Offside law

[swansvalleyjack]

The original, and obvious, reason for the offside rule was to prevent a totally unfair advantage to an attacking player eg if he stood way past the last defender. Fair enough.

But where is the obvious advantage if the last defender and the attacker are in line with each other.

I'm with Wenger. Keep it simple. Football is for entertainment and goals. How many wonderful goals have been chalked off for a millimeter of toenail.

And it'll balance itself out. The team you support will have goals credited more often. And yes vice versa to the opposing teams.

But the end result overall is ..more goals. Gotta be a good thing.

 

[bytholwyn]

The original, and obvious, reason for the offside rule was to prevent a totally unfair advantage to an attacking player eg if he stood way past the last defender. Fair enough.

But where is the obvious advantage if the last defender and the attacker are in line with each other.

I'm with Wenger. Keep it simple. Football is for entertainment and goals. How many wonderful goals have been chalked off for a millimeter of toenail.

And it'll balance itself out. The team you support will have goals credited more often. And yes vice versa to the opposing teams.

But the end result overall is ..more goals. Gotta be a good thing.

I disagree. Football isn't basketball. The fact that goals are hard earned is a big part of football's appeal. If you make scoring goals too easy you cheapen the product. Wenger's suggestion makes the defences job near impossible. It will probably result in much deeper defensive lines and a lot of hoofball. It will not improve the entertainment.

 

[monmouth]

The original, and obvious, reason for the offside rule was to prevent a totally unfair advantage to an attacking player eg if he stood way past the last defender. Fair enough.

But where is the obvious advantage if the last defender and the attacker are in line with each other.

I'm with Wenger. Keep it simple. Football is for entertainment and goals. How many wonderful goals have been chalked off for a millimeter of toenail.

And it'll balance itself out. The team you support will have goals credited more often. And yes vice versa to the opposing teams.

But the end result overall is ..more goals. Gotta be a good thing.

I agree, except for cardiff. It was never meant to be anything other than "clear and obvious" to the naked eye of the linesman. before TV replays and multiple angles there weren't many arguments, although Ray Tinkler (google it if you don't know) says, hold my beer. Understandable, I suppose, it was Leeds after all.

 

[monmouth]

I disagree. Football isn't basketball. The fact that goals are hard earned is a big part of football's appeal. If you make scoring goals too easy you cheapen the product. Wenger's suggestion makes the defences job near impossible. It will probably result in much deeper defensive lines and a lot of hoofball. It will not improve the entertainment.

The whole idea at one time was that any marginal calls go to attackers. That's what it should be. It's hardly making scoring easier is it?

 

[swansvalleyjack]

I disagree. Football isn't basketball. The fact that goals are hard earned is a big part of football's appeal. If you make scoring goals too easy you cheapen the product. Wenger's suggestion makes the defences job near impossible. It will probably result in much deeper defensive lines and a lot of hoofball. It will not improve the entertainment.

Even with this change, football will never be like basketball. Goals will still be hard to come by with defenders and attackers on virtually the same line. But just as Monmouth says, marginal calls should go to the attacker. No-one is really happy with the current system...so why not trial something new ( although really, it's the old system) and see how it goes.

 

[bytholwyn]

Even with this change, football will never be like basketball. Goals will still be hard to come by with defenders and attackers on virtually the same line. But just as Monmouth says, marginal calls should go to the attacker. No-one is really happy with the current system...so why not trial something new ( although really, it's the old system) and see how it goes.

I'd be happy for minor tweaks, such as taking offside from the position of feet alone (chips in the toes of boots could then simplify offside decisions and make them instantaneous). But is there really a problem with lack of goals? Don't see it myself.

 

[Colin-swansea]

The last decade or so has seen the game's rules tinkered with out of all proportion but in reality has the game improved. No. Apart from goal line technology cheating in various forms is on the increase. The ongoing shirt tugging at a set piece increases without being penalised, foul throws are ignored while kicking the ball away or standing over the player waiting to take a free kick continues. Last night in the Play Off game with BrIstol City v Sheffield United, Gustav Harmer three times was stopped from taking a corner kick because the ball was out of the quadrant. One of the game's small rules where players' try to gain advantage when the linesman is on the halfway line. Cheating.

Arsene Wenger, no doubt one of the more successful Head Coaches in the game is keen to do away with throw ins in favour of an indirect free kick. Why on earth remove an integral part of football when cheating and long standing mis-demeanours continue unabated.

A recent law change saw only the captain was allowed to query a referee's decision yet half a dozen players continue to crowd around the official and pressure while shirt pulling has taken on a new form in the penalty area that almost resembles a rugby tackle.

More and more cash is available in the game but sadly cheating continues as clubs, head coaches and players attempt to get one over on their opponents' to the detriment of what was once known as the wonderful game!