I mean what is the purpose of this rule anyway? It just creates more controversy. We have 2 officials just looking out for culprits and it breaks down attacking moves. The officials can concentrate in making the game fairer....ie help the Ref in protecting Great Footballers. As it is, they just favour Defence....which is harming Football in general. Let me know what is the pros/cons of scraping this rule for good???
2007-10-25
06:54:18
·
11 answers
·
asked by
Top Dog
3
in
Sports
➔ Football
➔ Other - Football
I think some of you guys are talkin bout American Football......its Soccer that I am referring to!!!
2007-10-25
09:51:16 ·
update #1
How bout we ban strikers from the 6 yard box? Who like watchin tap-ins anyway? This way the field will be spread for the skilled players to really florish!!!
2007-10-25
09:55:07 ·
update #2
Also limit the number of Defenders in the 18 yard box during normal play to say 4 or 5.
2007-10-25
10:05:14 ·
update #3
You won't know how good it will be unless you try it yourself. Better yet let FIFA try it and see for ourselves how much better it is for the game......then comment!!!
2007-10-25
10:06:55 ·
update #4
I am a true Footy fan....I love my Soccer and believe me I knw what I am talkin bout!!!
2007-10-25
10:08:37 ·
update #5
Tim S - as it happens, the old NASL in the US had a 35-yard offside line. Originally created with FIFA's permission, the international body decided it didn't like it and threatened the USSF with expulsion if it didn't drop the rule. Former NASLers still say it was a good rule.
The NASL, for all it was a poor cousin in the soccer world, was also responsible for increasing substitutions to three, as well as for the rule prohibiting passes and throw-ins to the goalkeeper.
2007-10-25 09:44:49
·
answer #1
·
answered by John F 5
·
0⤊
0⤋
This rule is to eliminate cherry pickers at the end of the field. if you thought that the game was boring now, imagine a ball flying back and forth out of control across the field and back. There would be a few more goals yes. but there would be alot more 60 yard passes that went out of bounds as well. I do believe the rule would make more sense if it was like it is in hockey with a solid line drawn that the player had to wait for the ball to cross. With the way it is now, defenders can run up to midfield and cause an offside.
I would keep the rule but I would make it a line instead of the last defenseman. With it the way it is now all a player has to do is step further in the wrong direction when he is beat to beat the ball from passing him.
What i would do is keep the rule, but modify it's parameters a little.
2007-10-25 14:03:29
·
answer #2
·
answered by ixnaytim 5
·
1⤊
0⤋
If you scrapped the offside rule you would end up with strikers who used to be known as "moochers" in the 1950's who would live just inside the 18 yard box for the entire match. Offside is good, it's just the current interpretation of "active v inactive" that sucks.
2007-10-25 13:59:55
·
answer #3
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
The whole point of the rule is to keep teams from kicking the ball the length of the field to a player who has gone down alone and is positioned to make a goal - ot two players, one on each side of the goal. If you want high scoring soccer games witth less person to person play then one way would be to change that rule.
2007-10-25 14:00:36
·
answer #4
·
answered by Mike1942f 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
I don't agree with you. Offsides is not for breaking down attack moves. If offsides is seen by ref, then it is, and if it isn't seen, then o well. If their were no rule, then someone could just hang out in front of the other team's goal, waiting for a pass and chance to score. I think this rule helps keep things in order.
2007-10-25 15:01:42
·
answer #5
·
answered by KitKat 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
The offside rule is open to interpretation. To scrap it would cause players to goal hang and prevent teams from pushing up. It is just one of the beautiful things that make football a much talked about subject. We all benefit and all get screwed over by it.
2007-10-25 13:58:07
·
answer #6
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
If they get rid of offside, teams will just adapt to a more defensive mindset to counter the greater attacking threat. It's a balancing act.
2007-10-25 15:13:01
·
answer #7
·
answered by Ryan B 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
Well that rule is in affect because It wouldn't be fair if 5 opponents were standing around the goalkeeper waiting for a breakaway
2007-10-25 15:18:00
·
answer #8
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
First, w/o a defense, there is no offense. W/o those elements, there is no game. Second, offsides can only be called on defense. False start can be called on offense but not offsides. W/o rules, there is no game, only choas. Rules make the game fair.
2007-10-25 14:00:09
·
answer #9
·
answered by Android 16 6
·
0⤊
1⤋
If you are a true footy fan, you would really appreciate offside rules. You must be some arrogant tosser thinking you know footy when you dont know footy at all.
XOXO
2007-10-25 15:25:08
·
answer #10
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