Can you be offside if you collect the ball in your own half?

Baldseagull · Mar 10, 2014

I can't recall the incident, must have been in the loo. My mate who is a Ref always tells me that the most important words attached to all the laws are "if, in the referees opinion" which he says means if he thinks it was a foul it is a foul.
But at the risk of being branded a retard for not understanding this basic rule, if Lingard had to run back to collect the ball, how was he either interfering with play, or gaining an advantage by being in an offside position?

Kuipers Supporters Club · Mar 10, 2014

I really can't get over how some people don't know the laws of football.

I guess it makes for a good Sunday league player mind.

Kuipers Supporters Club · Mar 10, 2014

Brightonfan1983 said:
Cripes, I didn't know that.

To be fair - I bet you are not the only one, as it used to be if you were 'level' you were offside.

halbpro · Mar 10, 2014

Brighton4Cambridge3 said:
To be fair - I bet you are not the only one, as it used to be if you were 'level' you were offside.

And it only counts your feet, body or head. Arms don't count (presumably as you can't gain an advantage with your arm), but I don't think it makes any mention of legs either, and you could knee a ball.

Kuipers Supporters Club · Mar 10, 2014

halbpro said:
And it only counts your feet, body or head. Arms don't count (presumably as you can't gain an advantage with your arm), but I don't think it makes any mention of legs either, and you could knee a ball.

The Interpretation I was taught, by a now Football League referee, was any part of your body which you can gain an advantage from ( i.e use / score) so yes, if your arm was offside, but everything else wan't, I wouldn't be giving an offside decision.

halbpro · Mar 10, 2014

Brighton4Cambridge3 said:
The Interpretation I was taught, by a now Football League referee, was any part of your body which you can gain an advantage from ( i.e use / score) so yes, if your arm was offside, but everything else wan't, I wouldn't be giving an offside decision.

The current FIFA guidelines for interpreting offside state that:

“nearer to his opponents’ goal line” means that any part of a player’s head, body or feet is nearer to his opponents’ goal line than both the ball and the second-last opponent. The arms are not included in this deﬁnition

I think the definition you were taught makes more sense, but I just find it odd that FIFA don't mention legs. I'd also have said torso, rather than body if they wanted to be clearer, but that's just nitpicking some odd phrasing.

Spun Cuppa · Mar 10, 2014

An even better one was when Solly March took a free kick late in the game in front of the North Stand from near the dead ball line. The ball hit the post and came back to him which caused quite a few around me to start whining when he didn't immediately attempt to play it again, and consternation when an indirect freekick was awarded when he did...

The rule being that the same player cannot play the ball twice from a dead ball situation

Baldseagull · Mar 10, 2014

Spun Cuppa said:
An even better one was when Solly March took a free kick late in the game in front of the North Stand from near the dead ball line. The ball hit the post and came back to him which caused quite a few around me to start whining when he didn't immediately attempt to play it again, and consternation when an indirect freekick was awarded when he did...

The rule being that the same player cannot play the ball twice from a dead ball situation

And some muppets not knowing the difference between a free kick and a corner.

Goring-by-Seagull · Mar 10, 2014

Baldseagull said:
And some muppets not knowing the difference between a free kick and a corner.

TWOCHOICEStom · Mar 10, 2014

But, if Lingard drove a 2001 mint green Skoda Octavia 1.4l diesel to the match from Saltdean, the wind was blowing at 3.2mph from the South East, it was a leap year, his mothers maiden name was Dalton and the pass was made by an in-form, 56 year-old Steve Ogrizovic from his own six yard box in the 5th minute of extra time against Burton Albion in the quarter final of the Johnstone's Paint Trophy with just one of his shoelaces tied in a double knot and he'd taken a big poo in the ladies toilets 22 minutes prior to kickoff.

IF, as the ball was played he was 10 yards offside, but came back into his own half to collect the ball.. What THEN?

keaton · Mar 10, 2014

Also (in case it happens again and you're the bloke sat behind me)

You can't be offside from a goal-kick.

mejonaNO12 aka riskit · Mar 10, 2014

keaton said:
Also (in case it happens again and you're the bloke sat behind me)

You can't be offside from a goal-kick.

Oh how I LOVE to shout that when someone claims the opposition are offside or Ulloa is standing past the last defender from a goal kick.

"YOU CAN'T BE OFFSIDE FROM A GOAL KICK". And then I sit back smugly whilst listening to the audible mutterings of people going "really? Surely that's not right".

keaton · Mar 10, 2014

mejonaNO12 aka riskit said:
Oh how I LOVE to shout that when someone claims the opposition are offside or Ulloa is standing past the last defender from a goal kick.

