Planetarion Forums - [Football]The Off-Side Rule

Apothos · 30 Mar 2006, 08:49

While i was lying in bed trying to get to sleep last night, i was thinking about football, and my thoughts drifted to a few seasons ago when Liverpool scored an off-side goal and the referee's decision made a mockery of Leeds' well-drilled backline playing the off-side trap. I think this was around the time when the 'not interfering with play' stuff started coming in.

Anyhoo, i was thinking, isn't it only fair on the defenders if, while the ball is coming at them, defenders on th peripheral are deemed not to be 'interfering with play', much as attacking players are deemed not to be, so, for example, a player coming down the right who gets the ball won't be onside if he is only played 'on' by the opposition rightback at the otherside of the field?

Or am i missing the point entirely, that the current system encourages more goals and :. a more exciting game?

KoeN · 30 Mar 2006, 09:11

i just keep repeating myself: the off-side rule is retarded and shouldn't be upholded any longer. while sports like for example volleyball, motorsports, badminton, hockey keep evolving, football will stay under strict control by the conservatives in Zurich.

one reason why football isn't (and probably never will be) popular in the USA, is that yanks enjoy action and goals. in football, (many) goals aren't guaranteed.

pablissimo · 30 Mar 2006, 09:13

Were there not rumblings of altering the off-side rule to only apply in the box? Think it was a mate of mine the other night mentioned it, though he immediately shot me in the eye with a Nerf gun so you know, it's not like I've a lot of trust placed in him at the minute.

pig · 30 Mar 2006, 09:14

Quote:

Originally Posted by Apothos

While i was lying in bed trying to get to sleep last night, i was thinking about football, and my thoughts drifted to a few seasons ago when Liverpool scored an off-side goal and the referee's decision made a mockery of Leeds' well-drilled backline playing the off-side trap. I think this was around the time when the 'not interfering with play' stuff started coming in.

That rule iirc came in two seasons ago so cant of been what you were talking about

Quote:

Originally Posted by Apothos

Anyhoo, i was thinking, isn't it only fair on the defenders if, while the ball is coming at them, defenders on th peripheral are deemed not to be 'interfering with play', much as attacking players are deemed not to be, so, for example, a player coming down the right who gets the ball won't be onside if he is only played 'on' by the opposition rightback at the otherside of the field?

Or am i missing the point entirely, that the current system encourages more goals and :. a more exciting game?

I think your missing the point to be honest. If I get this correct what you are saying

X... F
.. Y Z H
J

H is the leftback and r X is the rightback. You are saying if X isnt involved in the play as in he isnt actually defending against F who is the attacker then F would be offside? And you perhaps are arguing that those players that are only active in defence can be counted as keeping a player onside/offside.

If im correct so far then I would say this is barmy.

Firstly in a normal situation ie

X . . . F
. . Y Z H
J

F would be onside J passed him the ball, in your scenario however F would be offside.

For a minute imagine

X. . . F
. . Y Z H
J

J passes to F, X can still get to F no matter if hes "inaction" or out of action.

Your right the new offside rule does give the game a more attacking sense, however its an interesting rule, if you watch the modern back four, most attackers cant perfect the walking back and not interferring with play bollox, but the back four keep quite a strong line, when someone tries it there will be someone who picks him up quite quickly.

It only takes the skilled strikers to do it and even then depends on a perfect pass almost.

pig · 30 Mar 2006, 09:15

Quote:

Originally Posted by KoeN

i just keep repeating myself: the off-side rule is retarded and shouldn't be upholded any longer. while sports like for example volleyball, motorsports, badminton, hockey keep evolving, football will stay under strict control by the conservatives in Zurich.

one reason why football isn't (and probably never will be) popular in the USA, is that yanks enjoy action and goals. in football, (many) goals aren't guaranteed.

The offside rule is possibly the best rule ever invented. Women and Americans cant understand it.

Hicks · 30 Mar 2006, 09:29

I don't know about you guys but I'm going to start watching more hockey. It sounds a real sport for the 21st century.

pig · 30 Mar 2006, 09:37

Only girls play hockey in Britain and they arent really fit either

Apothos · 30 Mar 2006, 10:05

Quote:

Originally Posted by pig

That rule iirc came in two seasons ago so cant have been what you were talking about

Why not?

Quote:

...

aah, when you put it like that...

My two dimensional mind never thought about crossfield play (it was 2am when i thunk it).

