OFFSIDES AND NOT “INTERFERING WITH PLAY”

In the context of FIFA Law regarding offside, Law 11, the following definitions apply:

“Nearer to his opponent’s goal line” means that any part of a player’s head, body or feet is nearer to his opponents’ goal line than both the ball and the second last opponent. The arms are not included in this definition

“Interfering with play” means playing or touching the ball passed or touched by a team-mate

“Interfering with an opponent” means preventing an opponent from playing or being able to play the ball by clearly obstructing the opponent’s line of vision or movements or making a gesture or movement which, in the opinion of the referee, deceives or distracts an opponent

“Gaining an advantage by being in that position” means playing a ball that rebounds to him off a goal post or the crossbar having been in an offside position or playing a ball that rebounds to him off an opponent having been in an offside position

The most confusing of them all is “interfering with play”. Now and again we have seen goals scored from offside positions (while some attacking players were in an offside position) but we hear that they “didn’t interfere with play”.

According to FIFA, to “interfere with play” means that the attacker must touch the ball or make a play for the ball. While “touching the ball” is obvious, an attacker has not made a play for the ball if, in fact, he does not move toward the ball or does not move any part of his body in an attempt to touch a ball played toward him.

I think it is correct to consider “in the area of active play” to be the same as “involved in active play” . In my opinion, merely being near the ball is enough to judge that the attacker is involved in active play. For example, if an attacker (A) is going towards the goal with a ball and attackers B and C are also going towards the goal (with no opponent in sight except the goal-keeper) but parallel to attacker A, that should still be an offside. It should be an offside because attackers B and C are distracting or deceiving the goal-keeper. The goal-keeper may think that the attacker A (with the ball) may pass it to attackers B and C and therefore he divides his attention among the 3 attackers. Doesn’t that mean that attackers B and C are “interfering with play” or “involved in active play”?

To “interfere with an opponent” means that an opponent must actually be prevented from playing or being able to play the ball by clearly blocking the opponent’s line of vision or direction of movement or by “making a gesture or movement which, in the opinion of the referee, deceives or distracts an opponent.” To be deceived or distracted, however, the opponent must be within some reasonable distance of the play. There is no hard and fast test of “nearness” beyond the opinion of the referee but the interference with an opponent must be clear (not just hypothetical or theoretically possible) before deciding that an offside violation has occurred.

The “interfering with play” offside definition must be applied in conjunction with “interfering with an opponent” definition. Most goals scored from an offside position would be avoided. It seems most assistant refs forget about “interfering with the opponent” definition when allowing a goal because player X “didn’t interfere with play”.