Why was Ecuador's second goal against Poland not offside?

Question

I was just thinking about it over the weekend.
When the ball was played, both of their strikers were onside but the one without the ball ran into an offside position. The ball was then passed to him by the other guy. Why was the second bloke not offside? (he was about 5 yards from the last defender)
Is there some rule that makes this allowed? It was impossible for the ref not to notice he was offside.

Answer 1

because he was not in an active position

Answer 2

A player is in an offside position if "he is nearer to his opponents' goal line than both the BALL and the second to last opponent."

Which basically means that it's impossible to be in an offside position if you're behind the player that passes the ball, whether the pass is made forward, square or backwards. So if you were stood behind the player who makes the pass (at the moment the ball is played), you could quite legally run onto the pass and score and not be flagged for offside.

The whole point being that a player can only be offside if he is NEARER to the oppositions goal line that both the ball and player who passes the ball. So direction of the pass really doesn't matter, just the position of the player who receives the pass.

Therefore there could very well only be one defending player between the attacker and the goal line, but as long as he's behind the player who passes the ball, he can't be offside.

That's the only reason I can think of that the goal was allowed to stand.

Answer 3

This has been bothering me ever since I saw it - it certainly looked offside to me (good job I'm not refereeing I guess!)

As far as I can see, it's all to do with a player being regarded as being "actively involved in play" -
If a player is nearer to his opponents' goal line than both the ball AND the second last opponent, then he's deemed to be "active".
As the ball was played across the field in FRONT of the 2nd Ecuador player, although he was in an Offside position, he wasn't nearer the opponents goal-line AND the ball so therfore wasn't "active".

This explanation has cleared Ecuador's 2nd goal up for me, but I can't help thinking this "active" element of the rule makes it even more difficult to determine.

Also, there seems to be a lot of confusion with people thinking the Offside rule has something to do with the direction of the pass - this is INCORRECT as the Offside rule clearly states:
"A Player in an offside position is only penalised if, at the moment the ball touches or is played by one of his team, he is, in the opinion of the referee, involved in active play by:
Interfering with play OR Interfering with an opponent OR
Gaining an advantage by being in that position" = so it doesn't matter which direction the pass is made.

~ Pils.

Answer 4

Usually they only call the offsides if the ball is played to that person. It all depends on the situation. What the score was, how much time was left, how big of a threat the other guy was. There are a lot of variables.

Answer 5

Because the ball was played across. You can only be offside if the ball is passed forward, not square (across) or backwards. Therefore he was onside.

Answer 6

The other attacker was judge as not interferring with play so he wasn't flagged for offside.

Answer 7

because refree recognized that it wasn't offside

Answer 8

because the linesman is a shortsighted little ****

Answer 9

b/c ecuador is tite like that VIVA ECUADOR WOOOOT WOOOT