I have been watching Soccer for 40 years and I cannot explain why Spain's goal at the 88th minute of today's match against Croatia wasn't offside. Can anyone explain?

I think they just missed the call.

I was wondering the same thing. Only thing I can think of is that the pass went to Iniesta, who was even with the defenders. He then passed to Navas, who had been offside when the pass went to Iniesta, but perhaps it didn't matter because the initial pass didn't go to him. The studio commentators said a few times that the replay clearly showed no offside, and that the officials got it right, but they must have been referring to Iniesta and not Navas, who was clearly offside by at least a meter when the pass went to Iniesta. They never mentioned Navas' position, or clarified any rules regarding whether another player can be offside when a pass isn't going to him. My understanding is that once you're past all the defenders, you can pass the ball to another teammate who is also past all the defenders without it being offside, so Iniesta's pass to Navas was fine; the questionable thing for me was Navas' position when the pass went to Iniesta.

I know very little about soccer.

I was thinking the same thing about why it was not offside, but then it seemed to me that the ball was always in front of the Spanish player, therefore, no offside. If I can find a replay I will look at it again.

I believe the rules were changed in the mid 2000's to exclude calling offsides for players in an offside positions who aren't actively involved in the current play. The goal scorer, Navas, was in an offsides position on the first pass, but since the pass wasn't to him and he then received the second pass while being onsides again (behind the ball), the goal was allowed. I'm sure some (or a lot) of people could easily argue that Navas was actively involved or gaining an advantage due to his position, but that's not the was FIFA has chosen to define/enforce that part of the rule.

Check out:
http://www.fifa.com/mm/document/worldfootball/clubfootball/01/37/04/27/interpretation_law11_en.pdf
#13 (on the last page) is the exact situation seen in the game today, and FIFA is clear that it's not to be called offsides.

Before the rule change, it would have been offsides, (at least I think so).

The pass to Iniesta was close, but if we assume that was not offsides then the play is fine. This is because the pass to Navas was in-line/backwards. Even though he was past the defenders when the pass was made, if a pass is made in-line or backwards, then it is impossible to be offsides.

I found this quote here:

http://www.latinospost.com/articles/1393/20120619/euro-cup-2012-spain-vs-croatia-group-c-italy-ireland.htm

"... Cesc Fabregas chipped the ball over the Croatian defense to Andres Iniesta who moved in on goal alone. He slipped the ball across to a wide open substitute Jesus Navas who blasted the ball into the net in exhilaration. The play caught the Croatian defense off as they thought that Iniesta and Navas were offside. Replays indicated that Iniesta was onside and even though Navas was behind the defense when Iniesta passed the ball to him, offside rules deemed that he was behind the ball when Iniesta passed it."

That still doesn't clarify whether it was OK for Navas to be a meter offside when Fabregas passed the ball to Iniesta. Were it against the rules, I'd guess that the Croatians would have screamed bloody murder after the game, which they did not.

After reviewing it in slow motion, at the time the first pass was made the player to whom it was passed was even with the defender---no offside. At the time the pass was made to the second player he was even with the passer and the ball was always in front of him--no offside. Good goal.

mdcspe69;841901836 said:

---

After reviewing it in slow motion, at the time the first pass was made the player to whom it was passed was even with the defender---no offside. At the time the pass was made to the second player he was even with the passer and the ball was always in front of him--no offside. Good goal.

---

Just watched it - and you are right! It was close, but Navas was even with the ball on the last pass at the time it was passed to him. A player is not offside if they are even or behind the ball when it is passed to them, no matter where the defenders are - that's something that people often forget (or don't know).

The Refs got this right. Iniesta was even with the 2nd to Last defender at the moment the ball was last touched by a teammate.

The fact that a second teammate (Navas) was a player in an offside position (PIOP) is not a situation where he (Navas) must be sanctioned for offside as that teammate was not in the area of active play nor did he interfere with an opponent nor play the ball. Finally, "gaining an advantage" is narrowly defined to only apply to situations where the ball deflects off the upright/crossbar/defender and goes to a place where the PIOP can then play it. That also did not apply.

