comment by Bales (U22081)
posted 1 hour, 7 minutes ago
comment by Grand Cannon (U18697)
posted 13 seconds ago
comment by Thorgen Kloppinson - Cosmic Refugee (U1282)
posted 2 hours, 49 minutes ago
I like these rules.

But football will be a victim of its own greatness. We will never be able to change the game because of fear of the unknown and general pseudo-nostalgic resistance to new ways of doing things.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Very true. Football is the most conservative of all competitive sports, lacks dynamism and is always trailing behind other sports from general rule changes to use of technology.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It's not true. See goal line technology.

In terms of adopting new technologies it should only be done for two reasons: improving fan enjoyment or improving the sport itself. Simply because we can doesn't mean we should.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Goal line technology? I thought sports like tennis were already using the technology long before football?

Also, something like allowing corners to curve out the pitch would improve fan enjoyment and create a new dynamic in how corners are swung in.

comment by Thorgen Kloppinson - Cosmic Refugee (U1282)
posted 1 hour, 17 minutes ago
Also, something like allowing corners to curve out the pitch would improve fan enjoyment and create a new dynamic in how corners are swung in.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

100%

Can be easily implemented at all levels too. I've been daydreaming about different techniques I could use on a corner kick

comment by Thorgen Kloppinson - Cosmic Refugee (U1282)
posted 1 hour, 17 minutes ago
Also, something like allowing corners to curve out the pitch would improve fan enjoyment and create a new dynamic in how corners are swung in.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
What about free kicks near the corner flags, wd the same rules apply? I wd actually suggest the rule applies to ALL dead ball situations including free kicks. And if the concept works well it can in future be introduced even to live play as long as the ball didn't bounce off the field.

comment by 4star (U22472)
posted 3 hours, 35 minutes ago
Italy had a gol disaloud in world cup finale 2006 purely becuse Luca Toni was facing toward the gol n the French defender was facing away from the gol.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Generally we consider goal to be the usual spelling of goal

whut do u mean by "we"'?

*what

huh?

comment by RonAlvinho (U6117)
posted 1 hour, 52 minutes ago
comment by Thorgen Kloppinson - Cosmic Refugee (U1282)
posted 1 hour, 17 minutes ago
Also, something like allowing corners to curve out the pitch would improve fan enjoyment and create a new dynamic in how corners are swung in.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

100%

Can be easily implemented at all levels too. I've been daydreaming about different techniques I could use on a corner kick
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I can see the ball flying over the net, only to curve inwards at the far post for a header at goal or back across the 6 yard.

Dunno if 3 is practical. If kick ins replaced throw ins then the ball would stay in play a lot more than it does now, no?

Depending on which half of the pitch the ball is in, one team would always be struggling not to concede a kick in, especially near the half way line because it could turn into a proper set piece with an attempt at goal.

comment by Thorgen Kloppinson - Cosmic Refugee (U1282)
posted 2 hours, 27 minutes ago
Dunno if 3 is practical. If kick ins replaced throw ins then the ball would stay in play a lot more than it does now, no?

Depending on which half of the pitch the ball is in, one team would always be struggling not to concede a kick in, especially near the half way line because it could turn into a proper set piece with an attempt at goal.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Exactly. Teams will be very wary of conceding throw/kick-ins and will try to keep the ball in play. This helps reduce boring delaying tactics.

comment by manusince52 (U9692)
posted 3 hours, 22 minutes ago
comment by 4star (U22472)
posted 3 hours, 35 minutes ago
Italy had a gol disaloud in world cup finale 2006 purely becuse Luca Toni was facing toward the gol n the French defender was facing away from the gol.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Generally we consider goal to be the usual spelling of goal
----------------------------------------------------------------------
We also generally consider disallowed to be the correct spelling for disaloud.

comment by Grand Cannon (U18697)
posted 7 hours, 10 minutes ago
comment by Thorgen Kloppinson - Cosmic Refugee (U1282)
posted 2 hours, 27 minutes ago
Dunno if 3 is practical. If kick ins replaced throw ins then the ball would stay in play a lot more than it does now, no?

Depending on which half of the pitch the ball is in, one team would always be struggling not to concede a kick in, especially near the half way line because it could turn into a proper set piece with an attempt at goal.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Exactly. Teams will be very wary of conceding throw/kick-ins and will try to keep the ball in play. This helps reduce boring delaying tactics.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Or maybe allow both throw ins and kick ins, teams can use whichever they prefer.

I mean this argument works equally both ways. If your head is offside as an attacker then you have clearly not been able to time your run properly and so shouldn't have the rules there to erase you mistake, no?

-------------------------------
No because you're feet are behind the defenders. The only reason your head is in front is because you have to lean forward to run. The advantage/benefit of the doubt, is meant to be with the attacker anyway. "Aaw but his head was leaning offside," is pure excuses, excuses rubbish from a defender who got beat. Like the kid agt school who moans you only beat him in a race because he didn't have the right trainers on.

"Nah nah, it was ma shoes man, it was ma shoes."

