Should FIFA change or remove the offside rule?

I personally think nothing should be changed about it. If it were to change, it would not be such a “beautiful” game. The lack of scoring is not the problem. In fact, in my opinion there isn’t a lack of scoring, it’s an improper mentality about the game. With almost any other sport, the general trend seems to be that the only desire to play/watch is to score. In soccer, this is less so because the focus is more on a complete team. You can more easily see great defensive moves, substitutions are a logistical/strategic move and occasionally (when the stars align) you actually score which, as it stands, is a far more “beautiful” thing. Just my 2 cents.

On September 24, 2008 Jake Becker said

Although I don’t like to agree with Jake, :P I think I have to on this…

I don’t want my soccer changing! I think that it might make for a good tournament tho… just something to change it up a bit, like futsal does.

But to change the offsides rule, would change the whole way a offensive and a defensive line works.

On September 24, 2008 Danielle said

This is not a new idea, they tried that rule in the 70′s, when Pele, Bechenbauer, etc., were playing with the N.Y. Cosmos. It certainly will create more opportunities for the forwards and will also give more space at midfield for the “Creative players” to set up more goals. I agree with this change

On September 24, 2008 Jordan said

That is an interesting topic. It might make the game more interesting and faster paced. Although different setups, both hockey & soccer have “the trap” which only slows & stalls the flow of the game. The linesman being able to make calls though? I’m for it as I am in hockey but that hasn’t happened in the NHL as of yet. Instead, the NHL has instituted the two ref system and the problem with that is, usually a senior ref & junior ref are doing the game. And the junior ref yields calls to the senior ref. The junior ref is afraid to step on the senior refs toes so ta speak. I feel the same would or could happen with the linesmen as well. No one wants to make the senior official look bad by making calls that the senior official might have missed.

Personally, I wish the NHL would just allow the linesmen to make the calls behind the play instead of just offsides. Same for soccer. In soccer, they could easily just make a solid white line or different colored line (like yellow). They don’t need a dotted or broken line to show a difference between this zone line vs other lines on the field. The players will know which is which. And it would make the linesmen’s job much easier. Make it a nice, thick line as the case with hockey. Something ALL the officials can clearly see, so that a linesman or ref that is within the area of the zone can still see offsides from quite a distance. I think it would make for much better calls. Would their be tagging up offsides or zero tolerance offsides, that is another question.

The system in place now with offsides is too inconsistent. It’s confusing (with the inconsistency which goes from ref to ref & linesmen) and there are just too many awful & missed calls.
I’d like to see that change. I think once the players adapt, both the players & the game itself will and can benefit from this set up.

On September 24, 2008 Larry said

I think, when you are comparing this change to rule hockey, you also need to keep in mind the speed of the game, the size of the “field” and the fact that hockey has the “icing” and “two-line” rules as well. Hockey is a much faster game with substitutions being made anywhere from every 30 seconds to 2 minutes. Depending on the level of play, that is much different from soccer (championship level only allows 3 substitutions per game regardless of injury). Also, keep in mind that the playing “field” of a hockey rink is FAR shorter than a soccer field so when you talk about removing offsides, also think about how that will affect the players. Lastly, if you were to remove the current offsides rule for the ice hockey style, would you want to implant the “icing” and “two-line” rules as well?

On October 1, 2008 Jake Becker said

Some interesting opinions thanks to everyone who’s commented so far! I understand the reasoning behind both sides, which is why I thought this would be a good topic to spark conversation!

On October 3, 2008 Joshua said

Yes, I am in favor of changing or removing the offside rule.
I recommend making the 18 yard line (penalty box) the attack zone. If an attacker enters the attack zone before the ball, and if no defender is between the attacker and the goal, then an offside call is made.
I also will be in favor of removing the offside rule completely on the premise that the defenders will stop creating offside traps. These changes will increase the number of goals per game by at least 100%.

On December 23, 2008 Jashua said

I’m not so sure that would be a good idea at all. That highly favors the attack and seems to almost rule out the necessity for anyone to play defense… I understand it would increase goal scoring, but it still would ruin the entire game, you might as well stop calling it football (soccer) and call it penalty shots.

On December 24, 2008 Jake said

Well Jashua’s idea is similar to the article to have an attacking zone, but I think the 18yrd box would be way too close!