The play continues and at the moment that Iniesta last touched the ball Navas was further than the ball to the goal line and hence was not in an offside position.

Note, there is no such thing as in-line nor backward pass consideration in calling offside. A ball can be played side-ways or even backward and the first player to play the ball can still be sanctioned for offside.

goldenokiebear;841901839 said:

---

Just watched it - and you are right! It was close, but Navas was even with the ball on the last pass at the time it was passed to him. A player is not offside if they are even or behind the ball when it is passed to them, no matter where the defenders are - that's something that people often forget (or don't know).

---

You are correct BUT where was Navas when the original ball was passed to Iniesta? He was offside and since a Croatian defender never brought him back onside, when the ball was passed to him, he should have been flagged and the goal disallowed.

This particular situation is the trickiest rule to interpret.

But once the ball was played by Iniesta, and Navas stayed behind the advancing ball, no offsides occurred. AYSO uses the FIFA Laws of the Game, and I am an AYSO ref. The things we do for our kids...

92GoBears92;841901871 said:

---

But once the ball was played by Iniesta, and Navas stayed behind the advancing ball, no offsides occurred. AYSO uses the FIFA Laws of the Game, and I am an AYSO ref. The things we do for our kids...

---

You sure he was behind the ball? He looks level at best

Utexbear2;841901880 said:

---

You sure he was behind the ball? He looks level at best

---

For purposes of determining offside if one is even with (or further from the goal line than) the second to last defender OR the ball one is not in an offside position. From the still shots I have seen both parts of the play show that initially Iniesta is ONside when the first pass is made and Navas is ONside (behind the ball) when the last pass is made.
This is a terribly difficult call to make even in slow motion.
Got to give it up to the Assistant Ref for getting it right.

1. I think, having watched for a while, that off-sides has become a lightning rod in the sport, so they call it less often. Not unlick how we look at holding... call it when it is blatent, let them play otherwise. (next up: Falling down will soon stop being a penalty on whoever was closest :p )

2. Teams like Spain, Germany, Netherlands, Brazil, Agentina, England etc get better treatment because when the move forward, every tourny makes a LOT more money.


Couple those with how close the call is, and they let the play go 99% of the time, and everyone in the sport understands that, so thats why you dont see anyone crying about it. (Everyone in the world - outside of 7 million Croats - got what they wanted: Italy and Spain going forward)

it is clear the Iniesta was ONSIDE when the 1st pass was made and Navas was ONSIDE when the 2nd pass was made (even or behind the ball). For Navas to have been OFFSIDE when the pass went to Iniesta, the ref would have had to conclude that he was involved in the play (i.e., he drew the defender away from Iniesta), which clearly wasn't the case. It appears that Croatia attempted an offside trap which failed, leaving Iniesta and Navas wide open.

Utexbear2;841901862 said:

---

You are correct BUT where was Navas when the original ball was passed to Iniesta? He was offside and since a Croatian defender never brought him back onside, when the ball was passed to him, he should have been flagged and the goal disallowed.

This particular situation is the trickiest rule to interpret.

---

No.

He WAS in an offside position when the original ball was passed to Iniesta, BUT he was not involved or "participating" in the play at that point as others have pointed out. He was even with the ball when Iniesta played passed it to him, so he was not offside at that point; and there's no such rule about a defender having "to bring him back onside", you are either offside and participating and offside is called, or not.

The rule re: participation in the play may have changed as someone else suggested, but if it did it was before 1995 when I started reffing the game.

Phantom:

Disagree completely. You imply that referees are not applying the Laws equitably and that is simply not the case here.

The referees applied the Law as written and the outcome was fortuitous for one team, disastrous for another.

This is not the "fault" nor intention of the referees. Blame the Croat defense for not running a better offside trap.

Do referees make mistakes? Absolutely. Is this intentional? I have never run into a referee who was not truly remorseful about a blown call.

Teams like Spain/Germany/Brazil, et.al. advance because they play at a much higher level than the rest of the world. They are simply that good. They don't need the referees to "help" them win.

92GoBears92;841901871 said:

---

But once the ball was played by Iniesta, and Navas stayed behind the advancing ball, no offsides occurred. AYSO uses the FIFA Laws of the Game, and I am an AYSO ref. The things we do for our kids...