So you're saying if a players feet are level/behind the defender, that should count as benefit of the doubt or not offside? So basically your rule would be if any part of your body that can score is onside, you're onside?

Not sure how that would benefit the game because defenders will just naturally start defending deeper to prevent this happening.

comment by WB2 (Emery'll Get Me Killed) (U8276)
posted 8 hours, 47 minutes ago
I mean this argument works equally both ways. If your head is offside as an attacker then you have clearly not been able to time your run properly and so shouldn't have the rules there to erase you mistake, no?

-------------------------------
No because you're feet are behind the defenders. The only reason your head is in front is because you have to lean forward to run. The advantage/benefit of the doubt, is meant to be with the attacker anyway. "Aaw but his head was leaning offside," is pure excuses, excuses rubbish from a defender who got beat. Like the kid agt school who moans you only beat him in a race because he didn't have the right trainers on.

"Nah nah, it was ma shoes man, it was ma shoes."
----------------------------------------------------------------------

There is no advantage. That guidance (mot part of the laws) was to give the advantage to the attacker if the linesman wasn't sure. That isn't an issue now so that guidance is no longer in relevant.

Strikers know thatbtheir head counts, and so if they have allowed their head offside then they should have tomed their run better.

Instead of 3 I'd replace throw ins with kick ins but you can only hit it along the ground. Throw ins can be a disadvantage sometimes with teams losing possession

comment by welshpoolfan (U7693)
posted 1 hour, 1 minute ago
comment by WB2 (Emery'll Get Me Killed) (U8276)
posted 8 hours, 47 minutes ago
I mean this argument works equally both ways. If your head is offside as an attacker then you have clearly not been able to time your run properly and so shouldn't have the rules there to erase you mistake, no?

-------------------------------
No because you're feet are behind the defenders. The only reason your head is in front is because you have to lean forward to run. The advantage/benefit of the doubt, is meant to be with the attacker anyway. "Aaw but his head was leaning offside," is pure excuses, excuses rubbish from a defender who got beat. Like the kid agt school who moans you only beat him in a race because he didn't have the right trainers on.

"Nah nah, it was ma shoes man, it was ma shoes."
----------------------------------------------------------------------

There is no advantage. That guidance (mot part of the laws) was to give the advantage to the attacker if the linesman wasn't sure. That isn't an issue now so that guidance is no longer in relevant.

Strikers know thatbtheir head counts, and so if they have allowed their head offside then they should have tomed their run better.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Tbh I don't agree with head, and possibly shoulders as that can be down to which way you are facing to get to the ball. A defender will be running in one direction a striker in another

Knees and toes should be the decider.


Not eyes and ears and mouth and nose

comment by 8bit (U2653)
posted 4 hours, 46 minutes ago
Instead of 3 I'd replace throw ins with kick ins but you can only hit it along the ground. Throw ins can be a disadvantage sometimes with teams losing possession
----------------------------------------------------------------------
What do you mean by "hit it along the ground "? I don't understand that. You mean you can't hit a high ball into the opposition box, you can only hit a grounder?

comment by 8bit (U2653)
posted 4 hours, 49 minutes ago
Instead of 3 I'd replace throw ins with kick ins but you can only hit it along the ground. Throw ins can be a disadvantage sometimes with teams losing possession
----------------------------------------------------------------------

If throw ins are a disadvantage switch them so the team that played it out has to throw it in. Simple!

comment by JustYourAverageFan (U21016)
posted 1 day, 2 hours ago
So you're saying if a players feet are level/behind the defender, that should count as benefit of the doubt or not offside? So basically your rule would be if any part of your body that can score is onside, you're onside?

Not sure how that would benefit the game because defenders will just naturally start defending deeper to prevent this happening.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
No, not "any part." Strictly feet, since they're where you are actually standing, regardless what's leaning where. If attacker's front foot is behind level with rear most defender's, he's onside. Even if he scores with his head. To clarify, he can't be stood with his feet offside but head on, then score with his head. If he had his head onside, then tough shoulda got his feet there too.

Main reason for the choice is once you set the rule that way, it makes the call/VAR review alot more clear cut to decide so would ultimately lead to less controversy. After the obligatory first couple months of managers whining they preferred the old way.

Having read most of these comments, I am now asking myself the question: "Why do we even need an "off-side rule"?

Often "off-side" is a cover up for poor defending and prevents more creative, exciting and attacking football.
Now we find ourselves discussing elbows, shoulders, toe nails etc. etc. I know that some traditionalists will have seizures at this thought, but perhaps the game of football (aka. soccer) would be better off without it? I suspect that most game officials might also agree?

With regards to when is a ball out of play, the answer is simple, it is out of play as soon as it goes out of play and cannot come back into play! Just like when the ball crosses the goal line it is a goal, and cannot be dragged out.

If anyone bothers to respond, please stay on topic. The small group who thrive on personal insults and vulgarity need not waste their time.

No offside would oversimplify the game as goal hanging would come back in, and the opponent striker would be on your goal keepers shoulder instead of the centre back. No more high lines etc.

Imo, the feets r the only favtor in offside. If the heel of attacker is clser too the gol than the devender foots then offside.

*defender