I still think that to change the offsides rule would be to change how soccer is played!

On December 25, 2008 Danie said

This would be a bad idea. Once the ball enters the “attacking zone”, all the other players would just run to the goal line, the player would shoot, and everyone would get the rebound and score. It would ruin the game. I think the offside rule is fine how it is, I just think FIFA and sports networks need to make it more clear, because it is ALWAYS being altered. The 2010 World Cup would be a great opportunity; perhaps following some of the key games, offside can be explained.

On November 28, 2009 James said

Basing the offside on a line is a good idea. My support of this change is not only to make the sport more entertaining to watch, but really it is to allow the better teams to win most of the time against weaker teams. The current offside rule makes it too easy to defend. Clearly, anyone who watches pro-football and international football has seen weak teams hold off much more skilled teams.

I agree that something must be done. The current style is amazingly boring: it’s just endless noodling with the ball until the entire defensive team moves back and then you have some sort of totally uninteresting shot.

I am very happy with the growth of futsal, which is a great new’ish game. I hope there will be more versions of football: it’s a beautiful game and diversify it makes sense to me.

On June 16, 2010 Karim said

Gotta love Americans, you want to take a world wide game and change the rules to suit your unabashed need to have more (goals). Its a world wide game and granted as it stands law 11 is often controversial but everyone on the planet deals with, and accepts it. If you think football is boring perhaps the finer points of the game elude you. A score of 1 to 0 is a well matched game, a score of 99 to 103 is a kick fest with no goal keeper,boring. You want high scores stick to basketball. Its like watching a tennis match with tall gangsters, back and forth, back and forth, boring as hell.

On June 20, 2010 David said

I was just thinking what if Offsides could only be called in the Goalie’s box. A player could run to the left or right of a goal past the defense and center from there and not be offsides with my idea. (And, of course, to the front of the box) I agree that it is my American Bias that makes me want to see more scoring, but I also think such a change wouldn’t add that much scoring. More goalkeeping, but not that much more scoring.

On June 23, 2010 David said

I disagree with those who claim the lack of scoring in soccer is not a problem. Games that so frequently end 0-0, 0-1, 1-1, 1-2… serve as proof that singular goals are too rare and too significant in terms of win vs. loss. Goals at world cup level are also more often the result of defensive error than offensive skill, teamwork, assists, etc. I love the game (played it for years as a much younger man), but these facts detract from watching games played by the best soccer players. Because, … the best teams work that offside line, don’t make a mistake with it and don’t allow any offense to develop. Sorry purists, but that’s BORING! I strongly agree with the need to change the rule.

On June 23, 2010 Doug said

Things can always be improved, including the beautiful game, which ain’t so pretty when beautiful offensive plays are negated by calls which essentially favor a botched defense. Mexico and the USA were denied goals by an offsides rule which penalized them for outnumbering the defense in the attacking zone. That’s not beaty, it’s stupidity.

My solution is to suspend the offsides rule on any play originating in the 18-yard box. This way you still eliminate the goal-hanging and poaching, but don’t penalize an attacking team for outnumbering the defense or beating them to the ball.

On June 24, 2010 wcdevins said

I would like to see the judgement factor removed. Unless you are injured or take a knee or purposely move away from the play or leave the field if you are in an OS position when the ball is played FWD then you are OS – period! OR, perhaps, have the rule read ‘not OS if CLEARLY not involved with play’.

On June 26, 2010 J howard said

The off side rule needs to be tested.

I am a firm believer it should be removed. It is a technicality and no-one I know has been able to explain why it was introduced in a rational way. If you read the history of the off side law, it originated from Rugby where any player in front of the ball is off side, (anywhere in the attacking half?). That is, the rule originated from a game where the ball must go backwards (a rugby pass) before it can go forward (a player making a break in the defence). This historic origin of the offside rule demonstartes it has no place in modern football.

Our football game is about using the whole field and 11 players to create a goal scoring opportunity. The defense must counter the strategy and skill of the team in possession. Thus why not keep it simple. Why have a technical rule that limits the ability of a team to develop strategy and attacking opportunites?

The removal of this rule needs to be tested. If it works, good bye to unnecessary controversy!!

However, the poor old-school fellows at FIFA live way in the past (as demonstrated by the referring in this world cup). This would be way to radical for them.

