Q for Soccer fans. Feelings on offsides rule

About all I ever watch is the World Cup. What drives me nuts more than anything is the stupid offsides rule. Nothing is worse than seeing the defense in trouble run up the field past the other team gleefully raising their hands for the offsides call. It's the same feeling I get when I see Duke run under a guy going up for a dunk and try to draw an offensive foul. Even more frustrating was watching the Ghana game today and w/ a 3 man on only the goalie advantage, Ghana is called offsides for merely passing the ball forward. Yes it's the rule, but why?

So for the real soccer fans, would eliminating offsides completely ruin the game in a way I simply don't see? Obviously it would change a great deal, but for the better or worse? I think hockey should partially do the same thing, eliminate offsides for entering the zone, but once you're in, the blue line be in effect. Just curious how you guys feel about the rule

I couldnt agree more , and was thinking the same thing as I watch these games.

guildda said:

About all I ever watch is the World Cup. What drives me nuts more than anything is the stupid offsides rule. Nothing is worse than seeing the defense in trouble run up the field past the other team gleefully raising their hands for the offsides call. It's the same feeling I get when I see Duke run under a guy going up for a dunk and try to draw an offensive foul. Even more frustrating was watching the Ghana game today and w/ a 3 man on only the goalie advantage, Ghana is called offsides for merely passing the ball forward. Yes it's the rule, but why?

So for the real soccer fans, would eliminating offsides completely ruin the game in a way I simply don't see? Obviously it would change a great deal, but for the better or worse? I think hockey should partially do the same thing, eliminate offsides for entering the zone, but once you're in, the blue line be in effect. Just curious how you guys feel about the rule

Click to expand...

That Ghana goal was a kindergarten error by the forward. All he had to do was stay level with the guy with the ball and it was 3-0. I was pi$$ed more than most as I had the over.

The usa would of won when they tried the offside trap and did not suceed at it.

I say have have a 40 yard line as long as the ball passes the 40 yard line before the player then it is good just like hockey.

but once the defense clears it past the 40 yard line all offense players must come back over just like hockey this would keep them from camping in front of the net.

It's, by light years, the world's most popular sport. Don't think the offsides rule is changing any time soon.

Im a soccer fan and I would like to see something changed. Offsides dominates the game too much and the calls are always so close. Will never happen though

lander said:

It's, by light years, the world's most popular sport. Don't think the offsides rule is changing any time soon.

Click to expand...

Oh no doubt. Do wish they'd consider doing something though. People certainly don't love the game because of the offsides rules.

I have no problem with offside rule and never had. Grew up playing soccer and it's just a part of game.
The only problem I have is FIFA not using instant reply to decide whether the close call was right or not. It would be kind of cool if coaches in soccer had something like challange in NFL.

that's like getting rid of the "3 in the key" rule in basketball

guildda said:

So for the real soccer fans, would eliminating offsides completely ruin the game in a way I simply don't see?

Click to expand...

the opponent forward(s) would just stay in the penalty box or nearby waiting for a long pass and the defense has no other way than to mark him with at least one player, even if the play is completely in the other side of the field, "just" because of the fear of a fast counter attack with a long pass. It would become a great mess. Offside adds even more tactic/strategy to the game.
The offside rule is applied only from the midfield on, they only remote change I can see is moving the point of application from the midfield to the quarter of the pitch.

it would also cause big gaps between the midfielders and the forwards

<TABLE cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=0 border=0><TBODY><TR><TD>A worthy goal for soccer</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>Posted 6/13/2006 By William R. Mattox Jr.
USA Today Sports

The elusive gooooooooooooal!
Look, the object of soccer is to put the ball in the goal. But you'd hardly know this from watching a professional match. Because in big-time soccer, teams overload their formations with defensive players who are trained to play "keep away" once they get a lead. As a result, soccer teams rarely score.

Making matters worse, low-scoring games often end in ties — which are usually broken with a penalty kick shootout. While this sometimes leads to dramatic finishes — as when Brandi Chastain scored the U.S. team's winning goal in the 1999 women's Cup — settling a team game with an individual contest makes about as much sense as holding a punt, pass and kick competition to break a tie in the Super Bowl.

It could be easily fixed by heeding a lesson from basketball in the 1970s and early '80s, college basketball faced soccerlike problems: Teams often sat on leads and played too cautiously. In one infamous game between the University of North Carolina and Duke, UNC played its "four corners offense" for an entire half, attempting only two shots. (Both missed.)

After this fiasco (and others like it), the NCAA formally adopted a three-point shot and other rules changes designed to open up the game and make it easier to score. These changes helped make college basketball more appealing to watch — especially on television — and the sport's popularity skyrocketed.

An experiment
Call me crazy, but I think the MLS ought to adopt an experimental scoring system that mirrors the one found in basketball: One point for a penalty shot, two points for a short-range goal, and three points for a long-range goal.

This scoring system would make come-from-behind victories more common because teams down by a goal or two could take the lead with a single shot (or on a two-shot foul). It would also discourage teams from sitting on leads with passive-aggressive play. And it would make ties rarer — and easier to break in sudden-death overtime.

Changing soccer's scoring system would be easier, and better, than adopting other proposed remedies to soccer's low-scoring problem (such as making the goal bigger or reducing the number of players). And if this system worked well in the MLS, it could spread to other levels of competition in the same way that basketball's three-point shot has spread to virtually all levels everywhere.

