Obviously, I disagree as to the “boring” part, though it can be, but it does emphasise that interest isn’t necessarily tied to scoring. 
I tend to agree that more scores would make top-level soccer a better game to watch (watching a team defend a two-goal lead with one attacker isn’t very interesting), and would love a simple rule change that kept the basics of the game the same while increasing scoring, but have been convinced that eliminating offside isn’t a magic bullet. Remember, defenses would also change if the rule was eliminated.
So eliminating offside would actually result in fewer breakaways, because the last couple defenders would just never leave the penalty area, making it impossible to get behind them. I suppose it might open a little bit of room above the penalty area, as one or two defenders would get sucked towards the end line to defend against goal-campers, but at the expense of exhausting the midfielders who would be moving from penalty area to penalty area on every change of possession.
That’d be Australian rules, except it’s six misses equals a goal
Well, you’re wrong to disagree ;). I have a H&W Under-13 County Cup winner’s medal tucked away somewhere and I cannot stand cricket. I can watch a one-day match if I’m in a patient mood.
WHY do you have SUCH A STUPID RULE?!?!?!?!
