Question Number: 22746

Law 11 - Offside 1/22/2010

RE: Under 18

Dave of Des Moines, IA US asks...

This question is a follow up to question 22723

I'm starting to wonder why the 'gains an advantage' clause is even in law 11.
It is certainly confusing to many new refs
especially since the word 'advantage' can be very ambiguous.
Isn't this covered anyway since a deflection off of the keeper is basically a deflection off of a defender and would not resset the offside anyway.
And rebounding off a goal post is also covered in the laws.
Perhaps I am missing something as to why this is included in the LOTG?
Perhaps parrying could go away as well??

Answer provided by Referee Joe McHugh

Hi Dave
The use of advantage term here is not to be confused with the advantage term used in a foul situation. Also the full term must be used which is 'gaining an advantage by being in that position' and is a very simple clause to interpret and implement. As you know it means playing a ball that rebounds to a player off a goalpost or the crossbar having been in an offside position or playing a ball that rebounds to a player off an opponent having been in an offside position.
The law makers want to ensure that there is no question of a reset of offside should the ball be deflected/rebounds off an opponent, post, crossbar etc. Take the clause out of the laws and I can assure you that many will argue / interpret that it cannot be offside when the last person to touch the ball is an opponent and it is not stated otherwise in the laws.
As regards parrying in the laws, the reason it is there is to deal with the 6 second rule and possession by the goalkeeper. Take the parry part out of the law and many keepers can then argue that, having touched the ball with their hands in a controlled manner, they can again pick the ball up when challenged by an opponent. The purpose of the law is to ensure goalkeepers put the ball back into play in a timely manner rather then the cynical way with which some teams wasted time near the end of a game by passing back to the goalkeeper. It is surprising to note how many keepers will not trust their foot control skills and resort to the use of the hands for certainty and therefore the parry would be a bonus in control with the option of a pick up if it were not in the lawbook.

Answer provided by Referee Gary Voshol

The only reason for it to remain in the Laws is to emphasize the fact that offside still applies when there is a rebound off the goal or off any player (not just the goalkeeper). You are correct, gains an advantage is essentially a subset of interferes with play.

Answer provided by Referee Dennis Wickham

I think you are right, Dave, that they cover the same thing. Touching the ball after a deflection or rebound is still touching the ball. I can't think of a single situation in which one would find offside for 'gains an advantage ' but not 'interfering with play' under the current definitions.

IFAB, the folk who write the laws, still see some value in retaining it.

Answer provided by Referee Keith Contarino

Gaining an advantage did indeed become a nebulous term over time and bordered on meaningless. Referees all over the world had begun to consider almost anything as gaining an advantage. IFAB took care of this a few years ago and limited Gains An Advantage to a specific few instances. Almost always it pertains to an attacker standing near the goal in an offside position when a shot is taken by a teammate. The ball rebounds off the goal or is slapped away by the keeper or deflected by a teammate of the keeper directly to the offside positioned attacker who, if he plays the ball, is guilty of an offside offense by gaining an advantage by being in that position. You could easily say he had interfered with play as he made contact with the ball. Gaining an advantage is ingrained in Law 11 that it would take some doing to do away with it but interfering with play would also cover it so it's possible.

Parrying is almost never called anymore. Most keepers don't even know what it is and are usually stunned when it IS called. The thing I have never liked about the concept of parrying is it requires the referee to read the keeper's mind or decide for the keeper that he could have caught the ball when maybe the keeper couldn't have.