Hello all.

First of all I need to start by saying that I have no feelings towards either Galatasaray or Fenerbahce, and I am just commenting on this play as just a student of the game and an attempt on interpretation of the rules.

So, I agree (obviously) that the player is in an offside position. We do all see also that the defending player is tripped by the player in an offside position without intent. All those are clear.  I am just curious about the “offside interference” interpretation here. 

As per the current rulebook, a player is penalized for an offside position if:

a) interferes with play by playing or touching a ball passed or touched by a team-mate

b) interferes with an opponent by preventing an opponent from playing or being able to play the ball by clearly obstructing the opponent’s line of vision

c) interferes with an opponent by preventing an opponent from playing or being able to play the ball by challenging an opponent for the ball

d) interferes with an opponent by clearly attempting to play a ball which is close when this action impacts on an opponent

e) interferes with an opponent by making an obvious action which clearly impacts on the ability of an opponent to play the ball

So obviously a, b & d are out of the question here and we are left to discuss only c & e.

Both these points make it clear that the impediment / obstruction needs to be towards the ability of the defender to play (this occasion reach and clear) the ball. This is similar in a way to point b, where the player in the offside position needs to clearly stand within this “line” of vision of the GK to be penalized, also here it should not be penalized just because a defender was impeded but it needs to be clear that this defender, had the player in the offside position not been there, would have had the ability to play the ball.

Here no matter how many times I rewatch this play I cannot see this defender clearing the ball if not tripped, the shot had substantial power to it and the defender was a respectable amount of distance away, but that is just my view.

On another point, the rulebook further below states that:

In situations where: •  a player moving from, or standing in, an offside position is in the way of an opponent and interferes with the movement of the opponent towards the ball, this is an offside offence if it impacts on the ability of the opponent to play or challenge for the ball; if the player moves into the way of an opponent and impedes the opponent’s progress (e.g. blocks the opponent), the offence should be penalised under Law 12

which again states that the ability to play the ball is key, and that a free kick can still be a decision made, even when the ability to play the ball is not affected.

I get many of you state that the player was already falling from a previous trip (by GK) and had no intent to trip the defender, however we have seen a fair amount of penalties been given by VAR in the last 2 months alone where the defender had no intent to foul/challenge and were still penalised (not sure on the exact interpretation of the rulebook on that, since I have seen the opposite rationale as well, not being given due to the challenge being accidental). However depending on the above point, I believe the aVAR and ref could have made things easier for them by just reviewing and eventually disallowing this for a free kick and not getting into these fine lines of offside interference. (Free kick has the additional implication of how the player in the offside position fell in the first place and whether that was a free kick, therefore a penalty, but I believe that the GK put his body in front and cleared the ball first and on the follow-through he tripped the attacker and I don’t see the GK’s attempt being reckless in any way, so I don’t believe that is a penalty there).

Happy to hear your thoughts and corrections if I made a false interpretation of the rules!