---

Right there with you ref. However, I didn't know about the rule that you are onside if you aren't past the ball regardless of the position of the defenders.

And have watched every World Cup since 1970....

And I would have called it an OFFside, just because the player who scored the goal had only the goalie between him and the goal when the ball was played to him. If you are refing an AYSO game and don't call that OFFside, the parents will have your head on a platter.

P.S. By the way, I am not favoring either Spain or Croatia, just good Soccer (I like both teams and have both a Croatian AND a Spanish national football jersey, which I bought when I was visiting each country).

calbear80;841901820 said:

---

I have been watching Soccer for 40 years and I cannot explain why Spain's goal at the 88th minute of today's match against Croatia wasn't offside. Can anyone explain?

---

Folks:
There seems to be a bit of misunderstanding of Law 11 - Offside. It really is not that difficult once all components of the Law are understood.

This is probably of limited interest, but for anyone interested, following is the content of a document I developed for use when teaching Law 11 (OFFSIDE) to new Referees.

Law 11 OFFSIDE
A Primer By: TheBearsHaveWon

[COLOR="Red"]First and Foremost - one must understand that it is NOT an infraction to simply be in an offside position.[/COLOR]

A player is sanctioned for Offside if [U]all three[/U] of the following components apply:
1. AT THE MOMENT THE BALL WAS LAST TOUCHED BY A TEAMMATE
2. THE PLAYER IS IN AN OFFSIDE POSITION (PIOP)
3. THE PLAYER IS INVOLVED IN ACTIVE PLAY

The three components are broken down as follows:

1. [U]LAST TOUCHED:[/U]
Fairly straightforward but there are a few caveats. Glancing off an opposing player does not reset offside, unless the opposing player controls the ball. For Example - A glance off the head can be considered control, or not, depending on whether the referee determines that the header constituted control. Once the ball has last been controlled by an opposing player, the player in an offside position CANNOT be sanctioned for offside.

However, any glance or touch by a TEAMMATE of the Player in an Offside Position (PIOP) DOES reset offside. What this means is that on any glance off of or touch by a teammate, we must again evaluate whether the player is still in an offside position, or not, at that moment.

2. [U]PIOP -[/U]
The Player is in an offside position (PIOP) if ALL three apply:
A) He/she is in the opponent’s defending half of the field
[INDENT]A player cannot be offside in his/her defending half of the field[/INDENT]
B) He/She is closer to the goal-line than [U]both[/U]:
[INDENT]The second to last defender (2LD)
AND
The Ball[/INDENT]
C) The ball is NOT being put in play from a restart for the ball leaving the field:
[INDENT]a. Throw-in
b. Corner kick
c. Goal kick[/INDENT]

3. [U]INVOLVED[/U]:
In active play if [U]ANY [/U]of the following three apply
A) Player in offside position touches the ball
B) Interferes with an opponent
[INDENT]a. Obstructs an opponent’s vision/movement
b. Verbally distracts an opponent
c. Attracts opponent’s attention AND draws opponent into pursuit[/INDENT]
C) Gains an advantage by being in an offside position. This term is not the layman's understanding but rather is limited to the following possible events:
[INDENT]a. Ball glances off uprights/goalpost/goalie/opponent
b. Does not allow opponent time/space to fairly play the ball
c. PIOP is near enough to immediately capitalize on a defender’s mistake in playing the ball.[/INDENT]

And you would have been incorrect in calling offside there.
See Primer doc I posted below.

UrsaMajor;841901902 said:

---

For Navas to have been OFFSIDE when the pass went to Iniesta, the ref would have had to conclude that he was involved in the play (i.e., he drew the defender away from Iniesta), which clearly wasn't the case.

---

That was the old interpretation actually.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/football/gossip_and_transfers/4685599.stm

FIFA clarified the rule and issued a new interpretation in 2003. Now, they have a strict definition that allows that exact play - Navas doesn't touch the ball or interfere with a defender, so it's notoffsides, and when Iniesta touches the ball, it essentially resets and moves on so when the 2nd pass is legal, the play stands.