On June 27, 2010 Brad said

I’m your typical ignorant American who knows nothing about “football”, but I’ve had a chance to watch two or three games so far on TV for the World Cup. I googled this site because I absolutely could not understand offsides. Now that I’ve read the simple definition, I agree that it’s way too limiting a factor when considering the pacing of the game. I’ve watched hundreds of hockey games in person and on TV and the idea of a “blue line” to demarcate the offensive zone makes total sense. It doesn’t matter where the ball is, or where any of the players are, as long as the ball enters the offensive zone before any of the offensive players. I’m totally wowed by the skill and athleticism of the world’s best football players, but this offside rule is such a drain on this game. Like FIFA’s governing body, it’s a dinosaur.

On July 1, 2010 Mike said

The idea of offside in soccer is that the “attacking zone” is dynamic, defined by the position of the last defender. This gives the game it’s distinct character. I agree however that the current offside rule is has a high margin for error considering the factors the linesman has to judge simultanenously. This rule must be changed as to make it easier to judge. E.g. the receving player may not be closer to the goal than the last defender when the ball crosses the ‘last defender line’. If no ‘last defender line’ is crossed during a pass than the penalty area boundary lines will act as ‘last defender line’. This way the linesman only has to keep up with the last defender and keep his eye on this line when the ball is passed forwards by the opposing team. A penalty area offside is surely much easier to spot due to the box lines.

What’s also missing in football in my opinion is the lack of an incentive to move forward especially during league competions. In basketbal there is this rule, where a team, once having established ball control in the front half of the court, may not return the ball to the backcourt and be the first to touch it. An adoptation of this rule in football will most definitely give teams enough incentive to move and keep moving forward and therefore giving spectators a more enjoyable game.
In football this rule should also apply to every area (including the penalty area’s) on the field and not just the team’s halves.

On July 20, 2010 SteveR said

How about a free zone instead of a blue line? Essentially, offensive players can occupy the area between midfield and the ‘blue line’ without being offside. The benefits are that it creates more space since defenders have to protect the back. It also prevents goal crashing in the offensive zone.

On November 23, 2010 John said

The problem with being such a low scoring game as well as a game in which the referee is constantly making subjective calls is that just one of those calls can have such a big influence on the outcome of the game (Gerard’s
World Cup goal which was not credited). In a game like basketball with a 100 points or more scored the mistakes even out, but in a game with only a couple of scores this is often not the case. I like the idea of the hockey rule, but why doesn’t FIFA experiment with different solutions and see what happens. I seems like all these predictions about what would happen is the off-side rule where changes are predictions without any basis.

On December 23, 2010 N Jensen said

I stumbled across this site and had to make my contribution. I understand that those commenting are predominantly American, and understand further that you’re used to your high scoring sports. I’m English, and regularly watch English football from all of the divisions. I completely disagree with the statement proposed. If anything, the offside rule creates the principle foundations of the game. Football is about exaggerated score lines or just constant scoring. It’s called the beautiful game for a reason. It takes skill and patience to spring the offside trap, and when it’s done.. that’s where the real beauty of football lies. I don’t watch many American sports. However, the few times I have managed to watch it I just can’t help but turn it off. The amount of lines and markers on your sports fields, to my, seems completely unnecessary. Football is supposed to be simple yet intelligent, and it’s the little tricks and turns that make the game so exciting to watch. The offside rule, and the field the game is played on, makes this game so attractive. As I have mentioned, I understand that Americans play their sport in a different way. But to change a game that I feel is never boring and completely engaging, would be ridiculous and possibly a ‘typical’ American move. But hey, it’s your country. Just keep your new rules and ideas in there.

On January 5, 2011 Josh said

Football is loved by 95% of countries in the world. If you guys don’t like it, then stay out of it. I don’t want to’ insult intelligence but if you can’t see how simple the offside rule is, yet how advanced an intellect you have have to’ play the rule, then you just don’t have that necessary understanding. Shame for you cos we all absolutely love it already!

