near the goalkeeper. That brings us to the final sentence of our answer of April 12, 2010, on this topic and the answer to your question: “The referee should have blown the whistle immediately and awarded the indirect free kick to the goalkeeper’s team.”

A few words on how to judge interference with the goalkeeper: The key question is whether “in the opinion of the referee”  the goalkeeper, who is in the process of releasing the ball, has been influenced by the opposing player. The referee can only judge by the ACTIONS of the opposing player in question and the DISTANCE of the player to the keeper.  If the player jumps in the air to intercept the ball while being 10 yards away, that should not constitute interference.  On the other hand, a player who is as much as four yards away and jumps in the air to reach the ball would most certainly be considered to interfere.  The referee is the final judge. …