In the past, 'involved in the play' had too much room for interpretation, so FIFA spelled it out (and did so in the favor of the offense to encourage goals). Pre 2003, I think you'd find people that could argue both ways on the initial offsides position of navas - some could say he is in the play because he is in the center of the penalty box drawing attention from the defense and goalie, but then others would say the pass was clearly not to him, so he's not involved at that moment. New interpretation means it's clear as day.

calbear80;841901916 said:

---

If you are refing an AYSO game and don't call that OFFside, the parents will have your head on a platter.

---

So you don't think you'd be completely reemed by different set of parents if you disallowed the goal?

Colorado:
You are correct.
Latest interpretation makes it clear that simply being in an offside position is NOT an infraction.

However the latest interpretation still allows for distracting an opponent and drawing him into pursuit. Of course, this has to happen in the "Area of Active Play" which is narrowly defined as a conical section of the field from where the ball was last played to where it was received. By this definition, Navas was outside the area of active play and could not called for drawing an opponent into pursuit.
What about the poor goalkeeper you ask? FIFA says it is the goalkeeper's job to watch the ball, not call Offside. So it is on the goalkeep if he watched Navas instead of the ball.....

TheBearsHaveWon;841901912 said:

---

Phantom:

Disagree completely. You imply that referees are not applying the Laws equitably and that is simply not the case here.

The referees applied the Law as written and the outcome was fortuitous for one team, disastrous for another.

This is not the "fault" nor intention of the referees. Blame the Croat defense for not running a better offside trap.

Do referees make mistakes? Absolutely. Is this intentional? I have never run into a referee who was not truly remorseful about a blown call.

Teams like Spain/Germany/Brazil, et.al. advance because they play at a much higher level than the rest of the world. They are simply that good. They don't need the referees to "help" them win.

---

Happens in every level of sport in every sport.

Hate to break it to you that close/judgment calls consistently are consistently made in in favor of some teams and/or players. No ref is going to be remorceful about a close or judgement call...

I doubt it is conscious on the refs part, but it is not really debatable that it happens.




Finally, the reason it is widely accepted that is because the mindset in sport is "because they play at a much higher level than the rest of the world. They are simply that good" so a calls just happening to go their way is not a big deal: They would win anyway.

The fact that they would win anyway does not change that top teams get leniency and favorable calls from refs.


Had that play been the Irish scoring on the Spanish, it would have been called offside (regardless of replay with slow motion showed). I have ZERO doubt in my mind having watched the game this long.

On this we will have to agree to disagree. I will tell you that having worked with some of these refs of which you speak, they are of the utmost integrity and many (myself included) would find your viewpoint to be cynical and not a little bit insulting. Refs work very hard to ensure an equitable game, every game and do not take lightly that it is they who are the custodians of the integrity and traditions of the game.

One aspect of soccer that many Americans have trouble with is that the Referee has the final judgement of what is "trivial" and what is not. This concept means that the same action can be completely disregarded in one game or severely sanctioned in another, depending on the "needs of the game". This is where refereeing becomes an art and the very best at it are those that are refereeing international matches.

The refs at this level have worked on developing their judgement over many hundreds of hours of instruction using various different tools and not least of all years of experience. If the players believed that the referees were coddling or protecting one team, there would be many more incidents of violence on the pitch than what is seen.

Players know when a referee is not calling an equitable match and will almost always take things into their own hands in these situations. These referees do not last long in the profession.

But as previously stated, your mileage may vary. Believe as you will.

Phantomfan;841901940 said:

---

Happens in every level of sport in every sport.

Hate to break it to you that close/judgment calls consistently are consistently made in in favor of some teams and/or players. No ref is going to be remorceful about a close or judgement call...

I doubt it is conscious on the refs part, but it is not really debatable that it happens.




Finally, the reason it is widely accepted that is because the mindset in sport is "because they play at a much higher level than the rest of the world. They are simply that good" so a calls just happening to go their way is not a big deal: They would win anyway.

The fact that they would win anyway does not change that top teams get leniency and favorable calls from refs.


