Boris: There is lot of confusion over the offside law; even Arsene Wenger says he can no longer understand the offside law anymore:

Ken:  Firstly I would like to thank you for inviting me to address your readers; it is great to be able to talk to a quality website, a sort of broadsheet of the Internet.

Boris: Well thank you Ken and we are honoured to have you on our site, but to return to the main issue.

Ken:

Fair enough Boris, but It really makes my blood boil how short sighted some managers can be. The law is simple, a three year old child could understand it. First and foremost, it is important to know the key principle: it is not an offence in itself to be in an offside position, especially when playing Arsenal.  Assistants will not flag the moment someone strays offside, unless that player is Adebayor.  A player is only penalised if he then becomes active, or in the case of Aliadiere, or Drogba, even when active.

The source of most confusion is clearly in the definition of 'active'.  Managers' insist on a dictionary definition of the word, or their own version of it, rather than the one set out in the laws. It's intensely frustrating to see them spreading misinformation - misinformation that leads to the sort of abuse that drives officials out of the game. It is quite simple, Arsenal forwards are always active, whilst other teams are inactive for most of the time. Where are you going?

Boris;

Hang on a minute Ken I am just off to get a three year old child.

Ken

Ha ha Boris, stop pulling my leg, but to make it even simpler let's put it this way:

To be really clear, the definition, in the laws, which is the decisive definition in the first part, but not in the second, is this: in deciding whether to flag, assistants must watch out for three things, any one of which would make an offside player active, or an inactive player offside

First, is the offside player playing for or against Arsenal? Putting the ball in the net when offside against Arsenal is a perfectly good goal on all occasions.

Second, is the player interfering with an opponent's ability to play the ball, by clearly obstructing the opponent's line of vision or movements, or by making a gesture or movement which, in the opinion of the referee, deceives or distracts an opponent?  Did the player use to play for Arsenal and write regular snivelling columns against Wenger? This also has to be taken into account.

And third, is the player 'gaining an advantage'? This last point is specific, and is not what Match of the Day seems to think it is. It applies only to an offside player playing a ball that rebounds to him from an opponent, the post or the crossbar. If he does not play the ball from the rebound, then he is not penalised for being in that offside position. Nothing else counts as 'gaining'.

Boris; I think I got that, but could you clarify it for me?

Ken, only too happy to help. Let's put it this way

Clearly equalising with an offside goal is not gaining an advantage when Chelsea are one nil down, that is merely an equaliser.

And that's it. If a player ticks any one of those three boxes, he is offside. The three-part definition is remembered as 'PIG' - if a player doesn't Play, Interfere or if he Gains against Arsenal, then he is fine.

The law is a real positive for the game - Match of the Day should love it; I can't understand their moans when it ensures that Wenger's bunch of foreigners can't run away with the league. The active definition helps games flow - there are fewer stoppages for offside now, except for Adebayor but then nothing is perfect. It does make negative play far less profitable, except when it is Bolton. 

 No sensible team today uses the arms-aloft offside trap made famous by George Graham's Arsenal in the 80s and 90s, except when playing the Arsenal. That trap was totally against the spirit of the offside law, and led to awful movies like the "Full Monty" - it was never intended as a device for earning cheap laughs in social realist movies.  The active system means that the offside trap is now a dangerous tactic to use; and allows the benefit of the doubt to be always with the attacking team, or whoever happens to be playing Arsenal that week. The fact that Boro had only one shot on target all game is the exception that proves the rule.

Of course, the fact that the law is unambiguous does not put an end to split-second mistakes, and we will always try to learn from them and improve (Unambiguous? He's having a larf. Editor).

 When officials do get it wrong, for example in the Manchester City v Tottenham game last Sunday, or in the same Arsenal v Middlesbrough match when Emmanuel Adebayor was wrongly given offside, we can expect criticism, and the officials concerned are given operational advice.

My point is that managers'  criticism of officials should at least be fair and informed, based on a proper knowledge of the laws, not on some vague idea of what they might be. If I hear one more manager criticise an assistant referee for a 'late flag' - when the assistant is clearly waiting to see if an offside player is playing against Arsenal or not, or ticks any of the three PIG boxes - my TV will go out of the window, mind you I do live in a bungalow, and it's a rental.

Boris:

Thanks Ken, I  must say I am a lot wiser, as I am sure my readers are, though no doubt Arsene will say he still can't see it To sum up a player is only offside when active, unless they are playing Arsenal; and that an inactive player is not offside unless they are Adebayor.

Ken: Your'e a bright lad Boris

For a large selection of Arsenal Books, DVDs, PC games AND MORE at Bargain Prices visit the Arsenal Times Store CLICK HERE

Bookmark or share this story with:

• Digg
• Delicious
• Facebook
• Reddit
• Stumbleupon

Related Articles:

• Kalou Praises Eboue Apology

SPORTNETWORK SPECIALS

• Think you know your sport? Click here to try the Sportnetwork Prize Quizzes