U.S. Soccer Referee Position Paper: October 16, 2007

[cbruscato84]

doesnt matter cause it only soccer

[spamsupper]

Not offside. The referee made the right call by *not* calling offside. Just read the position paper by the U.S. Soccer Federation.

USSF explains clearly why it is not offside. He did not interfere with play or an opponent. The professional referee of the match and the U.S. Soccer Federation considered it to *not* be offside. Anyone that says otherwise is simply wrong.

[TheDuran21]

does not matter if the player touches the ball or not... just running behind the goalie and making him nervous is enough to call offsides.

Good offsides call. so long as the timing was right with the kick.

[catero01]

lklakej and anestorlak - The player does not have to touch the bal for the off-side to be an infraction.

For the rest. There are three instances when off side becomes an infraction:

•interfering with play

•interfering with an opponent

•gaining an advantage by being in that position

n my opinion, he interfer with the play and the goalie.

[buccos2324]

I absolutely agree w/ those that say interfering w/ play requires the player to touch the ball. But, the player could be interfering w/ an opponent.

(2009/2010 Laws of the Game)

Interfering with an opponent": ..."clearly obstructing the opponents line of vision or movements or making a gesture or movement which, in the opinion of the referee, deceives or distracts an opponent."

The player made a move that could, in the assistant referee's opinion, be obstructing the keeper's line of vision.

[stelist4life0]

Offside, He might have tricked the goalkeeper

[ANESTORLAK]

He didnt touch the ball.. but to a ref's point of view it looked like it.. so yea any ref would of called it.. unless they had instant replay

[krimo10]

goal should be disallowed hes impeding the keeper's vision and thats gaining an adv.

[glaschris08]

i think the striker was onside when the ball was kicked. as least, he should be given the benefit of the doubt

[lklakej]

But again... he did not touch the ball...

[crazychessman]

Not offside. He can only be gaining an advantage if he actually plays the ball deflected from an opponent or the goalposts and crossbar. He isn't interfering with an opponent playing the ball, and he isn't interfering with play because, again, he did not touch the ball.

[xizzlex]

definately gained an advantage by being in that position, he was involved in the play because his initial intention was to get a piece of the ball to redirect it into the goal...shouldve been disallowed

[oneeyedpossum]

Goal should be disallowed. Yellow player is in an offside position at the moment the friendly player shot the ball and gained an advantage from that position.

[ferrios25]

I would've called that...

[auggnation]

offsides. it's not clear but really looks to be a step ahead when the ball is cleared