It is indeed a barmy thought. :/

pig · 30 Mar 2006, 10:18

Quote:

Originally Posted by Apothos

Why not?

because leeds werent in the premiership when the rule came into place, might of just been the ref overuling the linesman hence the shocking decision.

Apothos · 30 Mar 2006, 10:25

Leeds were in the Premiership two seasons ago. :?

Filth · 30 Mar 2006, 11:13

Quote:

Originally Posted by pig

Only girls play hockey in Britain and they arent really fit either

i play hockey 3/4 times a week at uni, hockey is the largest sports club at sheffield (male dominated) and quite popular at most uni's

i was only given the opportunity to start playing hockey late in school life while the option was given to girls at a much younger age

although i play a bit of football i prefer hockey, its fast when played properly, not as pleasant as people think and pretty intense with some very serious injuries and requires a bit more skill (imo)

all round a great game - try it

pig · 30 Mar 2006, 11:30

To apathos I think your right 2003/4? And to filth I know blokes play hockey, just trying to annoy koen <3 koen. Although football is a much more enjoyable game than hockey imo.

SilverSmoke · 30 Mar 2006, 11:44

Quote:

Originally Posted by KoeN

i just keep repeating myself: the off-side rule is retarded and shouldn't be upholded any longer. while sports like for example volleyball, motorsports, badminton, hockey keep evolving, football will stay under strict control by the conservatives in Zurich.

one reason why football isn't (and probably never will be) popular in the USA, is that yanks enjoy action and goals. in football, (many) goals aren't guaranteed.

As an experiment they removed the offside rule for a certain period of time in some Dutch amateur competition. I think this was some years ago, the results where horrible as already expected. What I recall from it the games transformed into kick and rush matches that only happend on the axe of the field from goal to goal leaving the flanks/wings of the field abbandoned.

ReligFree · 30 Mar 2006, 11:57

Hockey is quite big here at Bristol uni. I play occasionally but play rugby for the uni. Only reason i play hockey is when there short as couple of mates of mine are on 2nd team and i used to play county at home so am of quite a high standard.

Anyway about the reason why yanks wont like football due to the offside rule limiting goals. I prefer to see 2 well crafted goals or a couple of superb finish's than scorelines of 15-13 with 28 tap ins. I think this is the same as most people tbh.

Removing the offside rule will cause stupid problems. The game will be completely end to end with people (for lack of a better term) 'goal-hanging'. This would ruin football tbh. Its supposed to be an invasion gAme where you have to penetrate your enemies defence, effectively. If the offside rule would be removed this wouldnt occur to such an extent. And at the end of the day, ask yourselves why the offside rule was brought in in the first place?

KoeN · 30 Mar 2006, 12:00

Quote:

Originally Posted by SilverSmoke

As an experiment they removed the offside rule for a certain period of time in some Dutch amateur competition. I think this was some years ago, the results where horrible as already expected. What I recall from it the games transformed into kick and rush matches that only happend on the axe of the field from goal to goal leaving the flanks/wings of the field abbandoned.

i remember. you're now talking about 3 matches in an amateur league here. you can hardly speak of a serious experiment. this was doomed to fail. in fact i'm pretty sure the KNVB never wanted it to succeed to begin with.
also, there are more reasons than the offside-rule for teams not playing kick & rush anymore. i don't believe that without the offside-rule, teams will stop playing combinationfootball, especially when considering how teams handle defending the long ball.

hicks: i just discovered some fieldhockey TV-channel on the internet: www.fieldhockey.tv

oh and filth: <3 (posrep!)

Ste · 30 Mar 2006, 12:11

Quote:

Originally Posted by Filth

i play hockey 3/4 times a week at uni, hockey is the largest sports club at sheffield (male dominated) and quite popular at most uni's

You're at Sheffield?
What's your Hockey name?
(my housmate was Japseye and my coursemate was implants... my girlfriend was chompy chompy. aren't they great)

Blastoderm · 31 Mar 2006, 12:17

Quote:

Originally Posted by pig

When girls play rugby they arent really fit.

Fixed.

MrL_JaKiri · 31 Mar 2006, 12:52

Quote:

Originally Posted by KoeN

i just keep repeating myself: the off-side rule is retarded and shouldn't be upholded any longer. while sports like for example volleyball, motorsports, badminton, hockey keep evolving, football will stay under strict control by the conservatives in Zurich.

Stop being a ****ing retard. The Offside rule is NECESSARY for flowing, exciting football and not just "lump it up to t'big man". Furthermore, the rules of the game DO change.

