Forum List | Football Forum
| Topic: Offside |
|---|
| 1. Author: PARrot Date: Mon 2nd Mar 2026. 00:15 I have never played football beyond BB level, so I don`t get the tactical intricacies. I think as a result I actually enjoy matches more than most. I hear folk moaning as we leave the ground after a match that I enjoyed. Anyhoo here`s the question....what would happen if we just scrapped offside? Reply |
| 2. Author: DBA Date: Mon 2nd Mar 2026. 00:30 Chris Kane would get 90 mins every week in the opponents penalty box. Reply |
| 3. Author: neils Date: Mon 2nd Mar 2026. 01:07 There actually an experiment years ago in what would now be English tier 5 or 6. Basically they got 21 players in the box, the keeper whacked the ball as far as possible, then the players charged up to the other box. All game. It was scrapped as quickly as they could . Reply |
| 4. Author: neils Date: Mon 2nd Mar 2026. 01:10 Had a nose about... In 1987/8 the GM Conference adopted a `no offside from direct free kicks` rule as a FIFA trial. It got scrapped a third of the way into the season as teams packed the six yard box on every free kick. Reply |
| 5. Author: OzPar Date: Mon 2nd Mar 2026. 01:17 I have a dim recollection of a game between Hearts and Kilmarnock where the SFA/SFL experimented with a withdrawal of the offside rule. The game finished something like 7-4 or 9-7. I am thinking that this occurred in the early seventies, but I may be out by a few years. It may have been in a cup, rather than in the league. Does anybody know more? Reply |
| 6. Author: sonofpetrie Date: Mon 2nd Mar 2026. 07:51 OzPar, Mon 2 Mar 01:17 IIRC the first half there was a line between the halfway line and the 18yard box meaning you were not offside when this side of it in the first 45. In the second half this line was ignored meaning you simply couldn`t be offside. The score was something ridiculous as you described. The normal offside rule was always supposed to give the benefit of the doubt to the attacker. This has fallen away, especially with the introduction of VAR. I personally find it soul destroying watching a perfectly good goal being chalked off because a toenail or bum cheek is 2mm ahead of the last defender. Would love to see a "daylight" rule introduced. "The only place success comes before work is in the dictionary" Reply |
| 7. Author: Pars11 Date: Mon 2nd Mar 2026. 08:23 The Pars played Celtic at Parkhead in July 1973 in the Dryburgh Cup. A experimental no offside rule until the 18 yard line was crossed was used. We got beat 6-1 with Bobby Lennox scoring 4. The experiment saw the opposition striker waiting in your half on service from his team mates. This was not a success. Bluebell Polka Reply |
| 8. Author: veteraneastender Date: Mon 2nd Mar 2026. 08:57 If memory serves the offside line in the Dryburgh Cup was set 30 yards from the goal line.As above, it wasn’t a success, a licence for fast movers like Lennox to operate a lot closer to the goal and invited more of the long ball game. Reply |
| 9. Author: OzPar Date: Mon 2nd Mar 2026. 09:39 Well, it turns out it was 1965. Here`s the match report... https://www.londonhearts.com/scores/images/1965/1965061901.htm Reply |
| 10. Author: d3monstrate Date: Mon 2nd Mar 2026. 11:14 The game has changed considerably since those times with a lot more analysis and risk management going on. Would certainly be interesting nowadays, especially at a higher level Reply |
| 11. Author: fcda Date: Mon 2nd Mar 2026. 11:46 I think there`s something special about seeing a well timed run/pass to beat offside so I`d be sad to see that go. I just think they need to apply "clear and obvious" to offside decisions though VAR. Effectively use a much wider line to determine if it`s wrong before it can be overturned. Reply |
| 12. Author: fcda Date: Mon 2nd Mar 2026. 11:56 Arsene Wenger`s proposal will be trialled in the Canadian Premier League. It will move the offside line to the other side of the attacker, meaning there has to be a clear gap between them and the defender for it to be offside. This brings back the advantage to the attacking team but in a pretty heavy handed way IMO. I think you`ll still get toenail decisions, just at the other side of the attacker. Reply |
| 13. Author: wee eck Date: Mon 2nd Mar 2026. 12:01 Would scrapping offside not mean more `route 1` football and the demise of the midfield? Football would become more like basketball with less emphasis on skill and subtlety. Reply |
| 14. Author: Bletchley_Par Date: Mon 2nd Mar 2026. 12:33 Offside, the modern equivalent of battlelines. You need to know who is a participant in the battle, know where the fight is actually taking place. The article that Oz has linked to is a fascinating read, even in the heady days of 5 forwards they knew that you could have too much of a good thing. We can either trust the ancient wisdom that offside is needed or we can doubt it until our own experiment makes us reach the same conclusions. Many games have an "offside" rule even if they don`t call it that our current version of offside requires a go with the Occam`s razor. It needs to be fair, clearly defined and able to be enforced in the same way by officials at all levels.  Reply |
| 15. Author: neils Date: Mon 2nd Mar 2026. 12:35 Agree, I think with the increased analysis would mean giant strikers and any keepers or defenders needing to be able to kick the ball as far as possible.why would you need a midfield? I like the tactics and nuance of football, apart from that it`s beauty is it`s simplicity. Reply |
| 16. Author: veteraneastender Date: Mon 2nd Mar 2026. 14:35 If offside were to be abolished the length of the pitch could be significantly reduced - no need for build up play from own half, just concentrate on route one tactics. Reply |
| 17. Author: AdamAntsParsStripe Date: Mon 2nd Mar 2026. 14:40 I actually think this Canadian trial will prove that it won’t benefit attackers. What we will see is teams playing the high press will sit much deeper and midfield will become congested. The game will become more defensive as it used to be before VAR existed. Zwei Pints Bier und ein Päckchen Chips bitte  Reply |
| 18. Author: p4r5f4n Date: Mon 2nd Mar 2026. 18:50 I refereed in a summer trial in England in the early seventies where the eighteen yard line was extended from the box out to the bylines. Players could only be offside between the eighteen yard line and the goal line. It was a disaster for a number of reasons. 1. The linesman had to stay near the offside area because the forwards were clustered near the eighteen yard line. 2. The game was reduced to long balls from defence to the attackers with virtually nothing happening in midfield. It was virtually two separate games, one at each end of the pitch. 3. It was impossible to referee with a single referee for reasons 1 & 2 above. 4. It was horrible to watch. 5. It didn’t increase the number of goals scored. This trial took place at all levels from Northern Premier down to County leagues and was universally deemed a failure by everyone involved. Reply |
| 19. Author: veteraneastender Date: Mon 2nd Mar 2026. 20:41 Good explanation of the negatives. Reply |
| 20. Author: PARrot Date: Mon 2nd Mar 2026. 22:21 Glad I asked. A veritable mine of info. Thanks. Anyone got ideas what might be better than what we have? Reply |
Your Message:
By using your account you have implicitly accepted the DAFC.net Forum Rules and agree to be bound by them. You also agree that you will take sole responsibility for your post and indemnify dafc.net on all matters and costs. Refrain from making any potentially libelous comments about anyone
- - -