Before 1863 Traditional games A law similar to offside was used in the game of
hurling to goals played in Cornwall in the early 17th century:
School and university football Offside laws are found in the largely uncodified and informal football games played at English public schools in the early 19th century. An 1832 article discussing the
Eton wall game complained of "[t]he interminable multiplicity of rules about
sneaking,
picking up,
throwing,
rolling,
in straight, with a vast number more", using the term "sneaking" to refer to Eton's offside law. The novel ''
Tom Brown's School Days'', published in 1857 but based on the author's experiences at
Rugby School from 1834 to 1842, discussed that school's offside law: The first published set of laws of any code of football (Rugby School, 1845), stated that "[a] player is off his side if the ball has touched one of his own side behind him, until the other side touch it." Such a player was prevented from kicking the ball, touching the ball down, or interfering with an opponent. Many other school and university laws from this period were similar to Rugby School's in that they were "strict"—i.e. any player ahead of the ball was in an off-side position. (This is similar to the current
offside law in
rugby, under which any player between the ball and the opponent's goal who takes part in play, is liable to be penalised.) Such laws included
Shrewsbury School (1855),
Uppingham School (1857),
Trinity College, Hartford (1858),
Winchester College (1863), and the
Cambridge Rules of 1863. Some school and university rules provided an exception to this general pattern. In the 1847 laws of the
Eton Field Game, a player could not be considered "sneaking" if there were four or more opponents between him and the opponents' goal line. A similar "rule of four" was found in the
1856 Cambridge Rules and the rules of
Charterhouse School (1863).
Club football Most surviving rules of independent football
clubs from before 1860 lack any offside law. This is true of the brief handwritten set of laws for the
Foot-Ball Club of Edinburgh (1833), the published laws of Surrey Football Club (1849), the first set of laws of
Sheffield Football Club (1858) and those of
Melbourne Football Club (1859). In the Sheffield game, players known as "kick-throughs" were positioned permanently near the opponents' goal. The 1862 laws of
Barnes FC featured a strict offside law. Sheffield FC adopted a weak offside law at the beginning of the 1863–64 season.
J. C. Thring J. C. Thring was an advocate for the strictest possible offside law. A resident master at Uppingham School from 1859 to 1864, Thring criticised most existing offside laws for being too lax. The Rugby laws, for example, were at fault because they permitted an offside player to rejoin play immediately after an opponent touched the ball, while Eton's rule of four allowed "an immense amount of sneaking" when the number of players was unlimited. Thring expressed his views through correspondence in the sporting newspapers such as
The Field, and through the publication in 1862 of
The Simplest Game, a proposed set of laws of football. In
The Simplest Game, Thring included a strict offside law which required a player in an offside position ("out of play", in Thring's terminology) to "return behind the ball as soon as possible". The influence of Thring's views is evidenced by the adoption of his proposed offside law from
The Simplest Game in the first draft of the FA laws (see below).
The F. A. laws of 1863 On 17 November 1863, the newly formed
Football Association adopted a resolution mirroring Thring's law from the
Simplest Game: This text was reflected in the first draft of laws drawn up by FA secretary
Ebenezer Morley. On 24 November, Morley presented his draft laws to the FA for final approval. That meeting was, however, disrupted by a dispute over the subject of "hacking" (allowing players to carry the ball, provided they could be kicked in the shins by opponents when doing so, in the manner of Rugby School). The opponents of hacking brought the delegates' attention to the Cambridge Rules of 1863 (which banned carrying and hacking): Discussion of the Cambridge rules, and suggestions for possible communication with Cambridge on the subject, served to delay the final "settlement" of the laws to a further meeting, on 1 December. A number of representatives who supported rugby-style football did not attend this additional meeting, resulting in hacking and carrying being banned. Although the offside law was not itself a significant issue in the dispute between the pro- and anti-hacking clubs, it was completely rewritten. The original law, taken from Thring's
Simplest Game, was replaced by a modified version of the equivalent law from the Cambridge Rules: The law adopted by the FA was "strict"—i.e., it penalised any player in front of the ball. At the FA's meeting, the alteration "gave rise to a lengthy discussion, many thinking with
Mr Morley that it would be better to do away with the off side [law] altogether, especially as the Sheffield clubs had none. It being found, however, that the rule could not be expunged without notice, the alteration was passed." Contemporaneous reports do not indicate the reason for the change.
