You already can’t be offside in your own half.
As you can’t be offside from a throw in, or a backwards pass.
This has all been explained in previos posts in this thread.
Yeah, you caught me in a Canadianism there. I was referring to the 6-yard box-- and since most Canadian kids learning the game also know hockey, the “official” names from various sports get blurred into one another.
I can’t see that as a good thing, other than it reminded me of the Monty Python Philospher’s Soccer Match:
“Archimedes out to Socrates, Socrates back to Archimedes, Archimedes out to Heraclitus, he beats Hegel! . Heraclitus a little flick, here he comes on the far post, Socrates is there, Socrates heads it in! Socrates has scored! The Greeks are going mad, the Greeks are going mad. Socrates scores, got a beautiful cross from Archimedes. The Germans are disputing it. Hegel is arguing that the reality is merely an a priori adjunct of non-naturalistic ethics, Kant via the categorical imperative is holding that ontologically it exists only in the imagination, and Marx is claiming it was offside.”
Perhaps rsa meant something like you wouldn’t be offside if the original pass was made from inside the defending team’s half. Seems a bit generous to the attacking team - how about having an ‘offside line’ two thirds of the way up the pitch; receiving a pass made from within that zone would not be offside.
'Ang on. Is that true? I thought throw-ins could result in an offside call.
Right, what Usram said is what I meant. I was thinking about still having offsides to prevent long kicks from one end of the field to the other to some player hanging out near the other team’s goal.
And I agree that midfield may be too generous, the idea of an “offside line” sounds good.
Coldie,
Seeing as I was wrong about goalkeepers having to wear long sleeves (another urban myth dispelled by the SD), I won’t be too definite but I think Aro is right about throw ins. I always understood it to be that you couldn’t be offside inside your team’s half, from a backwards pass, from a corner (a variant of a backwards pass) or from a throw in.
::Waits to be corrected::
Yup, I was wrong: see page 45 of this PDF file off the FIFA web site. “A player cannot be offside from a throw-in”.
Nope, no offsides on a throw-in. Quoting from the FIFA 2001 rules:
“There is no offside offence if a player receives the ball directly from a goal kick or a throw-in or a corner kick.”
Or, on preview, what Coldie said.
Thanks guys. I tried to download that PDF but our proxy server is acting up.
The thing is, at the 98 WC I remember the English commentators all getting on their high horses precisely because of the fact that some keepers were flouting the “long sleeves” rule. I assumed that the refs just didn’t care that much.
pan
Just while we’re talking rules and things, I don’t think Rivaldo was fined anywhere near enough. Diving, rolling around on the ground and “simulating” injury are an absolute blight on the game IMO. And I think his completely unrepentant attitude stuck in my craw too. Give them a red and a fine of 50,000 euros at least I say. And is it just me or does it seem more institutionalised in Sth American teams?
There are two reasons why this is a bad idea:
- Jimmy Hill thought of it first
- It would add one more element to an already complicated rule. The ref and linesmen would have to spot where the attackers were and where the defenders were when the pass was made (not received) + which side of the offside line the receiver was. Jeeez.
I bet that was Motty? Had to be.
I don’t think you’ll get an argument there. The fine was small change to Rivaldo and he’s already said he couldn’t care less. Common sense says he should’ve got at least a retrospective yellow card, but when have FIFA ever shown common sense?
I’ve also never heard of a rule that goalkeepers must wear long sleeves. Fabien Barthez of France, as has been mentioned, has worn short sleeves every time I’ve seen him play, including France’s game against Uruguay yesterday (photo).
I looked in the online Laws of the Game, and I can’t find anything in there talking about it.
Am I the only person out there who thinks that the offside rule is perfectly fine as it is? 
I’m also curious as to why the “offside trap” would be regarded as a cheap tactic. It certainly carries risks - you’re screwed if you try it and it doesn’t work…
'Course, when I play soccer, I’m usually a defender, so my outlook may be a bit biased. 
I wasn’t seriously suggesting it, just trying to give rsa some backup. Coming up with alternatives to the odious offside rule is a noble pursuit, one to be encouraged.