"YOU CAN'T BE OFFSIDE FROM A GOAL KICK". And then I sit back smugly whilst listening to the audible mutterings of people going "really? Surely that's not right".

I tried explaining after two of them had been wittering on about it for a couple of minutes.
I was greeted with a blank look and ignored.

Acker79 · Mar 10, 2014

Baldseagull said:
But at the risk of being branded a retard for not understanding this basic rule, if Lingard had to run back to collect the ball, how was he either interfering with play, or gaining an advantage by being in an offside position?

People like to think the offside rule was fine as it was back in the day, if you were in an offside position when the ball was played forward, you were offside, none of this 'interfering with play' malarkey. The problem is that it wasn't fine, at least not everyone ought it was, as the player on the far side who no defender is paying attention to as he stopped to tie his laces causes an attack on the near side to be pulled up, etc.

The interfering with play aspect of the law was introduced (and has regularly evolved) to compensate for this.

To make the law work, FIFA have made it so that it's where you are where the ball is kicked. If you are in an offside position when the ball is kicked, that is the offending action, it is only punished if you then interfere with play, even if you have to run back on side.

There is the argument that if a player is stood offside, defenders will ignore him under the assumption if he interferes with play it will be flagged, so perhaps Ulloa was only able to collect the ball because defenders didn't pay attention to him when he was offside, I.e. If he were stood in front of the defence they would have seen him as the target of the ball and acted to stop him receiving it.

It would have to work this way, because if you start to allow the position you're in when you collect the ball, all a player in an offside position would have to do is let the ball get in front of them, because once they are behind the ball, they are onside. Essentially, that would be like scrapping the offside law.

halbpro said:
I think the definition you were taught makes more sense, but I just find it odd that FIFA don't mention legs. I'd also have said torso, rather than body if they wanted to be clearer, but that's just nitpicking some odd phrasing.

'Body' would include legs. Though it would also include head and feet, so they seem somewhat redundant. Simply 'body, not including arms' or the previously mention 'any part of the body you can play the ball with' would have sufficed.

Acker79 · Mar 10, 2014

keaton said:
Also (in case it happens again and you're the bloke sat behind me)

You can't be offside from a goal-kick.

In fairness, it's not often kuszczak gets the ball over everyone direct to the player behind the defence, it is often more likely to have to be headed on to get to anyone stood in an offside position, and there's no guarantee that will be an opposition player, so urging our players to get onside when we're taking a goal kick isn't entirely unreasonable.

keaton · Mar 10, 2014

Acker79 said:
In fairness, it's not often kuszczak gets the ball over everyone direct to the player behind the defence, it is often more likely to have to be headed on to get to anyone stood in an offside position, and there's no guarantee that will be an opposition player, so urging our players to get onside when we're taking a goal kick isn't entirely unreasonable.

It was an opposition's goal kick.

I believe the rule for us is:
You cannot be offside for a goal-kick because Kuzcack is going to kick it a metre or so over Bruno/Calderon/Ward's head straight into the dug out are and then shout at them that it's their fault for not being over 10ft tall.

father_and_son · Mar 10, 2014

keaton said:
It was an opposition's goal kick.

I believe the rule for us is:
You cannot be offside for a goal-kick because Kuzcack is going to kick it a metre or so over Bruno/Calderon/Ward's head straight into the dug out are and then shout at them that it's their fault for not being over 10ft tall.

lol... kicking it up field is an entirely new concept for him as all he had to do last season was roll it to Greer. Hoof-ball isn't his strong point!

Acker79 · Mar 10, 2014

keaton said:
It was an opposition's goal kick.

I believe the rule for us is:
You cannot be offside for a goal-kick because Kuzcack is going to kick it a metre or so over Bruno/Calderon/Ward's head straight into the dug out are and then shout at them that it's their fault for not being over 10ft tall.

Ah, the people around me were yelling for ulloa to get onside while kuszczak was getting ready to kick it out to the fans.

mejonaNO12 aka riskit · Mar 10, 2014

TonyW's understanding of the offside law =

halbpro · Mar 10, 2014

Acker79 said:
'Body' would include legs. Though it would also include head and feet, so they seem somewhat redundant. Simply 'body, not including arms' or the previously mention 'any part of the body you can play the ball with' would have sufficed.

That's why I think they're using 'body' to mean 'torso', otherwise head and feet is rather odd, as you say. 'Body, not including arms' or 'any part of the player, excluding the arms and hands' would likely be better ways of phrasing it.

Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊

Can you be offside if you collect the ball in your own half?

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Thanks Greens :(

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Big heart, hot blood and balls. Big balls

Well-known member

Big heart, hot blood and balls. Big balls

Well-known member

Well-known member

Big heart, hot blood and balls. Big balls

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Share this page