Debate Continues Over Wenger's Offside Law Proposal
Arsene Wenger's proposal to change the offside law has been a topic of discussion for six years.
This issue will be revisited on Tuesday when the International Football Association Board (IFAB) convenes to consider potential amendments for the upcoming season.
However, the law remains unchanged since 2020.
This stagnation persists despite controversial VAR decisions that have ruled goals out by mere millimeters. Are we only contemplating a change in the law due to these contentious rulings?
Consider the dramatic goal scored by Coventry City during stoppage time in their FA Cup semi-final against Manchester United two years ago. Had it been allowed, Coventry would have clinched a 4-3 victory, but they ultimately lost in a penalty shootout. VAR eliminated what could have been one of the most memorable goals in the tournament's history.
Yet, should the fundamental nature of the game be altered at all levels because of VAR?
How likely is it that Wenger's proposed law will be adopted?
Wenger was appointed FIFA's chief of global football development in November 2019, with a mandate to promote attacking play.
Shortly thereafter, he introduced his vision for revamping the offside rule, known as 'visual separation' or, more commonly, 'daylight' between players.
According to Wenger, "If any part of your body is on the same line as the defender, you’re not offside." In essence, a complete gap must exist between the attacker and the second-to-last opponent, typically the last defender in most scenarios.
Offside is Not Broken; VAR Has Complicated It
Since the laws were established in 1863, the offside rule has undergone only two significant changes: in 1925 and again in 1990.
These modifications have been minimal because the law is fundamentally effective, serving as the cornerstone of tactical systems and the overall gameplay.
The last change in 1990 followed a World Cup marked by defensive tactics, where the goals-per-game average in Italy was the lowest in the tournament's history. IFAB amended the rule to allow players to be level with the second-to-last opponent instead of behind them, promoting more attacking play while maintaining fairness between forwards and defenders.
Currently, discussions about a lack of goals in football are overshadowed by VAR's tendency to disallow legitimate goals through scrutinizing decisions.
In October, IFAB's advisory panels warned against rewriting the offside rule solely due to contentious VAR calls. Their caution is understandable, as VAR influences only a small fraction of the game.
After some initial progress and minor trials, the conversation surrounding Wenger's law has quieted, only to be reignited by semi-automated offside technology (SAOT), which has led to even more contentious marginal offside decisions.
For instance, it took five minutes and thirty seconds to disallow a Manchester City goal against Newcastle in the Carabao Cup due to players being positioned too closely for SAOT to function effectively.
Reports indicate that SAOT has faced numerous challenges in Europe's top leagues, forcing VAR to revert to traditional line-drawing methods. In one league, confetti on the pitch interfered with SAOT, while in another, the system mistakenly identified the wrong defender.
We are relying on this technology as the basis for a potential overhaul of the offside rule.
Wenger's proposal also overlooks a critical point: regardless of how the law is defined, there will always be a threshold where a player transitions from being onside to offside, and VAR will still be present to make those marginal decisions.
This appears to be a problem rooted in VAR itself, rather than an issue requiring a broader change in the game.
Will Wenger's Law Be Approved Next Week?
After each IFAB meeting, discussions about the offside rule are always mentioned.
IFAB's hesitance is evident, as Wenger's law has yet to be presented to associations for trial in senior football after all this time.
Such trials are a necessary next step; the law will not be implemented directly into major competitions like the World Cup or the Premier League next season.
Minor trials were conducted in Italy's under-18 championship and youth tournaments in the Netherlands in 2023.
While BBC Sport reports that the results were generally positive, there were concerns regarding an excessive advantage for attackers.
These trials occurred in lower-level competitions, and the law must be tested in real matches, particularly those utilizing VAR, to assess the impact on tactics and gameplay.
Trials exist to prevent unintended consequences; Wenger's law could lead to an increase in goals or potentially decrease them.
Numerous examples of unsuccessful tests exist, such as the 2000-01 rule that moved a free-kick forward ten yards for acts of dissent, which caused confusion in leagues less familiar with rugby, where it originated. The ABBA penalty shootout format from 2017-18 also confused players and spectators alike.
In the 1987-88 season, the National League (then the Conference) attempted a tweak that exempted players from being offside from a free-kick, resulting in defenses crowding the six-yard box instead of promoting attacking play.
A similar outcome could arise with Wenger's law, compelling defenders to drop deeper to prevent attackers from exploiting space behind them, especially during free-kicks.
Wenger's law is often envisioned with two players racing down the center of the pitch, but its true impact, particularly inside the penalty area, could significantly favor attackers.
Another alternative suggestion has been to use the torso as the reference point for offside, disregarding the feet and head. However, the practicality of this approach for assistant referees in crowded situations remains uncertain.
If trials yield positive outcomes, it may take until the 2028-29 season for a change to be fully implemented across the sport.
Is Wenger's law a beneficial idea? At present, that question remains unanswered.