Question Number: 26967

Law 11 - Offside 11/1/2012

RE: Retired Adult

Dimitris of Thessaloniki, Greece asks...

This question is a follow up to question 26965

OK many thanks about the multiple answers, but i would like to have a follow up question.

Here is an identical situation of my original question that i have 2 things to ask.
Here is the link with the situation which is identical to what i've originally described:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QkXtk9Sd-dI

There are 2 things i would like to ask:

a)First, does the exposed and in an offside position player(red shirt), which is in front of the GK and by obstructing his vision, commits a violation of an offside or not? ASSUMING(in case you do not share this opinion) that the (red)player does indeed obstruct GK's vision!
According to your previous arguments it's the exact same situation with my original example, since the exposed player does not prevent the GK to play the ball, since the GK has not even the slightest chance to play the ball.
But do you share this opinion of no offside violation at all or you would call for an offside violation?

b)Secondly do you believe it's a penalty violation?
I personally don't see any purpose on the defender to play the ball(too close/shoot relatively strong/time of reaction minimal) so no direct free kick and so no penalty at all, but what is your opinion about that also?



Many thanks in advance again!

Answer provided by Referee Joe McHugh

Hi Dimitris
On the offside question there is no offside offence here. The player in an offside position has not interfered with an opponent. Had the ball got past the defender then there was a possibility that the offside positioned player was interfering with the goalkeeper's ability to play the ball by obstructing his line of vision to the ball which then makes it an offside offence. Until that happens though there is no offence. That is entirely consistent with my previous answer and it is shared by the AR who does not raise his flag
As regards the penalty call it is a difficult one. His arm action looks suspicious to me and the referee is very well positioned to make the call. The defender seems to make a move to the ball with his arm which does make him bigger. If it was not given I believe there would be equal calls for the award of the penalty and therein lies the challenge for the referee. I have given one of these recently just like this and my thinking at the time was that the player made no effort to avoid the ball..
So in the scenario in the video the penalty award was 'in the opinion of 'the referee. Offside could not be used as a reason to not award the penalty and the only possible reason to not award the penalty was that the handling was not deliberate. Another referee on another day might have waved it away and there would be questions asked as to why the penalty kick was not given. That is just part of the game.

Answer provided by Referee Michelle Maloney

The offside positioned player committed no offside offense here, so there is no offside.

The penalty that was called had nothing to do with the attacking player in an offside position. The Law is clear that being in an offside position is not an offense - it is the first line in Law 11.

If we can separate out the actions, even if the offside positioned player (PIOP) did get involved in play and commit an offside, the question is which one happened first?

If the attacker was in an offside position, he has not committed an offense. If the defender then commits a handling offense inside the penalty area, then that is a PK.

If the defender did not commit a handling offense or other foul, but simply misplayed the ball to a spot where the attacker in the offside position could play it, or a teammatte could shoot it but the keeper is blocked due to the position of the PIOP, then we can consider offside for interfering with an opponent, or in some circumstances for interfering with play.