The Offside Rule

[RudeBoy 0]

Should be abolished.

Fucking pointless.

[TexasGers 96]

Are you Sepp Blatter?

[disgruntled_bear 157]

Are you Sepp Blatter?

Was just going to say that

Wasn't that long ago... I posted a story that they were looking at abolishing the offside rule.

[Guest SandyIniesta-Nordahl]

This is probably your worst post, which is saying something.

[RudeBoy 0]

Are you Sepp Blatter?

Was just going to say that

Wasn't that long ago... I posted a story that they were looking at abolishing the offside rule.

What's the point of it? It serves absolutely no positive purpose. Imagine how much more exciting it would be if you could score effectively from anywhere on the pitch.

Defenders would have to be more alert, each team would be desperate to get it to the opposite end of the park as soon as, there would be no bullshit, contentious referee/linesman decisions, the game would be faster and there would be more goals.

Offside is negative and inane.

[rfc_no1fan 13]

Football would be a farce without the offside rule

[RudeBoy 0]

Football would be a farce without the offside rule

In what way?

[Jordo 33]

people standing in the box for 90 minutes, the game would lack any quality with long ball the only way of playing. you must be having a laugh !!

[RudeBoy 0]

people standing in the box for 90 minutes, the game would lack any quality with long ball the only way of playing. you must be having a laugh !!

People couldn't flood the opposition box as this would leave thier own box unguarded. They would have to be pragmatic. You're making the mistake of assuming that this rule would only affect/benefit one team.

How would the game lack 'quality'? Is a 0-0 draw a quality game? What the fuck is quality about a midfield battle which results in a player being set up only to be called, rightly or wrongly, for offside? Nothing. Get it scrapped and let's see some fucking action.

[RudeBoy 0]

There would be a ridiculous amount of goals for a start. Teams would require a ridiculously deep defencive line, giving the midfield acres to run about in. It just wouldn't be as entertaining.

Why would there be a 'ridiculous' ammount of goals? You still have to get the ball through defenders and a goalkeeper and ensure that your own defence is solid.

Any team that played 'ridiculously' deep would do so at thier own risk. No team could flood the other's box as it would leave themselves exposed. Even if a team sits two strikers in the oppsition box, the opposition just has to stick two defenders there thereby cancelling out notions of an 'unfair' advantage. Each team would realise that they would have to be a bit more strategic and match the other. This would ensure that the play would still focus on the midfield but there would be no contentious offside decisions.

[David1872 21]

So when a free kick is given every player could just stand on the goaline and give the keeper no chance and force the ball in?

[RudeBoy 0]

There would be no need to flood the opposition box when you can just leave one or two people up there.

And you're making the assumption that it would improve the quality of the game having no offside rule. I really can't see any benefit in scraping the rule. None at all.

Exactly. You leave two up there, the defence sticks two on them. The assumption I make, rightly, is that there will be no more shite referee decisions in this area.

You're making the assumption it would lead to a 'ridiculous' ammount of goals. There is no basis whatsoever for such a claim.

[RudeBoy 0]

So when a free kick is given every player could just stand on the goaline and give the keeper no chance and force the ball in?

How do they 'force' the ball in? And why would they all stand there and leave themselves completely exposed at the back? They aren't stupid. They would know that all it took was a clearance up thier end and they would be fucked. They wouldn't do it. You are creating a straw-man argument.

[TexasGers 96]

It's a great game as is, if it ain't broke there's no need to fix it

[David1872 21]

Also Linesman are not just for calling offside. They help the referee out on other decisions.

If you take them away and implement your no offside rule then players could get away with just about anything.

[David1872 21]

So when a free kick is given every player could just stand on the goaline and give the keeper no chance and force the ball in?

How do they 'force' the ball in? And why would they all stand there and leave themselves completely exposed at the back? They aren't stupid. They would know that all it took was a clearance up thier end and they would be fucked. They wouldn't do it. You are creating a straw-man argument.

What if their wasn't a clearance? You could just put 5 players around the goalkeeper, giving him virtually no chance, then keep 5 players back incase there is a clearance.

Then the player could hit the free kick into the net and the goalkeeper would be stuck in the middle of the players and have to muscle his way through 5 players which could result in a penalty.

[RudeBoy 0]

It's a great game as is, if it ain't broke there's no need to fix it

It is broken. The offside rule is fucked.

[TexasGers 96]

It's a great game as is, if it ain't broke there's no need to fix it

It is broken. The offside rule is fucked.

Well so far nobody has agreed with you

[RudeBoy 0]

Also Linesman are not just for calling offside. They help the referee out on other decisions.

If you take them away and implement your no offside rule then players could get away with just about anything.

I never said anything about doing away with linesmen. Keep them by all means, as you said, to catch fouls and shit. They'd probably see more diving and proper fouling if they weren't burdened by the offside shit.

[David1872 21]

Also Linesman are not just for calling offside. They help the referee out on other decisions.

If you take them away and implement your no offside rule then players could get away with just about anything.

I never said anything about doing away with linesmen. Keep them by all means, as you said, to catch fouls and shit. They'd probably see more diving and proper fouling if they weren't burdened by the offside shit.

