Offside loophole to be outlawed
Your support helps us to tell the story
From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.
At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.
The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.
Your support makes all the difference.Sam Allardyce's inventive demonstration of the absurdity of the latest interpretation of the offside law is likely to be outlawed at an emergency summit meeting this morning.
At Leicester on Tuesday the Bolton Wanderers manager instructed his players to take up advanced positions, previously considered to be offside but now viewed as "inactive" unless the ball reached them, at free-kicks. They then ran into onside positions as play progressed. The move confused the Leicester City defence and, according to the goalkeeper, Ian Walker, was a factor in his conceding an embarrassing goal.
Prompted by referees concerned at this development, and alarmed at the prospect of this ploy being repeated in matches across the land, inevitably leading to disciplinary problems at park level, the Football Association's head of refereeing, John Baker, has since conducted an informal debate with relevant parties.
This morning he and Keith Hackett, the Premiership referees' supervisor, will present their conclusions to Mark Palios, Richard Scudamore and Andy Williamson, the respective senior executives of the FA, the Premier League and the Football League. They are expected to agree that such exploitation of the letter of the law be regarded as infringing its spirit and, as such, be punishable by a yellow card for unsporting behaviour. An advisory will be sent to clubs to that effect.
The advice will concentrate on situations where an attacker deliberately places himself "in the eye-line" of an opponent, usually the goalkeeper, and the ball, thus distracting him. This would exclude, for example, Thierry Henry's habit of drifting into an "offside" position, behind a defender, to avoid being marked, only coming onside as play develops, as he usually does this 40-odd yards from goal.
The reinterpretation will not alter the recent policy of regarding players as "inactive" if they are not in the goalkeeper's eye-line. Thus Ruud van Nistelrooy's controversial recent goal against Southampton, when he was offside when a free-kick was played in, but not when the ball finally reached him, would still stand. But Danny Murphy's goal against Leeds United in October, when Paul Robinson, distracted by three Liverpool players in "offside" positions, allowed the ball to squirm through his arms, ought not.
Fifa, the game's world governing body, will doubtless follow the FA's ruling. The global television coverage of the Premiership means that Fifa are sensitive to the example set in the English game, especially "reinterpretations" of a Fifa ruling. However, changes in the offside rule are more controversial in England than most countries because defences generally play a higher line, prompting more decisions.
Join our commenting forum
Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies
Comments