I think the use of the word "inactive" introduces the wrong concept

"Inactive" in the offiside rules has a pretty specific (and complex) meaning for ATTACKING players

I don't think there's any reference anywhere to it being of any significance in the offside context that a DEFENDING player is "inactive". In fact, if you think about it, "inactive" (ie dozy) players play attackers onside all the time.

The only question is whether Panucci counts as a second defender close to the goal line than the attacker.

Posted By: Old Git on June 10th 2008 at 14:21:55


Message Thread


Reply to Message

In order to add a post to the WotB Message Board you must be a registered WotB user.

If you are not yet registered then please visit the registration page. You should ensure that their browser is setup to accept cookies.

Log in