On January 29, 2011 Greg said

Just want to’ add that the offside was introduced in 19th century simply to’ stop players just standing near the goal, and it works. Also, i think we all know the system is imperfect and mistakes Are Made, but that is precisely BECAUSE the definition of offside HAS been changed to’ follow a US model of tv-pleasant sport. Sport does not exist just for tv; if it did, then noone would play it outside of the pro game, and we would all be’ obese couch potatoes like, erm, ‘americans’

On January 29, 2011 Greg said

why dont we make the goals twice the size then we could have scores of 10 all or 15 nil. this should keep the americans happy.

On February 6, 2011 graham tranter said

Don’t change anything!!! This rule is important to the game strategically. We have the same thing in Australia. Here because Aussie rules is the most popular sport, people here cant understand the lack of goals in soccer. I think it is those lack of goals that makes the game so exciting. If you have true passion for a particular team, you are most likely going to be on the edge of your seat for the entire game because of that anticipation of scoring or the dread of conceding. Given the fact that a dominating team may only have a 1-nil lead, makes the game up for grabs at any time. Why isn’t basketball the “best” sport in the world if all people care about is the number of goals? The reason why soccer is the most popular sport in the world is because its simple, and it really hasn’t changed all that much. People from countries with other dominating sports may not get it, but thats no reason to change it for them.

On March 24, 2011 Steve said

Its a good idea there should be a change. Maybe if they had a play back. Some of the refs out there r making way too many mistakes.

On March 26, 2011 ig said

Remove Offsides in the box. It is crazy. Or use more linesman. I love soccer, but the off-sides calls make the game boring. If the ball is in the box, you shouldn’t get called off-sides. If the defense is going to let you go free in the box you should should get rewarded.

On April 12, 2011 Tony said

Tony, That’s a great point. I think it would make things a lot more interesting if there were no offsides in the box.

On April 13, 2011 Danie said

Certainly there should be no offsides when the ball is within the box. This simple change of the rule would prevent the cherry picking that was the main reason offsides was introduced but still allow for much more interesting offensive attacks. The ability to position your players anywhere and anyway your team wants (after the ball is in the 18 yard box) is a much more natural and pure game. The offside rule as it stands today is very artificial and prone to too many errors by the refs.
There is no reason to not to try and see the results

On June 24, 2011 Patrick said

The offsides rule, as it stands now, IMO, is a big pansy rule meant to impede the attacker because the defense can’t stay between them and the goal.

As we say here in the states – Tuff luck Chuck!! I would say modify it much like hockey did, which certainly resulted in more exciting games and more scoring. Draw a straight line, or a semi-circle line, say 20-35 meters out from the center of the goal. Station a line judge there and you have a clear way of determining if someone is offsides. None of those missed offsides that even my untrained eye caught last year.
Note: I never have really played soccer but even my eye caught offsides that the referee missed. In such close games where the players are at the peak of their soccer career, it is inexcusable that a missed/blown offsides can potentially result in a loss.

And don’t get me started on the issues like the English goal that was not called due to a lack of any electronic goal line system, or even a set goal line judge.

As it stands now, soccer is usually a boring sport to watch. Fun to play, much like golf, but usually a bore to watch.

On July 13, 2011 Keith said

Played soccer my whole life. The problems with soccer are as follows:
1. It is highly defense advantaged which means that often times the better team actually loses and very subpar teams can advance. By tweaking offsides rules to not cripple the attacking team, the greater avg goals per game will allow the better team to win.

2. Another horrible fact about soccer is that because there are so few goals, it is often a very winning strategy to simply practice fooling the ref into giving a game changing penalty kick. Again, with more avg goals there will be less incentive to fake the ref and thus less BS dives and fouls and more soccer!

3. They need to also add replay for every penalty kick foul to eliminate the fakers and after the fact red cards should be issued if any replays show that a player got away with faking the ref or cheating. That will cut out all the BS faking that frankly ruins the game.

4. Again, like I said. with the avg 1-0 scores, the bar isn’t high enough to know which team actually won. It’s like giving a college test that everyone scores 99-100 on. That test is terrible in deciding who the best students are. Its the same with the current soccer scoring. With avg scores of 4-2, 5-3, and such, even inspite of BS ref calls, and incorrect penalty kicks, the better team will still win in the end.