Charles Alcock, writing in 1890, suggested that it was made in order to induce two public schools,
Westminster and
Charterhouse, to join the association. Those two schools did indeed become members of the FA after the next annual FA meeting (February 1867), in response to a letter-writing campaign by newly installed FA secretary
Robert Graham.
Early proposals for change (1867–1874) Over the next seven years, there were several attempts to change the three-player rule, but none was successful: • In 1867, Barnes FC proposed that the offside rule should be removed altogether, arguing that "a player did not stop to count whether there were three of his opponents between him and their own goal". • It was also proposed that the FA should revert to its original "strict" offside rule. This change was introduced in 1868 (Branham College), 1871 ("The Oxford Association") and 1872 (Notts County). • There were attempts to introduce the one-player rule of the Sheffield Football Association in 1867 (Sheffield FC), 1872 (Sheffield Football Association), 1873 (
Nottingham Forest), and 1874 (Sheffield Association). However, the two codes were eventually unified without any change in this area; the Sheffield Clubs accepted the FA's three-player offside rule in 1877, after the FA compromised by allowing the throw-in to be taken in any direction.
Offside in own half (1907) The original laws allowed players to be in an offside position even when in their own half. This happened rarely, but was possible when one team pressed high up the field, for example in a
Sunderland v
Wolverhampton Wanderers match in December 1901. When an attacking team adopted the so-called "one back" game, in which only the goalkeeper and one outfield player remained in defensive positions, it was even possible for players to be caught offside in their own penalty area. In May 1905,
Clyde FC suggested that players should not be offside in their own half, but this suggestion was rejected by the
Scottish Football Association. It was objected that the change would lead to "forwards hanging about close to the half-way line, as opportunists". After the
Scotland v England international of April 1906 ended with the Scottish wingers being repeatedly caught offside by England's use of a "one back" game, Clyde again proposed the same rule-change to the Scottish FA meeting: this time it was accepted. The Scottish proposal gained support in England. At the 1906 meeting of the International Football Association Board, the Scottish FA announced that it would introduce the proposed change at the next annual meeting, in 1907. In March 1907, the council of the [English] Football Association approved this change, and it was passed by IFAB in June 1907.
Two-player rule (1925) The Scottish FA urged the change from a three-player to a two-player offside rule as early as 1893. Such a change was first proposed at a meeting of IFAB in 1894, where it was rejected. It was proposed again by the SFA in 1902, upon the urging of
Celtic FC, and again rejected. A further proposal from the SFA also failed in 1913, after the Football Association objected. The SFA advanced the same proposal in 1914, when it was again rejected after opposition from both the Football Association and the
Football Association of Wales. Meetings of the International Board were suspended after 1914 because of the
First World War. After they resumed in 1920, the SFA once again proposed the two-player rule in 1922, 1923, and 1924. In 1922 and 1923, the Scottish Association withdrew its proposal after English FA opposed it. In 1924, the Scottish proposal was once again opposed by the English FA, and defeated; it was, however, indicated that a version of the proposal would be adopted the next year. On 30 March 1925, the FA arranged a trial match at
Highbury where two proposed changes to the offside rules were tested. During the first half, a player could not be offside unless within forty yards of the opponents' goal-line. In the second half, the two-player rule was used. The two-player proposal was considered by the FA at its annual meeting on 8 June. Proponents cited the new rule's potential to reduce stoppages, avoid refereeing errors, and improve the spectacle, while opponents complained that it would give "undue advantage to attackers"; referees were overwhelmingly opposed to the change. The two-player rule was nevertheless approved by the FA by a large majority. At IFAB's meeting later that month, the two-player rule finally became part of the Laws of the Game. The two-player rule was one of the more significant rule changes in the history of the game during the 20th century. It led to an immediate change in the style of play, with the game becoming more stretched, "short passing giv[ing] way to longer balls", and the development of the
W-M formation. It also led to an increase in goalscoring: 4,700 goals were scored in 1,848
Football League games in 1924–25. This number rose to 6,373 goals (from the same number of games) in
1925–26.
