Here's another ⚽ Offside question ...

[aggiesal]

In this image, the Passer & Reciever are both beyond all the defensemen.
Yet when the ball is passed to the receiver, the receiver is called OFFSIDE, WHY?

[Ponietz]

1. It's a game of millimeters now

At the time of the pass the receiver is ahead of the passer.

[aggiesal]

2. So what? Borh were ahead of the defense. n/t

[Ponietz]

3. There must be two defenders for a forward pass in the opponent's half regardless of where the passer is

In simple terms, a player is offside if they are in the attacking half and closer to the opposing team's goal-line than both the ball and the second-last opponent.

https://www.sportingnews.com/us/soccer/news/offside-rule-soccer-explained/joz30fulyxepkne3soxqvcrs

In your example the receiver, in the attacking half, is closer to the opponent’s goal line than the ball and the second defender.

[aggiesal]

4. What a ridiculous rule, if that's the case. ...

If a team is good enough to get multiple players behind the defense, they should be able pass the ball at will.
It's basically a breakaway with mulitiple players and they should be able to pass the ball to each other as much as they want.
What a stupid rule.

[Ponietz]

6. Okay then

[aggiesal]

9. That gives a massive benefit to the goalie, since he knows they can't pass to the other player. ...

Imagine that rule in hockey.

Sorry, but it's a stupid rule.

[rampartd]

11. if the receiver is behind the passer it is a good pass

kinda like a lateral in american football.

a forward lateral in usa football is illegal

[aggiesal]

7. If a team is good enough to get multiple players behind the defense, ...

they should be able pass the ball at will.
It's basically a breakaway with mulitiple players and they should be able to pass the ball to each other as much as they want.
What a stupid rule.

[Ponietz]

8. It's easy to get behind the defense

Without the rule players would just camp in the opponent’s penalty box and the goalie and defenders would pound long balls. We used to play pick up games without offsides. It’s “not the flex you think it is”. Tactics become very important — a defense has to decide where they’ll hold the line, so there are “high lines” and “low blocks”. The more pressure a defense applies the greater the likelihood they’ll get burned.

[aggiesal]

10. I'm not referring to players camping out behind the defense ...

I'm refering to teammates that followed the rules to bring the ball past the defense legally.
In this image, the player with the ball excelerated past the defense, where his teammate timed that perfectly
and received the subsequent pass and scored, only to be called offsides
The player receiving the pass was not camped out behind the defense, he timed the attack with the player passing the ball. I don't see that as offsides.

[Ponietz]

12. It might be interesting to experiment with your idea

I can’t see a good reason, though, to reward off the ball players with a chance to cherry pick. It would probably force teams i t playing low block which is really boring.

[aggiesal]

13. I have no idea why it would change the game, since ...

having multiple onside teammates behind the defense rarely occurs.
Although it happened in yesterdays game.

[muriel_volestrangler]

14. Perhaps having multiple teammates behind the defense rarely occurs because it would be offside

under the current rules, so teams don't try it.

I don't see how a change in the rules wouldn't permit goal-hanging. You say "his teammate timed that perfectly and received the subsequent pass"; in what way did he time anything perfectly? He's nearer the goal than any defender (not counting the keeper). What did he time? How would you differentiate between where he is in the picture, and him standing next to a goal post?

[muriel_volestrangler]

15. Another thing - not a good angle for the picture, but I suspect white no. 5 is closer to the goal than the passer

You need a picture (or assistant referee's point of view), but from this one picture, I'd put people in order of closeness to the goal line as:
goal keeper
receiver
Colombia no. 25 to his left
Ghana no. 5 midway between receiver and passer
passer and Ghana defender near him too close to call from this angle

[aggiesal]

16. I agree the image down the line would be better ...

And with the technology, where they show the animation showing the player offside would have been better.
For this call, they did show the animation technology to show it was an offside. But I posted this image before that occurred.
My question is still a valid question. In hockey there is a situation where 2 on 0 (i.e. 2 offensive players are onside, behind all defensemen, attacking only the goalie) occurs, they can pass the puck between them to get the optimum shot on goal.
In soccer, apparently passing the ball between 2 onside player behind all defense players is considered offside.
Rediculous rule.

[muriel_volestrangler]

17. This rule is consistent. You're just saying "I wish there were a different rule, because I'd like it more"

You're trying to define a player as "onside" because you want to add a new exception to the offside rule, to make it more complicated. I'm not sure how you'd word your exception to get the outcome (easier to score) that you want. I think it'd have to be "but if the player was not offside at the last-but-one touch of the ball by the attacking side, then he is deemed onside without regard to where defending players are". It would make the interplay with the "in active play" rule in the other thread horribly complicated. Referees would have to be checking not just one pass, but two. No thanks.

[aggiesal]

18. If there is a breakaway, (Player with a ball past the defenders with only Goalie in front), then

any teammate can join that breakaway and receive a pass.
Both players are beyond the defense, and were legally online when it happened.

They should be able to pass the ball between them as many times has needed until
a shot is made to the goalie or a defender gets between the players and the goalie.

I don't know where the second pass would be that you're referring to.