Jaidi -offside?

[Johnny]

Brian Clough used to say 'if a player is not interfering with play then he shouldn't be on the pitch'.

If you're offside, you're offside. It should go back to being that way IMO. Everybody knows where everybody stands. Literally.

100% Shags.Your in the game or your not.

[Shaggy]

That's flawed though, because you could have a great goal ruled out due to someone being 20 yards to the right of centre, by the touchline and doing nothing, but getting flagged offside pointlessly.

Then that'd be tough ****. If you're by the touchline and not directly involved in play, step off the pitch. I used to do that when the rule was 'if you're off you're off'. If you're miles offside in a wide area, step over the touchline, run up the line and come back on to the field of play when you're back in an onside position.

You could find a flaw with every variation on the rule and this for me is the most clear and straightforward.

[Craig_H]

Then that'd be tough ****. If you're by the touchline and not directly involved in play, step off the pitch. I used to do that when the rule was 'if you're off you're off'. If you're miles offside in a wide area, step over the touchline, run up the line and come back on to the field of play when you're back in an onside position.

You could find a flaw with every variation on the rule and this for me is the most clear and straightforward.

You'd get booked for leaving the field of play without permission

[Shaggy]

You'd get booked for leaving the field of play without permission

Not in the Sunday leagues.

But that would be a simple solution to the problem you put forward.

And if not well then tough ****. If you're offside, you're offside.

It's all about opinions but this 'active' stuff is just bollocks. Everyone's active.

[Craig_H]

Active isnt what i'm arguing with, but 'interfering with play' is easy to work out IMO.

[Shaggy]

Too many grey areas and it boils down to a referee's interpretation. As we've seen a million times, they all interpret things differently. With my proposal there are no grey areas - everybody's clear and people can have no complaints.

[Craig_H]

Honestly mate, before this phase 1 and phase 2 bollocks came in, they were all singing from the same hymn sheet, more or less, with regards to interfering or not interfering, it was almost enforced universally. I'd go back to that.

[Shaggy]

Honestly mate, before this phase 1 and phase 2 bollocks came in, they were all singing from the same hymn sheet, more or less, with regards to interfering or not interfering, it was almost enforced universally. I'd go back to that.

Well I'd obviously prefer that to the current farcical situation, but still I seem to recall there being controversies - people have different perceptions of what is and isn't active (regardless of 'phases of play') and I still think there are too many grey areas and hence lots of post-match squabbling about certain decisions.

I remember Allardyce and Bolton pushing their luck and they got reigned in. The same should happen now to prevent a repeat what happened today (and previously against Everton) with Jaidi.

[Craig_H]

Against Everton, he wasnt actually in an offside position though

[Joe King]

OK offside monkeys. Just answer this question. Can you get offside from a throw in?
Haha, suckers

[Craig_H]

Only if you're holding a banana when you receive the ball

[Joe King]

Whoosh!

[Craig_H]

Whoosh!

I saw yours and raised you another

[Gazmo1]

Only if you're holding a banana when you receive the ball

in today's PC world that could be classed as a racist comment!

[Neil Young]

I read an article a few weeks where Keith Hackett was complaining that pundits don't know the offside law and that's why there is so much controversy. His argument was that the current law is perfectly clear and workable. He's right to say pundits don't know what they're doing (which is disgraceful really) but he's also wrong - even in the way he discussed it in his article it was obvious there was so much scope for inconsistent and illogical decision-making.

The old rule was fine. There will always be scope for referees to interpret the laws of the game and hence there will be variation in how they judge whether a player is interfering with play but if the old law were reinstated there would be far fewer occasions when an injustice is done.