Now, lest I leave the wrong impression, I want to confess to having a fond affection for Europeans. I almost always root for the Italians in the World Cup, and I appreciate the English teams, too. In addition, I have great admiration for professional soccer players. They can do things with their feet that I cannot even begin to do with my hands.

Nevertheless, a soccer match ought to be more than just a hacky-sack exhibition using an inflatable ball. Big-time soccer should be more like marriage (with frequent scoring) and less like abstinence.

So, I hope the Lords of Soccer will consider revising their rules the way the Lords of Basketball altered theirs. Because unless something dramatic changes, homely Americans like me are going to have a hard time ever falling madly in love with "the beautiful game."
William R. Mattox Jr. is a writer in Virginia and a member of USA TODAY's board of contributors.

guildda- Good post. The offside rule in soccer might possibly be the worst rule in all of sports as far as constantly ruining a marvelous game. The offside rule should be eliminated because it slows down the pace of the game and also because the linesmen keep screwing up offside calls either through incompetence or misinterpretation.

The offside trap stifles the game and slows down talented players. Sure, you can beat the offside trap but that doesn't happen too often and even when it does the linesmen will call the play offside even when it isn't. There are so many times where the player is level with the last defender and the linesmen blows the call. On other occasions, they will call offsides even when the player who is offside is not directly involved in the play and other times they will let the play continue.

I will be the first too admit that the linesmen have a very difficult job seeing as they have to determine when the pass was made and then determine the position of the player receiving the pass when it was made. They have to watch two things at once and that is pretty difficult. I am a huge soccer fan but the offside rule should be eliminated altogether.

dj_mercury said:

the opponent forward(s) would just stay in the penalty box or nearby waiting for a long pass and the defense has no other way than to mark him with at least one player, even if the play is completely in the other side of the field, "just" because of the fear of a fast counter attack with a long pass. It would become a great mess. Offside adds even more tactic/strategy to the game.
The offside rule is applied only from the midfield on, they only remote change I can see is moving the point of application from the midfield to the quarter of the pitch.

Click to expand...

Thanks dj (and everyone else), that's the sort of thing I was looking for.

Perhaps something like being within a meter or two of the defense would work. Of course then it's gets really difficult to call. FIFA couldn't care less, but I just can't see myself becoming more than an every four year fan unless this gets tweaked eventually.

Hell ever game I see that freakin' flag or opposing players raise their arms indicating offsides. Now I've just learn how to sit through an entire soccer game but seeing this called over and over kills any pleasure of watching the game. They should do like hockey does and have a blue line or something.

odogg25 said:

that's like getting rid of the "3 in the key" rule in basketball

Click to expand...

BINGO

the offside rule is there for very good reasons, and it also makes the games more interesting, not for the perpertual arguments after the games of whether it was or wasn't offside. There are intricasies of the sport which I cant go into right now on why the offside is a sine qua non in football. You can't have teams "parking" players in front of the goal line, and you the beauty of it all it the technical offside and having the player accelerate past the offside against the defenders, and the passer having such skill as to pass just in time to avoid the offside. That takes tremendous skill and coordination from both the offence and the defence. Bottom line, the offside can't and won't go, it's the whole essence of the game.

Another thing, the u.s. attempt at a technical offside today was the most pathetic thing I ve watched a long time, real highschool stuff..

As for such comments:

"Nevertheless, a soccer match ought to be more than just a hacky-sack exhibition using an inflatable ball. Big-time soccer should be more like marriage (with frequent scoring) and less like abstinence."

Bollocks from people who don't love the game and don't get the game either. As for the metaphors, marriage with frequent scoring and abstinence, somebody give me a shot of morphine, this is so painfully unfunny.

I can understand why they have the offside rule and don't think it will change any time soon. What I can't understand is that we have the world's best players on the field being offside by 5 yards. Don't these idiots watch their teammate with the ball? Don't they then look to see where the defenders are??? Get back onside you retard.

I'm not talking about the occasional close call. These retards are 5 yards offside while their teammate has been dribbling for 10 seconds or more.

I grew up playing soccer and played on some elite teams. One guy I played with is making millions playing in Chili and another who was twice the player that kid was gave up soccer to play basketball at Evansville... was good enough to play on the most elite teams in the world.

Anyway soccer is far and away the best sport and I will never understand America's disinterest in it. The game would be ruined without the offsides rule...it would just be a little more americanized. The rule is perfect, keeps the offense honest and stategy in the game. Without offsides the game would revolve around the long ball...and the feild would be way to open....possesion would mean nothing.

A 0-0 final is a beatiful thing.

The old NASL used the hideous 35-yard line where offsides was enforced. The world ridiculed the league for it. Fact of the matter is the game would be horrible without it. You need to use all 10 players (not including the goalie) to build up an attack. If the offside rule wasn't there defenders would have to hang back and chase players too much. The field is just too big for that. An offside rule works well in hockey because there isn't as much area to cover and you can start out a quick attack with the speed of skating and the smaller rink area.

True talents time their runs perfectly. Its not about watching the other players to know if you are offside, it is running into space at the precise moment the ball gets hit. Very tough to do and if you are just lazy as the Italians appeared today you will get whistled over and over.

The way to beat offsides is to make a good play with the ball to get into open space or get a teammate ahead into open space and then send lateral passes after that. I don't know what McBride was doing on that play, maybe it was intentional because anyone who has played goalie in soccer or hockey knows stopping a shot with a defender in front of you like that is many times more difficult. Not sure if Buffon lets that through without McBride there.