Somewhere, in some deep, dark corner of football, there is a committee room where a group of men sit and come up with the next abomination for our sport. The last one, sin-bins and “blue cards”, appears dead on arrival, or so we can hope.
Those rooms have vomited forth all kinds of nonsense down through the years; thankfully the crazier elements have stayed in those rooms. There was one some years ago about splitting the pitch into zones and giving you more “goals” depending on where you score from, just as happens in basketball where a long-range basket is worth three points instead of two.
One of the problems we’ve seen since the implementation of VAR has been the constant tinkering with the handball rule. It has been used to cover a multitude of sins. If people left the damned rulebook alone for a spell that would work better for everyone, and it might not give certain people so much to hide behind. Yet not all change is change for the worse.
The reports that the offside rule is set to change – again – is welcome, because it restores some common sense to what used to be a fairly sensible situation. Right now, if a single part of a player’s body is over the line it’s offside. This absurdity has penalised pace. It has penalised those players who can think that bit quicker than others on the pitch.
In short, it’s actually served to erode the meritocratic principle in some ways, and when the rules of a game are actually altered to punish those who are just that bit better at it than others then it’s ceased to function as it was intended. It’s ceased to be a sport where the cream rises to the top. Anything that restores that principle is to be welcomed.
These proposed changes will do that, by moving football back to where it previously sat. The offside rule will now state that a player’s entire body has to be in an offside position for the offside to count; no more of this nonsense where you can be “level” with someone and your boot is sticking out that little bit further, or your head is bowed at such an angle as to technically put you “over.”
The current offside rule is stupid and had to go. This makes things better.
And it is clubs like ours, with players like Maeda and Kyogo and Idah and Kuhn, who will benefit from just such a change. Maeda terrifies teams right now as it is – I ignored the absurd comments from a former Japanese international the other day on him, that’s a classic example of a former player not being able to read the game properly.
With a change like this his pace will be even more devastating and he’ll be even scarier to play against.
Kyogo will really destroy sides though, because he plays right on the edge of the last man already and anything that makes his natural skills stand out more, anything that hands him the slightest advantage, will make him murderously difficult to stop.
That’s why we should be pleased with this. It may not be in time to impact this season, but if it’s in place before the next one we might really see something especially as pace is one of the key traits that Rodgers wants to see in this team.
Interesting development. This is one that any football fan should welcome.
Regarding the offside rule ? When a ball is deemed out of play ,the entire ball has to be completely over the line ….the complete sphere , or play continues ! Yet in the offside rule , if a player’s fingernail is offside , if it’s a goal , it is cancelled and a free kick given . Why not make it the FULL body ,like the full ball rule needs to be offside for the free kick to be given ? Once again with administrators and officials it’s one rule for one thing and another for something similar ?
“This is one that any football fan should welcome”
Er… Perhaps with the exception of Sevco and it’s fans I’d predict James !!!
The present offside rule is nonsense, I have said many times since that there should be clear daylight between attacker and defender to be offside. Many have agreed with me so this chance has to be for the better. Wonder how many Bobby Lennox goals would have stood had this been the case.
At long last common sense has prevailed
“No laughing at back” shouts the chair at the meeting of the Lanarkshire Referees Association as the new offside proposals are shown on PowerPoint.
It’s club crest that decides. No more no less.
My understanding of this is that there’s still another year of trials to take place before the decision is made to implement it or not. I may be wrong but I’m sure that’s what was said at the IFAB conference.
Great idea, now get the penalty decisions right, ball to hand is outrageous. It should never be a penalty.
At least a step in the right direction. Watch highlights on Beintv every week. Decisions all over Europe begger belief. The handball given all over the place are a joke. Var is ruining the great game.
On the face of it, yes this sounds like it could be a significant improvement.
A striker’s big toe won’t put him in an offides position? 🙂
Additionally, I am quietly confident that our very own ‘top Scottish referees’
will still find a way to f*** it all up ! 🙁
As for “the next abomination for our sport”:
With the increased foreign ownership of top clubs over the years,
– and especially with American ownership –
it’s just a surprise that the game is not already played out over
4 quarters – simply to increase the number of commercial breaks for TV?
‘Water breaks’ in recent Tournament Finals seemed like a tentative [worrying]
step in that direction…?
This would be a welcome return to common sense instead of the absurdity of the rule at present. Another good piece James. Thank you.
This won’t reduce the amount of frustration, which is currently with the time taken by VAR. It won’t be any faster than currently. It will benefit Celtic (or should in theory) numbers wise but we will still have 5 minute checks for every goal.
Good. It makes sense.
However, I think they should do away with the “offside rule” entirely and replace it with one where a player can be deemed to be “poaching” and then penalised.
Details to be worked out. Say hanging about within the opposition’s 20 yard line.
This would open up the game for the lessers teams who could play the long ball and would keep defenders on their toes.
Difficult one. Removal of offside rule altogether will have teams sitting far far deeper. We also then have the potential for an attacker to constantly just stand in front of the keeper preventing any view of what’s happening. Which would be fun for one game and then everyone would hate it.
This latest proposal is probably the best way forward, as it is likely to increase the number of calls the AR gets correct in real time, and reduce the impact of VAR (everywhere except Scotland).
But we definitely need an offside rule in some form, honestly the alternative when this much money is at stake would ruin the game.
If I’m not mistaken the last rules change in the offside rule came in the 1980’s, up until then an attacking player level with 2nd last defender[including the goalkeeper] was offside. This was changed to the attacker being onside when level with 2nd last defender, this gave the attacker the benefit of the doubt. This change if passed would restore that benefit of the doubt back to the attacker which VAR and the drawn lines have taken away. A great change for the better. All they’ve got to do now is to be clearer in what is a handball offence, I won’t hold my breath.
One of the biggest rules that should change is getting an indirect free kick in the box, ie not Always a penalty. It used to or maybe still does for pass backs but if the pressure was taken off refs so an indirect free kick if it was an offence outside the box could be the same inside it would help everyone.
I’d also like to see offside rule change so that your big toe can’t put you offside, it should be a clear body part or parts.
the rule will be bendable against ZTHEM,MONTHEHOOPS
Whereas I totally agree with the new rule for offside as it has ruined some perfectly good goals, won’t it just create the exact same argument when checking VAR after a goal, if a player’s “big toe ‘” deems him to be just onside?