Video replays are almost impossible to use in Association Football, because there is no stoppage of the clock. Thus, you don’t have TIME to go look at some monitor to see whether or not what you think happened actually did happen. Paul Gardner, a well-known soccer journalist, has suggested that it is ridiculous that FIFA haven’t managed to at least create some sort of electronic system for judging whether or not the ball has crossed the line completely so everyone will know if it is a goal or not, avoiding the trouble that occurred in the infamous final game of the '66 World Cup.
Soccer is known for its flow. The ability of the game to remain fast paced and relatively interruption free is vital. American football reached its current stop-and-go status in part because of the desire to adjudge so many important things after the ball is brought down, not the least of which is the excruciatingly silly question of whether you’ve reached 10 yards or not, a decision based entirely upon guesswork, but measured out with painstaking care.
The downside to the issue of flow is the difficulty of correcting “mistakes”. Ask Italy today just how cruel improper calls can be.
Also, let’s not ignore the very important factor that soccer is the same regardless of the level at which it is played. With the exception of substitution rules, the laws of the game are identical for all levels of play. I can’t think of a single other team game of which that is true. It’s kinda fun to know that the officials in K/J are having the same problems I have in a simple U-19 tournament final game.
Finally, the offside rule. PLEASE stop calling it “offsides”; you can’t be off both sides of the line 
While the rule is in large part intended to stop so called “cherry picking”, the way the rule is written is also intended to allow defenses to determine how they wish to force opponents to attack the goal. Teams can aggressively pull their fullbacks out away from the goal line, creating a large space behind into which the opponents can try to send speedy runners to latch onto through balls, or teams can have their fullbacks play more withdrawn, allowing more space in the mid-field, but making it harder to get behind the backs. This is an important difference from the hockey version of the rule, where there is a static line that can’t be passed without the puck.
Yellow and Red cards: A player is cautioned (yellow card) if he does any of the following: unsporting behaviour, dissents from the decision of the referee, persistently infringes the laws of the game, delays the restart of play, encroaches on free kicks, and leaves or enters the field without the referee’s permission. A player is sent off (red card) if he does any of the following: serious foul play, violent conduct, spitting at an opponent, deliberately fouling to deny an obvious goal scoring opportunity, uses abusive, insulting or foul language, or commits a second cautionable offense. Frankly, these lists contain a number of actions that are covered in the more general prohibitions (e.g. delaying restarts = unsporting conduct), but the International Football Association Board (makers of the Laws) feel that the officials weren’t punishing them so they listed them to emphasize the need to punish them. They still get ignored by sloppy officials who prefer to think that they have a better idea of what should be punished than the lords that be. <grumble, grumble>
Lastly, there is no rule requiring a keeper to wear gloves.
Not a cheap trick at all - it’s very difficult to time, and a major achievement for a team if it works. It shows great teamwork.
Of course, the fact that Rinus Michels invented the system when he coached AFC Ajax in the Sixties may have something to do with my admiration, too.
And while there may or may not be a rule requiring goalies to wear gloves: have you ever tended goal in a street match, sans gloves? Now replace fat Robbie from around the corner with Roberto Carlos, and that half-limp worn out ball with a FIFA specs " 5". You want to wear gloves!
Actually, before DSYoung’s mis-rendering takes hold, I never suggested there was a rule about a goal-keeper having to wear gloves. What I said was if he wears gloves at the start of the match, he is not allowed to remove them for the duration. Slight difference.
As to whether there actually is any such rule, I believe I heard it cited as such on one of the radio shows we have here in the UK devoted to the beautiful game. It was not said as a joke or a way of winding up the ignorant. It was presented as the answer to a factual trivia question. Of course, I could have mis-heard or mis-remembered it.
There is no requirement that a 'keeper wear gloves, regardless of whether he/she started the match with them or not.
IIRC the rules of football were originally written down in England, and as the English football season is in Autumn (Fall) / Winter a player barely moving outside a 6 yard radius will get VERY cold if he’s wearing short-sleeves. [My WAG] Maybe the original rule makers were saying the goalkeepers could wear a different strip to the rest to keep warmer. [/My WAG]