Every year, before the season starts, all referees receive a copy of the
Amendments to the Laws of the Game as agreed by the International FA Board. I am given to believe these are also distributed to football clubs and to the media. I wonder, however, if these are ever passed on to the club's players and management or to the journalists who report on football matches. If they do receive them, do they read or bin
them?
In one of my articles earlier in the season, I covered the new interpretations on the offside law, which were included with this year's alterations. The offside law itself has not changed but the way it should be interpreted was spelt out, to try and achieve uniform decisions.
Just before Christmas, there was an excellent example of an assistant referee following these new interpretations to the letter. He was subjected to vitriolic criticism from Mark Hughes, the Blackburn manager, and received caustic comments from more than one football correspondent.
The new International Board Decision defines 'interfering with play, as 'playing or touching the ball'. In other words a player in an offside position should only be penalised if he actually touches the ball. As I reported before, when this was introduced in summer tournaments, an offside player could sometimes chase a ball played over his head almost the length of the opponents half, before touching it. The assistant referee had to wait until that moment before raising his flag.
It became obvious that this just wasted time, so FIFA hastily convened a working party chaired by Angel Maria Villar Llon, who is not only Vice-President of FIFA but also chairman of the referees' committee. With a name that long, he has to have at least two
jobs!
The working party issued a letter, again sent to all parties, saying that while not changing the wording or the spirit of the new interpretation, they added some advice on its application. In circumstances such as I have described, the player in an offside position may be penalised before he has actually touched the ball. 'But', they said, 'only, if in the opinion of the referee, no team-mate who is onside, has the opportunity to play the ball'. So even if the offside player makes a move towards the ball, he should not be penalised if there is a chance that one of his team-mates can run from an onside position to play it.
This was exactly what happened in the Fulham-Blackburn game. Paul Dickov of Blackburn was in an offside position, when the ball was played forward by one of his team-mates into the left hand side of the Fulham half. Dickov chased after it but at the same time a team-mate ran down the left wing from an onside position. The assistant referee kept his flag to his side to see who would reach it first. As it happens, it was
Dickov who played the ball and the assistant referee immediately raised his flag.
Colin Malam, distinguished football writer of the Sunday Telegraph, who once wrote an article for me when I edited the
Reading Referee magazine, called it, 'a ridiculously late linesman's flag'. It was of course not a late flag, except to the uninitiated or those who fail to understand the new interpretation. Of course even the best assistant referees will not always get it right.
The same weekend at Arsenal, the flag was raised too early for Thierry Henry who moved forward when offside, only for Robin van Percie to run from an onside position to play it and score a goal that was disallowed. The law makers are attempting to give the benefit to the attacking side, although it didn't seem like it to the Blackburn manager at the time. But offside is still offside even if the flag may sometimes appear late.
Dick
Sawdon Smith