Parts of body (2005) In 2005, IFAB clarified that, when evaluating an attacking player's position for the purposes of the offside law, the part of the player's head, body or feet closest to the defending team's goal-line should be considered, with the hands and arms being excluded because "there is no advantage to be gained if only the arms are in advance of the opponent". In 2016, it was further clarified that this principle should apply to all players, both attackers and defenders, including the goalkeeper.
Defender outside the field of play (2009) In 2009, it was stated that a defender who leaves the field of play without the referee's permission must be considered to be on the nearest boundary line for the purposes of deciding whether an attacker is in an offside position.
Halfway line (2016) In 2016, it was clarified that a player on the halfway line itself cannot be in an offside position: part of the player's head, body or feet must be within the opponent's half of the field of play in order to be considered offside. The concept was that offside should only apply in the last of play (inside or beside the penalty area). In 1972, the
North American Soccer League adopted a variation of the offside rule in which it added a line on the field 35 yards from each goal line; a player could only be offside within that area of the opponent's half. The rule was dropped in 1982 at the insistence of
FIFA which threatened to withdraw recognition of the league if it did not apply all of the official rules of football.
Subsequent developments: exceptions at the restart of play Goal kick Since the first FA laws of 1863, a player has not been penalised for being in an offside position at the moment a teammate takes a
goal kick. (According to the "strict" offside law used in 1863, every player on the attacking side would automatically have been in an offside position from such a goalkick, since it had to be taken from the goal line and a player could be in an offside position even when in their own half.)
Throw-in Under the original laws of 1863, it was not possible to be offside from a
throw-in; however, since the ball was required to be thrown in at right-angles to the touch-line, it would have been unusual for a player to gain significant advantage from being ahead of the ball. In 1877, the throw-in law was changed to allow the ball to be thrown in any direction. The next year (1878) a new law was introduced to allow a player to be offside from a throw-in. This situation lasted until 1920, when the law was altered to prevent a player being offside from a throw-in. This rule-change was praised on the grounds that it would deter teams from "seeking safety or wasting time by sending [the ball] into touch", and thus reduce stoppages.
Corner kick When first introduced in 1872, the
corner kick was required to be taken from the corner-flag itself, which made it impossible for an attacking player to be in an offside position relative to the ball. In 1874, the corner-kick was allowed to be taken up to one yard from the corner-flag, thus opening up the possibility of a player being in an offside position. At the
International Football Conference of December 1882, it was agreed that a player should not be offside from a corner-kick; this change was incorporated into the Laws of the Game in 1883.
Free kick The laws of football have always permitted an offside offence to be committed from a
free kick. The free kick contrasts, in this respect, with other restarts of play such as the goal kick, corner kick, and throw-in. A 1920 proposal by the FA to exempt the free-kick from the offside rule was unexpectedly rejected by IFAB. A further unsuccessful proposal to remove the possibility of being offside from a direct free-kick was rejected in 1929. Similar proposals to prevent offside offences from any free-kick were advanced in 1974 and 1986, each time without success. In 1987, the
Football Association (FA) obtained the permission of
IFAB to test such a rule in the
1987–88 GM Vauxhall Conference. At the next annual meeting, the FA reported to IFAB that the experiment had, as predicted, "assisted further the non-offending team and also generated more action near goal, resulting in greater excitement for players and spectators"; it nevertheless withdrew the proposal. ==Offside trap==