What about the problem with players surrounding the goalkeeper giving him no chance?

[RudeBoy 0]

There would be no need to flood the opposition box when you can just leave one or two people up there.

And you're making the assumption that it would improve the quality of the game having no offside rule. I really can't see any benefit in scraping the rule. None at all.

Exactly. You leave two up there, the defence sticks two on them. The assumption I make, rightly, is that there will be no more shite referee decisions in this area.

You're making the assumption it would lead to a 'ridiculous' ammount of goals. There is no basis whatsoever for such a claim.

If you'd only need 2 defenders to match these 2 strikers, why do most teams play a 4-4-2 formation?

What exactly is there to gain from scrapping the rule?

They could still play a four four two formation if they wanted. Sticking two defenders to man-mark (if that indeed is actually required) still necessitates a defensive line.

Like I said, each team would have to tailor accordingly. If the opposition sticks three up front, you stick three out of your four defenders onto them. It doesn't make it any less of a defence. Accordingly, if the strikers were getting fuck all out of this, it would force them to either scrap the plan or play further back. This allows the defence to push up as required.

What you would gain would be a quicker, more exciting game with more goals and no contentious offside decisions.

[RudeBoy 0]

Also Linesman are not just for calling offside. They help the referee out on other decisions.

If you take them away and implement your no offside rule then players could get away with just about anything.

I never said anything about doing away with linesmen. Keep them by all means, as you said, to catch fouls and shit. They'd probably see more diving and proper fouling if they weren't burdened by the offside shit.

What about the problem with players surrounding the goalkeeper giving him no chance?

There is no problem. You have just created one out of an extremely unlikely scenario. Why on earth would they do this? you are also again assuming that this would just benefit one team and that the goalkeeper would have no protection from his own players.

Why would one team expend so many players concentrated in one small area of a massive pitch leaving thier own goal/half weakened? On the off-chance of a goal? There is just as much chance as them losing one by doing this.

[RudeBoy 0]

There would be no need to flood the opposition box when you can just leave one or two people up there.

And you're making the assumption that it would improve the quality of the game having no offside rule. I really can't see any benefit in scraping the rule. None at all.

Exactly. You leave two up there, the defence sticks two on them. The assumption I make, rightly, is that there will be no more shite referee decisions in this area.

You're making the assumption it would lead to a 'ridiculous' ammount of goals. There is no basis whatsoever for such a claim.

If you'd only need 2 defenders to match these 2 strikers, why do most teams play a 4-4-2 formation?

What exactly is there to gain from scrapping the rule?

They could still play a four four two formation if they wanted. Sticking two defenders to man-mark (if that indeed is actually required) still necessitates a defensive line.

Like I said, each team would have to tailor accordingly. If the opposition sticks three up front, you stick three out of your four defenders onto them. It doesn't make it any less of a defence. Accordingly, if the strikers were getting fuck all out of this, it would force them to either scrap the plan or play further back. This allows the defence to push up as required.

What you would gain would be a quicker, more exciting game with more goals and no contentious offside decisions.

And you're having a go at me for making assumptions...

My assumption is the inevitable result of the flaws of your rebuttal.

[David1872 21]

Also Linesman are not just for calling offside. They help the referee out on other decisions.

If you take them away and implement your no offside rule then players could get away with just about anything.

I never said anything about doing away with linesmen. Keep them by all means, as you said, to catch fouls and shit. They'd probably see more diving and proper fouling if they weren't burdened by the offside shit.

What about the problem with players surrounding the goalkeeper giving him no chance?

There is no problem. You have just created one out of an extremely unlikely scenario. Why on earth would they do this? you are also again assuming that this would just benefit one team and that the goalkeeper would have no protection from his own players.

Why would one team expend so many players concentrated in one small area of a massive pitch leaving thier own goal/half weakened? On the off-chance of a goal? There is just as much chance as them losing one by doing this

Well if he had protection from his own players then that would even things up if there was a break on. Having 4 or 5 players back is enough to stop a counter attack.

Also they would do this to stop the goalkeeper from moving which would result in him having no chance of saving the shot if it was put into the corner.

[RudeBoy 0]

So when a free kick is given every player could just stand on the goaline and give the keeper no chance and force the ball in?

How do they 'force' the ball in? And why would they all stand there and leave themselves completely exposed at the back? They aren't stupid. They would know that all it took was a clearance up thier end and they would be fucked. They wouldn't do it. You are creating a straw-man argument.

What if their wasn't a clearance? You could just put 5 players around the goalkeeper, giving him virtually no chance, then keep 5 players back incase there is a clearance.

Then the player could hit the free kick into the net and the goalkeeper would be stuck in the middle of the players and have to muscle his way through 5 players which could result in a penalty.

And what if there is a clearance? This could go on all night. Your team puts five round my keeper, I put five of my defenders in there as well. Do you have an advantage? No. You keep five of your players back, I put five of mine up. Do I have an advantage? No.

Your last point also neglects the fact that goalkeepers will generally always be offered the protection of the referee and given the benefit of the doubt. One outfield player can't obstruct a goalkeeper these days never mind five. Your point is a non-starter and speculative.