Offside rule

Understandable that they want to free the game up, but the way the offside rule now stands is silly. There was always a rule which protected players from being offside if they were not influencing the play ,but it was intended to cover situations where an attacker might be sitting on his arse out wide and away from the action.

The fact that the Arsenal goal against Chelsea should have stood just shows up how weak the law is as it stands. A player was about 8 yards offside and slowly walking back from the penalty spot when the ball was crossed. How can a player alone and so close to goal not be an influence? Would another couple in the same place also be non -influential?

The rule would be easier for officials to interpret if central players were not given offside if they were running back to get onside rather than wandering? All very messy as it stands and maybe administrators like The FA and Blatter and Co should be doing more to clarify the rules.

They might start with the rule of obstruction which is, at present, imposed if a player deliberately steps in front of another to prevent him getting to the ball.........but it seems - for reasons not in the rules and known only to refs - this does not apply if the ball is running out of play in favour of the obstructer. Seems he is then free to step in front with arms wide, An indirect free kick in the centre circle, but not an offence on the lines?

Making defenders either play the ball or give away a free kick would liven the attacking game up far more than those changes to the old offside laws have done.

LC