Why The Offsides Flag Has Been "Ruud" to Italy
From: Why The Offsides Flag Has Been "Ruud" to Italy
Sports Are 80 Percent Mental
Two
Euro 2008 games and two questionable offsides calls against Italy, one
on defense, the other on offense, are still being talked about this
weekend. First, in the Netherlands opener,
van Nistelrooy scores from an obvious offsides position... except for
Panucci, who is lying on the ground next to the goal. In fact, UEFA had
to defend their referee
for a correct interpretation. The call that did not get an explanation
was Luca Toni's offsides on a cross from Zambrotta in the Romania match, which disallowed a first half goal. The first call was deemed correct, the second one was a blatant error.
Calling
offsides correctly is one of the most difficult officiating duties in
sports. In fact, some have argued that it is nearly impossible given the
limitations of the human eye and the number of objects that need to be
tracked by one assistant referee. Back in 2004, Francisco Belda
Maruenda, M.D. of Centro de Salud de Alquerías in Murcia, Spain, took a
look at the eye movements necessary along with their associated
durations to determine if it was a humanly possible task. Let's look at
his logic.
First, some eye physiology definitions are needed:
Saccadic
movements - when we shift our eyes' focus from one object to another,
we are making a saccadic movement. As an assistant referee (AR) looks
from the ball carrier to the last defender to the offensive players, he
needs to make several saccadic movements to take in the whole scene.
Vergence
movements - there are two types, convergence (changing gaze from
objects far away to objects closer to you), and divergence (just the
opposite, near to far).
Accomodation - to change the focus of the eye from far to near or near to far, the convexity of the retina lens needs to change.
All
of these eye movements, saccadic, vergence and accomodations take time
to accomplish. Let's see how Maruenda added these up for an offsides
call:
- the AR needs to keep track of at least four objects, the
ball, the last two defenders and the offensive receiver of the pass.
There may also be more offensive players to track as well.
- to make
saccadic movements from the first object to each of the remaining
objects will take about 130ms for the first object and then another
10ms per object after that. With four objects to track, that would be a
total of about 160ms.
- if some of the players are on the far side
of the field and some on the near side, then a vergence movement and an
accomodation would be required, taking an additional 360ms for the
accomodation and 640ms for the far to near vergence movement.
- of
course, the players are constantly moving during the play, so their
position is changing rapidly. If the speed of an offensive player is
assumed to be 7.14 m/s, then in 100ms, they will have moved 71cm. This
movement could be the difference between an onside position and an
offside position. See the diagrams below (taken directly from the
article)
Top: No offside, players in correct position.
Bottom: 100 ms later (players' velocity 7.14 m/s), offsides

The
conclusion then, is that the total time needed for the AR to focus on
at least four different objects in sequential order and process their
positions cognitively is beyond the 100ms that would be needed for an
offensive player to move from an onside position when the ball is
played to a perceived offsides position when the AR finally focuses on
him.
There have been some responses to Maruenda's logic, mainly
centered on the fact that ARs have long known they can't watch the ball
and the last defender, so they instead listen for the sound of the ball
being struck while staying focused on the line of defense. This method
may be used, but the sound of the crowd, the muted sound of the boot on
the ball and the slower speed of sound may also have an effect on this
judgement.
There is technology being developed to make offsides
calls with multiple cameras, etc., but FIFA is not in favor of taking
the flag away from the AR yet, just as they are against obvious goal
line technology to watch for goals. It appears the debates and
arguments will live on for the near future.
![]()
Source: Belda Maruenda, F. (2004). Can the human eye detect an offside position during a football match?. BMJ, 329(7480), 1470-1472. DOI: 10.1136/bmj.329.7480.1470
Post A Comment
You need to be signed into istadia.com to post comments
If you are not a member yet, registering is quick and easy! Click here for Quick Registration and keep up to date with what is happening, engage in some networking and access to iStadia’s expert community.
However if you are a sport & exercise professional or business and would like to promote yourself by building a detailed, search-engine friendly profile and posting content to attract potential clients, customers or employers, we recommend Full Registration.

Comments
Rob Robson
iStadia - Networking for Sport & Exercise Community