Quote:

Originally Posted by KoeN

one reason why football isn't (and probably never will be) popular in the USA, is that yanks enjoy action and goals. in football, (many) goals aren't guaranteed.

Baseball and American Football are two of the slowest, most boring sports in the world. It's like you don't have a clue what you're talking about in this entire post.

KoeN · 31 Mar 2006, 15:13

Quote:

Originally Posted by MrL_JaKiri

Baseball and American Football are two of the slowest, most boring sports in the world. It's like you don't have a clue what you're talking about in this entire post.

jakiri. dear friend jakiri.

Quote:

Originally Posted by KoeN

one reason why football isn't (and probably never will be) popular in the USA, is that yanks enjoy action and goals. in football, (many) goals aren't guaranteed.

as you can see, i spoke about "action and goals", not gamespeed. they are not necessarily related to each other. but ok, let's say it is for football. in that case, would it be better of without the offside-rule or not?

btw, both baseball and american football are rather popular (worldwide even, not just within the USA) for what you call a "boring sports".

(correct me if i'm wrong but aren't you one of the scriptkids in here that hasn't been outside since the age of 12? this would explain a lot. oh and insulting me really isn't necessary).

xxx

Phang · 31 Mar 2006, 15:28

koen for the last two months has been the worst poster GD has had in years. stop it.

lokken · 31 Mar 2006, 15:36

Offside is an essential rule for football to be any good. The problem is the law has been open to so much interpretation, that it's difficult to provide much consistency. Offside is actually simple, all you have to do is sit in a stand alongside a football pitch just alongside the 18 yard line or a bit further out, for 90 minutes and the simplicity of the rule will become apparent to any human being.

Quote:

one reason why football isn't (and probably never will be) popular in the USA, is that yanks enjoy action and goals.

Yeah, because there are never bad games of baseball and american football. Fact is neither of them can do something like this and that quite frankly, they wouldn't know action and excitement if it bit them in the arse.

And yes any excuse to post that link

Phang · 31 Mar 2006, 15:37

Quote:

Originally Posted by lokken

this

fantastic.

ReligFree · 31 Mar 2006, 15:45

Quote:

Originally Posted by lokken

Yeah, because there are never bad games of baseball and american football. Fact is neither of them can do something like this and that quite frankly, they wouldn't know action and excitement if it bit them in the arse.

And yes any excuse to post that link

Your still going down........

JonnyBGood · 31 Mar 2006, 15:56

I thought I banned koen from speaking about sport on these forums until he quits playing hockey?

G.K Zhukov · 31 Mar 2006, 16:19

Quote:

Originally Posted by pig

The offside rule is possibly the best rule ever invented. Women and Americans cant understand it.

PIG FOR WORLD PRESIDENT!

The fact that football is not popular in the U.S is just telling me how great football is.

Cannon_Fodder · 31 Mar 2006, 17:49

Lok did that link have video?

lokken · 31 Mar 2006, 18:37

no

i have a link to the goal, but the commo is in arabic

MrL_JaKiri · 31 Mar 2006, 23:42

Quote:

Originally Posted by KoeN

correct me if i'm wrong but aren't you one of the scriptkids in here that hasn't been outside since the age of 12?

I was nearly a junior international rower, if that's what you mean :v:

Alessio · 1 Apr 2006, 00:44

Imagine the riots we would get when a pro football match would end with 12 - 0

KoeN · 1 Apr 2006, 01:43

Quote:

Originally Posted by Alessio

Imagine the riots we would get when a pro football match would end with 12 - 0

there have been far more riots over 1-0's (or even 0-0's) than there shall ever be over let's say 4-0 or 5-0's, even.

deerbarn · 1 Apr 2006, 02:24

(i think far more games have ended 1-1 1-0 etc than 4-0 5-0)

Dead_Meat · 1 Apr 2006, 02:49

Koen: In case you hadn't noticed, in baseball, they count the number of times people hit the ball and it counts as a statistic that gets reported.

Not how many times they hit and score, just how many times they hit it.

Maybe we should count the number of times footballers kick the ball in a match to know how exciting it was and how good they are as well...?

KoeN · 1 Apr 2006, 14:50

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dead_Meat

Maybe we should count the number of times footballers kick the ball in a match to know how exciting it was and how good they are as well...?

i'm not sure about the situation in other countries, but i do know there are people here who keep score on stats like that aswell.