On July 13, 2011 Wise Man said

Wow, what a great debate. When I first started reading the comments I have to admit I was a bit of a purist and, even though I’m from Canada and love the fast paced game of Hockey, I also love football the way it is and thought it should just be left alone. There is alot of strategy to playing football and adding additional lines to establish attacking zones or using the hockey style of offside is too drastic of a change to this international game and it just wouldn’t be the same. And eliminating offsides all together would be an absolute disaster. However, I have to admit I was entrigued by the one proposal to remove offsides once the ball is within the penalty box area. Even the football fans from other parts of the world, if they kept an open mind, would have to admit that this change would not effect the beauty or strategy of the current game but will only enhance it. It also won’t result in ridiculous high scores or allow cherry picking but will help skilled teams to make some impressive plays within the penalty box area without having to worry about being offside. I wouldn’t have thought it to begin with, but my mind has been changed. Remove offsides from within the penalty box, it will be good for the game.

On August 27, 2011 Jeremy said

Most of the rules for soccer are still the same rules and most of them are great rules. The offside is just fine but if I could change something is the expel of ‘red card’
Nevertheless, my biggest concern about the soccer rules is that many of them are old and some of those rules are basically too hard like the red card (expelled). I mean, sure, a player gets a red card, and good to have him/her expelled from the game for immoral attempts, injuring, and hopefully such player gets expelled from a couple more games.
But in the other hand, there is a whole team playing with one less player for the rest of the game, getting punished for something that they didn’t do. That team probably after such dangerous ‘taco’ gets a penalty that very likely ends in a goal (the rival team might end scoring a goal). Then that same team looses a player for the rest of the match, and isn’t very exciting anymore for neither the crowd nor the team. I thing, to make the competition more interesting, that so punished team should be able to after a few minutes, or at least for the second half (if it was during the first half) to be able to introduce a new player on the field to compensate the game and make it much more fascinating.
I thing that the expelling should be an interesting subject to debate

On November 1, 2011 Johnny said

Got an idea

Well invent a new game.

It will be a lot like World Football but with some “better” or “more americanized” rules

1. Offsides is when a Player enters 18 yard box before ball does

2. Do not limit substitutions

3. Get rid of over the head throw – Kick, Skyhook, However u can get the ball back in bounds(except directly in goal, or directly into 18yd)

4. Replay – Anything inside the box up for review, especially ball over the line replay(“we have the technology”).

5. Every free kick requires ref whistle before restart.

6. (this one is a slippery slope)Work out a good way of reviewing impact on the fly. Like continuing play until review booth can relay down if it is justified. We have it down to science. It would literally take seconds.

8. Show cards for diving.

9. Re-vamp penalty or card system to were it results in 2, 5, 10 minute player reductions based on volitility of challenge or penalty. Reserve severe challenge or penalties for rest of half or entire game.

10. True Goal = 2pts
PK = 1pt

WELL CALL IT SOCCER

On December 12, 2011 Blue said

And lets leave World Football alone. It is a beautiful game.

With Soccer we can remove the incentive to cheat, scandal etc…

And have a little more respect for the game when we win because we didnt cheat or dive to get a free kick or pk.

And most impportantly restore it to a man’s game.

YOU EVER WATCH A MATCH FROM ENGLAND BACK IN THE 60′s or 70′s. THAT WAS ALMOST AS HIGH IMPACT AS AMERCIAN FOOTBALL OR RUGBY.

On December 12, 2011 Blue said

I was a soccer referee. Like others have said, the problem with soccer is that its difficult for the best teams to shine.

For example, if the score is 1-0, this could be due to a penalty kick, ONE lucky shot, one miscall. A low-scoring game is very sensitive to random chance.

How can it be a “beautiful game” if we don’t get to see good play get rewarded? Its a real shame, because soccer is a terrific sport, great for the mind and body. People should understand that the fans in the high-scoring camp are not the instant gratification folks who want to tarnish a “pure game”; instead, we just want to see a clear, conclusive, definitive, undisputed separation in play between the elite teams/players.

On January 2, 2012 asdjkl said

In Australia we have a saying ” with soccer all the action is in the crowd – while with afl the action is on the ground” – the stagnant nature of soccer as a spectator sport has a lot to do with the violent erruptions and appauling soccer riots caused by people who go out for a “release” of lifes pressure valve but end up totally wound up by a pensively tense often scoreless tug of war. I used to play soccer – great fun….watching it is a chore.

On March 11, 2012 Jesper said