I did a couple of articles in this series, one on discipline and another on cup competitions. Today, it’s time to look at a law I’ve hated ever since George Cain, Huddersfield and Pawel Abbott.
Offside is the most contentious of all football rules. The implementation of offside has been mishandled and debated for years, and as we approach another season, it has started again. I wonder, is it just time to get rid?
Firstly, the change that is currently being proposed is to introduce something called the Wenger rule, which works on the assumption that if any part of the attacker’s body is behind the defender, then they’re onside. Essentially, there would have to be daylight between the attacker and defender for him to be offside. Many times last season, when I saw an offside decision picked apart on television or VAR debated on social media, I claimed that daylight should be the rule. What a fool I was.
Why? Because it makes no difference. So, we change to daylight between an attacker and a defender. it still means someone with a pen is going to be drawing wonky lines; people are still going to argue over whether there was daylight when the ball was played. At Sincil Bank, we’ll still shout at an assistant referee who we think has got the decision wrong, even though they’re up with play and we’re eighty feet away at the back of the stand on an angle. Whether you’re judging offside in terms of daylight or body parts, it doesn’t make a difference.
No, it’s time to do away with it altogether.
A Brief History of Offside
Offside has been a part of our game since 1863 and has evolved over the years. The first rule stipulated that a player was offside if he was in front of the ball. In 1866, a player was considered onside if there were three defensive players between him and the goal, and in 1873 you were considered offside when the ball was played rather than when you received the ball. In 1903 the first notion of interfering with play was brought in, in 1907 you couldn’t be offside in your defensive half, and in 1921 you couldn’t be offside from a throw-in.
In 1925, after Newcastle and Bury drew 0-0. It meant games had what was considered a ridiculously low average of 2.58 goals per game, so another change was brought in – only two players were required to play someone onside. That is an interesting precedent – the law was changed to make the game more exciting. Is that what they should be doing now? They tried in 2005 – the law remained fairly constant until then when we started throwing body parts into play. Phew.
Famous Advocates
I’m not the first person to suggest offside should be scrapped – far from it. In 2021, one of the greatest strikers of a generation, Marco Van Basten, suggested the exact same thing. “I am very curious as to how football would work without offside,” he said. “I fear many people will be against it. I would be in favour of it because football is increasingly resembling handball: Nine players plus goalkeeper make the penalty area dense, which is like a wall. It is very difficult to get through. All teams rely on the same effective tactics: forming a stable defence.”
A packed penalty area, camping with nine behind the ball – sounds familiar.
“Without offside, the strikers could be behind the defenders, which would be much more difficult,” added the Dutch legend. “If they move far back in front of their goal, the attacker will have more opportunities for distance shots. This would make the game more attractive, the attackers would have better chances, more goals would be scored.”
What Would Change?
How exactly would scrapping offside change our game? It’s hard to say, but there’s certainly a chance it would encourage more goals. Isn’t that what we all want to see? More goals? I don’t think it would lead to the collapse of the game as we know it, but it might encourage teams to sit deep, but stick a couple of big men up top. Therefore, it could push through a new age of long-ball football, which I guess wouldn’t be good. However, it could also lead to more space on the field, as teams both defend deeper against forwards essentially goal-hanging. That said, when the full pitch is being used, and talented players are afforded space and time, we would likely see a more attractive brand of football.
The 1872 international between England and Scotland is interesting. Scotland didn’t have an offside rule, so they played a passing game lots of movement and the ball on the floor. England, who had stringent offside, were more about possession, rushing forward with the ball at their feet. It’s certainly worth reading this article to get an understanding of what not having offside meant 150 years ago.
Other Sports Abolishing Offside
We can also look to field hockey for an example of what happens when you abolish the offside rule. They slowly regressed, adopting the 1925 football rule change in 1972. In 1987, offside only applied if a player was in the final 25 yards. In 1998, it went completely. Hockey didn’t die – it got better. “The game was very confined,” said Kate Richardson-Walsh, captain of the Great Britain team that won gold at the 2016 Olympics. “There was a need to open the game up and make it faster just to develop the game. It also coincided with the time when hockey started to be played on astroturf instead of grass. That added to the speed element of it. Everything changed.”
Think about the abolition of the backpass rule in 1992. It made the game faster, more attack-orientated, and ultimately better for supporters. Last season, we saw plenty of 0-0 draws at the Bank – had offside been properly implemented, we may have beaten Southampton in the cup. But what might have happened if playmakers such as Ted Bishop and Danny Mandroiu could get on the ball quicker? Would we have scored more goals if there wasn’t a worry from the overlapping full-backs about staying onside? Would our three at the back have kept such a solid record of clean sheets if we’d had to worry about Cole Stockton playing exclusively in our 18-yard area?
Conclusion
If it ain’t broke, don’t fix it, right? Well, the offside rule is broken. It is a bone of contention every week, from the Premier League to grassroots football. I’ve run the line, and here’s something I believe is a fact – it is impossible for an assistant referee to flag offside accurately. They cannot possibly see the moment the ball is played and the line across the field – they have to turn their head, they may be a step behind the play, and it’s hard. I’ve run the line with ten-year-old kids, and I got calls wrong; imagine trying to do it with 5,000 fans screaming blue murder behind you, watching a game played at breakneck speeds. Not possible.
Nope. Offside is broken, and like most things in today’s society, if it’s broken, don’t fix it; just chuck it out. I do wonder if football’s longevity and excitement might be helped by the abolition of the offside rule. it’s certainly a better idea than Lee Mason drawing wonky lines on a screen or a player being deemed offside because his feet are size 11, and the defender is a seven. It’s time to flag offside for the relic that it is.
You must be logged in to post a comment.