Had that play been the Irish scoring on the Spanish, it would have been called offside (regardless of replay with slow motion showed). I have ZERO doubt in my mind having watched the game this long.

---

The major flaw in your theory is that Spain would have advanced regardless if the goal had counted or not. Not only would they have advanced, a tie would have earned them second place in the division and a first-round elimination match with England! Furthermore, this would have set up a 2006 world cup rematch of Italy vs France. Now that would have generated some cash-money!

TheBearsHaveWon;841901934 said:

---

Colorado:
You are correct.
Latest interpretation makes it clear that simply being in an offside position is NOT an infraction.

However the latest interpretation still allows for distracting an opponent and drawing him into pursuit. Of course, this has to happen in the "Area of Active Play" which is narrowly defined as a conical section of the field from where the ball was last played to where it was received. By this definition, Navas was outside the area of active play and could not called for drawing an opponent into pursuit.
What about the poor goalkeeper you ask? FIFA says it is the goalkeeper's job to watch the ball, not call Offside. So it is on the goalkeep if he watched Navas instead of the ball.....

---

Absolutely correct. For example, it would have been offside on Navas IF he had been in the conical section of where the ball was when it was passed to Iniesta, Iniesta, and the Keeper - if he's in that area he would/could be considered to affect/distract the Keeper. But he was clearly outside that area, well to the side.

TheBearsHaveWon;841901955 said:

---

On this we will have to agree to disagree. I will tell you that having worked with some of these refs of which you speak, they are of the utmost integrity and many (myself included) would find your viewpoint to be cynical and not a little bit insulting. Refs work very hard to ensure an equitable game, every game and do not take lightly that it is they who are the custodians of the integrity and traditions of the game.

One aspect of soccer that many Americans have trouble with is that the Referee has the final judgement of what is "trivial" and what is not. This concept means that the same action can be completely disregarded in one game or severely sanctioned in another, depending on the "needs of the game". This is where refereeing becomes an art and the very best at it are those that are refereeing international matches.

The refs at this level have worked on developing their judgement over many hundreds of hours of instruction using various different tools and not least of all years of experience. If the players believed that the referees were coddling or protecting one team, there would be many more incidents of violence on the pitch than what is seen.

Players know when a referee is not calling an equitable match and will almost always take things into their own hands in these situations. These referees do not last long in the profession.

But as previously stated, your mileage may vary. Believe as you will.

---

Well, it's clear you haven't met the refs in Serie A and Serie B. Those crooks have no problems fixing a match or 20.

The fact that refs have been involved with match fixing in arguably the 2nd best professional soccer league in the world lends some credence to Phantoms overall point.

And I saw an OFFside all 10 times. Fine points of the rule book aside, if it walks, talks and quacks like an offside, it is an OFFside. If I was reefing an AYSO game and did not call that play OFFside, the parents would have me chased out of town.

cb80:
Are you still officiating?
If so, please go back and obtain refresher training. Your local assignor and/or assessor can help you with this.
Calling Offside properly is important to the players and you should have the latest interpretations in mind when you officiate.
Peace.

calbear80;841902246 said:

---

And I saw an OFFside all 10 times. Fine points of the rule book aside, if it walks, talks and quacks like an offside, it is an OFFside.

---

If it fits the definition of offside as outlined in the rules, it's offside. I'm surprised that an actual referee would make this kind of argument. Are you related to Dick Bavetta?

I don't understand the controversy here. The guy was onside. It was sh*tty Croatian defense. There is no excuse for Croatia's goalie. Send him to the mines.

calbear80;841902246 said:

---

And I saw an OFFside all 10 times. Fine points of the rule book aside, if it walks, talks and quacks like an offside, it is an OFFside. If I was reefing an AYSO game and did not call that play OFFside, the parents would have me chased out of town.

---

Seems pretty clear due to the striping on the field, navas is behind the ball by about 1 yard, thus no offsides. Of course it's harder to tell at game speed.

I do sympathize with youth league refs because parents take these things way to seriously and refs do often get singled out for bad calls in a mostly thankless task. So while homering a team to avoid heckling or worse might be a good way to practice self preservation, it's not a good argument as to what the correct call actually is.