The Question: Why is the modern offside law a work of genius?

[Neil Young]

OK, I've read the article now and I think it overstates the case - a major reason why Barcelona are succeeding with small players is because of changes in tackle laws - and completely fails to grasp the point of the discussion between Brian Clough and Johann Cruyff and chaired by Brian Moore during the 1978 (or was it 82?) World Cup about the benefits to the passing game of having the game compressed to some extent.

As for the offside law itself, my main criticism remains that enforcement is inevitably and, in my view, unacceptably unreliable. The article is right that the new interpretation of interference is clearly to the benefit of the attacking side but it does make for very a messy spectacle, both for fans at the game and for the TV viewer too. Perhaps if they introduced technology for assessing whether someone is in an offside position then that would remove some of the contentiousness and dissatisfaction.

Then we could just spend our time moaning about interference. That would be progress I think.

[Ben_Itez]

Interesting article dww, thanks for posting.

[CJ]

Rush goalies where I'm from.

for years i thought it was russian goalies

does anyone remember wembly doubles?

[CJ]

OK, I've read the article now and I think it overstates the case - a major reason why Barcelona are succeeding with small players is because of changes in tackle laws - and completely fails to grasp the point of the discussion between Brian Clough and Johann Cruyff and chaired by Brian Moore during the 1978 (or was it 82?) World Cup about the benefits to the passing game of having the game compressed to some extent.

As for the offside law itself, my main criticism remains that enforcement is inevitably and, in my view, unacceptably unreliable. The article is right that the new interpretation of interference is clearly to the benefit of the attacking side but it does make for very a messy spectacle, both for fans at the game and for the TV viewer too. Perhaps if they introduced technology for assessing whether someone is in an offside position then that would remove some of the contentiousness and dissatisfaction.

Then we could just spend our time moaning about interference. That would be progress I think.

i used to play hockey and i remember when they got rid of the offside rule. one problem was that at the lower levels people just put a huge bloke infront of the keeper and at any opportunity launch the ball at him to deflect in. howevver at high levels it didnt make a huge difference it infact meant that teams now defend better as they cant simply step up. it made the game more fluid and added more goals to the game. now in hockey you need to touch the ball in the d to score so you wouldnt just get long balls all the time that you may in football. at the highest level i suspect you would end up with good defending and tackling etc. at lower levels with no offside it would become a farce at first but eventually i imagine it would work

[dww]

OK, I've read the article now and I think it overstates the case - a major reason why Barcelona are succeeding with small players is because of changes in tackle laws - and completely fails to grasp the point of the discussion between Brian Clough and Johann Cruyff and chaired by Brian Moore during the 1978 (or was it 82?) World Cup about the benefits to the passing game of having the game compressed to some extent.

I agree it is potential over statement (or possibly merely a simplification) of the case. I think the varied tackle changes have probably also had an impact as you say. Although presumably less so in the PL where many of them have only vaguely been implemented.

For the benefit of those who were at best one at the time of this discussion could you provide a brief summary (and/or link)?

As for the offside law itself, my main criticism remains that enforcement is inevitably and, in my view, unacceptably unreliable. The article is right that the new interpretation of interference is clearly to the benefit of the attacking side but it does make for very a messy spectacle, both for fans at the game and for the TV viewer too. Perhaps if they introduced technology for assessing whether someone is in an offside position then that would remove some of the contentiousness and dissatisfaction.

I agree about the problems with enforcement. I have to say I'm against a rule that is only implementable with technology.

I think the article raises the interesting issue of whether it is better to have a rule that encourages more exciting play even if it is harder/more messy to interpret correctly.

Then we could just spend our time moaning about interference. That would be progress I think.