Onside with offside

By Pete Sanderson

Like David Beckham, the offside law is never far from the media spotlight. Not so long ago, the law stated that if any player appeared between his last outfield opponent and the goalkeeper, he was offside.

Law amendment
Fast forward to October 2003, and the introduction of a new interpretation of Law 11 which, following a number of incidents in the English Premiership, has provoked a fascinating debate. The latest amendment to the rule, in essence, means that a player in an offside position can only be ruled to be actively offside if he is interfering with play, interfering with an opponent or gaining an advantage by being in that position.

Shrewd Ruud
If this latest change has passed you by then do not be too disheartened. Arsenal FC manager Arsène Wenger confessed he only stumbled across the new law when Ruud van Nistelrooij scored for Manchester United FC from a seemingly offside position against Southampton FC and the goal was awarded by referee Graham Barber.

Tinker man
If Wenger was surprised, then Bolton Wanderers FC manager Sam Allardyce was positively stunned. Never one to sit on the fence, Allardyce made his viewpoint known to all and when his comments fell on deaf ears, he turned to 'Plan B' and that trusty old adage: "If you can't beat them, join them".

Active or passive?
Having scrutinised the new interpretation of Law 11 ahead of their televised match with Leicester City FC, with particular regard to active and passive offside, Allardyce positioned two players in offside positions at free-kicks. The players rushed back as the kick was taken, creating confusion in the Leicester defence. The first set-piece saw Kevin Nolan, one of the 'offside' players, strike a post and the second led to a Bolton goal.

Reduces entertainment value
It was a wonderfully choreographed move and, as far as Allardyce was concerned, the perfect riposte to a rule that, he claims, is putting the entertainment value of the game in jeopardy.

Apologetic mood
The next day, everyone was talking about Allardyce's exploitation of the rule, but the manager maintained his stance. "We had a good look at the new regulations and we have used them to our benefit," he explained. "I don't like them and I think they detract from the game.

Taking advantage
"It is not the referee's fault," said Allardyce. "We are one of the first to start implementing it but as more teams start to cotton on, the more the spirit of the game will be spoiled." One of many opinions, both positive and negative, expressed about the rule in recent times.

Interfering with play
FIFA acknowledged Allardyce's concerns, but emphasised that the rules would not be changed. "Further details of the rule were given to ensure the laws of the game are respected, and to protect the attacking players," a FIFA spokesman said. "Goals and attacking opponents were being cancelled out by players being offside but not interfering with play."

Deceiving players
The story took another twist when the English Football Association addressed the issue. The upshot was an advisory caution to referees to call players offside if they are "deceiving or distracting an opponent". Some observers claim that the controversy also makes life more complicated for officials who, they say, must now adopt a policy of, "wait, wait and see what happens" rather than making an instant decision. With further meetings planned, it seems Allardyce will have to adopt a similar policy but - for now at least - it will probably be very much a case of play it again, Sam.