Results so far:
Votes are still being tallied.
Join the Debate now.
If anyone had ask me which game i feel is the most interesting competitive game in the world i would choose football, If i was asked if i hate anything about the game or if there is something i feel is not right about the game i would say.."nothing".But if we should put a bit of deep reasoning to the rules,especially the offside rule, we will see that the offside rule is the only rule in the game of soccer with a confusing outcome when it comes to making decisions about it so you can ask yourself...what is the importance of the rule?
Let ua have it this way, football is the only game with such a rule.Correct?( I mean such a controversial rule.)And if you say yes to that now then we are getting somewhere.I will like to explain some tacticalities about the rule to you.Lets take the game of chess for instance.If such a rule should be in chess then there would be no winner,If such a rule should be in basketball then every player will have to take their trial shots without dreaminjg of being going into the opponents realm circle for a good slam/dunk.
Although it is understandable that all games have their different rules with different and somewhat meaningful reasons and functionalities but the big question is this.Has the offside rule even been seen as efective or productive during a match? No. Reasons? It is a rule which is more like being used to stop the calculated attack of an opposing squad and if coaches can calculate their patterns well then an opposing striker beating a defender to the ball during an attack will not be so easy and if the defending squad of a team can follow the movement of it's central defence and move with him/her when he/she moves to the front or retreat to the back, then the attacking opponents will have no choice but dribble their way past the defence line or take a short from an almost impossible angle.( Thank goodness that has not really been calculated in the football world.)
The point is this.That is the offside rule can be scrapped,scoring golas would not be so hard or easy but scoring a goal will be much more tactical,interesting and brain stressing.Then, football will be more loved by football lovers.Imagine a defender feeling so relaxed that an opposing striker can not be behind him to get the ball as he would be in an offside position but he will be much more challenged if he understands that he has to contain the opposing striker either while the striker is at the defenders back or not.
Football is meant to be more calculating,more tactical and more cunning since it is a game of deception which two oppsing teams will have to go against one another to mock them with a goal.But the offside rule is more like a device used in hindering the possible outcome of a more appreciating football game so we can ask oursleves why it is still being in use.Thiery Henry has been a player who's calculation to be the opponent has always given the referee much stress in order to take an offside decision as he will deliberately move to the offisde position and cause a distraction for the goal keeper while one of his squad men will run in and go for goal thereby beating the offside trap.What a calculation.
Just so we all understand this.The offide trap is getting more controversial and confusing so why should we not do away with it?Afterall we all are football lovers and we demand and ask for more action.Is that bad?Let the football league organizations reason with this.Good luck to us all.
Learn more about this author, Osunsanya Olalekan.
Click here to send Author comments or questions.
The debate is more not should the offside rule be scrapped but should it be returned to it's original form.
The offside rule has existed t prevent attacking players from remaining in forward positions when the play is at the other end of the field, it prevents the proverbial, 'hoof-ball.' It could be argued that this enabled the game to flow much more fluently, it encourages quick, breaking football where teams can attempt to get in behind defenders, it existed to improve the way in which the game was played and create a much more exciting spectacle.
Both attackers and defenders could use the rule to their advantage, attackers could play on the shoulders of defenders, timing their run at just the right time against defenders who had pushed up the field too far finding themselves quickly exposed. Likewise defenders could use the rule to their advantage, pushing out at just the right time would leave attackers offside, the notorious 'Arsenal Offside Trap,' frustrated many a striker.
Perhaps the offside trap in it's original form played more into the hands of defensive teams. Modifications were made to the rule in an effort to create more goals, however all this has done has created confusion and an unfair advantage to attacking teams. Goals scored can be deemed legal one week and against the law the following week. While players who have educated themselves in traditional defensive play now find themselves exposed at times when they really should not.
The new fangled terminology is 'not interfering with play,' though quite how you can be deemed to be 'not interfering at the start of a move, then get the final touch to a goal is bemusing. In the words of the great Bill Shankly "If he's not interfering with play, then what's he doing on the pitch?"
The debate is not should the offside rule be scrapped but should the offside be reverted to it's original form - which in my opinion it most certainly should be. Controversy is good for football but there is plenty of that without the 'grey area' of offside. We should not lose sight of why it exists in the first instance and that should aid the flow of a game, not hinder it. Nobody other than FIFA, and I'd be surprised if they themselves fully understand it in it's current form, fully understands the rule. We should not be seeing different interpretations from week to week, it should be black and white.
Should offside be scrapped? - absolutely not, those who argue otherwise are demonstrating a complete lack of understanding of the game - should the rule be reversed? - for the good of the game - YES!
Learn more about this author, Paul Nunn.
Click here to send Author comments or questions.