A goal. A roar. Then silence. Nothing kills football’s joy like a goal ruled offside. In the VAR era, fine margin offside calls have become routine and increasingly controversial. But what if the problem isn’t just the technology, but the rule itself? Arsene Wenger thinks it’s time for a change.

The former Arsenal manager and now FIFA’s Chief of Global Football Development is pushing to rewrite the offside law: an attacker would be onside if any part of their scoring body is level with the last defender. A small tweak on paper, but one that could reshape the game.

The Offside Rule

Under the current FA Rules, an attacker is considered offside if any scoring body part – the head, body, or feet – is beyond the last defender at the moment the ball is played, and they become involved in the attacking play [1].

Historically, offside decisions were solely made in real-time by assistant referees using their own judgment, with marginal decisions often resolved in favour of the attacker. It was an imperfect but human process, with an acceptance that the speed of football made absolute precision impossible.

VAR: Promise and Problems

VAR (video assistant referee) was introduced to eliminate “clear and obvious” errors. In many areas, it has succeeded – correcting red cards, confirming penalties, and identifying missed incidents. But when it comes to offside, it has created a new kind of problem.

With the arrival of VAR, offside decisions have become rigidly forensic. Rulings are now based on still images frozen at the supposed moment the ball is played, with razor-thin lines manually drawn across the screen to judge whether a player is marginally offside. And in this forensic approach, attackers no longer receive the benefit of the doubt, with countless decisions being made that defy the spirit of the game. In 2020, Leeds striker Patrick Bamford had a goal ruled out against Crystal Palace because he extended his arm to indicate where he wanted the ball [2]. VAR judged the outstretched arm offside.

***Figure 1****: Patrick Bamford called offside. Source: Premier League via SportsJOE (7 November 2020).*

The decision, though technically correct, was hailed “the worst decision in the history of football” [3]. Ex-England striker Gary Lineker lamented, “That's another ridiculous VAR offside decision. I actually loathe the way it's being implemented” [4].

While offside rulings have historically involved elements of discretion, VAR has significantly narrowed this space for judgment in favour of rigid rule enforcement. In cases like Bamford’s, decisions are no longer shaped by the flow or context of play, but by forensic measurements. The system applies the law with mathematical precision, even where the margin provides no tactical advantage. Such decisions signal a shift in officiating philosophy: from interpreting the dynamics of play to enforcing the letter of the law with inflexible precision, often at the expense of fairness, flow, and logic.

Wenger’s Solution

Wenger’s proposed rule change is built around a return to attacking fairness. Under this new rule, if any part of the body that can score is in line with the last defender, the player is onside [5]. This would reverse the trend toward ever-narrower offside calls and restore the benefit of the doubt to the attacker. Figure 2 illustrates the proposed changes to the offside rule, showing what will now be considered onside and offside under Wenger’s reform. The attacking player is shown in yellow.

***Figure 2****: Wenger’s proposed offside rule. Source: 433 via* X (17 November 2023).

Wenger’s proposal isn’t without precedent. Following the notoriously low-scoring 1990 World Cup – the lowest in modern history at 2.21 goals per game – FIFA amended the offside law [6]. The amendment changed the rule so that a player would be onside if they were level with the last defender, rather than needing to be behind them [7]. The change was brought with a clear intention of promoting attacking football. Wenger, however, argues that “with VAR, this advantage disappeared” [8]. His proposed rule is a modern extension of that earlier reform: it aims to promote attacking football by ensuring marginal calls no longer penalise attackers unfairly.

What Would Change?

If implemented, the “Wenger rule” could have several major impacts in theory:

More goals: Marginal offsides would no longer erase quality attacks, encouraging risk and creativity.
Less controversy: Wider margins would reduce hairline calls and rebuild trust in officiating.
Tactical shifts: Defenders may drop deeper, rely more on positioning, and use the offside trap less aggressively.

FIFA has already begun trialling the rule in lower-tier competitions [9].

The Risks of Reform

Not everyone is convinced. Critics – including former Liverpool player Jamie Carragher – warn that Wenger’s proposal could backfire, forcing teams to “defend completely differently” by dropping deeper, compressing space, and encouraging more negative, reactive football [10]. This could in fact lead to fewer goals as defences adjust to address the advantage now paid to attackers. Early trials of the rule have done little to ease those concerns, with no clear evidence that the switch will bring more goals [11].

The numbers weaken the case for change; goals are not in short supply. A record 1,246 goals were scored in the 2023/24 Premier League season, breaking the previous year’s total of 1,084 [12]. If the aim is to increase scoring, the current rule may already be delivering.

Conclusion: Where to draw the line?

Wenger’s proposed reform doesn’t seek to abandon technology; it asks whether the current application of the offside law truly reflects the spirit of the game. While some see his solution as a necessary correction to rigid VAR interpretations, others fear it could distort defensive structure and give attackers too much advantage.

At its core, the debate extends beyond technical accuracy and into broader questions of regulatory design. Should officiating frameworks prioritise precision and consistency, even at the expense of fluidity? Or should they accommodate a degree of uncertainty to preserve the attacking nature of the game?

As football continues to evolve, lawmakers face a delicate balancing act. Whether Wenger’s rule strikes that balance remains to be seen.

References:

[1] ‘Law 11 – Offside’ The Football Association (Web Page) https://www.thefa.com/football-rules-governance/lawsandrules/laws/football-11-11/law-11---offside

[2] 'Did Leeds United striker have a goal ruled out for pointing?’ (BBC Sport, 7 November 2020) https://www.bbc.com/sport/football/54855596.

[3] Ibid

[4] Ibid

[5] Dale Johnson 'Wenger eyes "daylight" offside law "in one year"' (ESPN, 18 October 2023) https://www.espn.com/soccer/story/_/id/45036690/arsene-wenger-eyes-changes-daylight-offside-law-one-year.

[6] Tom Mallows 'Arsene Wenger proposes daylight change to offside rule' (BBC Sport, 8 May 2025) https://www.bbc.com/sport/football/articles/cvgngqen0jgo

[7] Ibid

[8] Ibid

[9] Ibid

[10] Megan Feringa, ‘Jamie Carragher fumes at Arsene Wenger’s radical change to offside law’ (The Mirror, 23 May 2024) https://www.mirror.co.uk/sport/football/news/arsene-wenger-offside-jamie-carragher-32873523.

[11] Johnson (n 7)

[12] Feringa (n 12)

The Offside Rule on Trial: Wenger’s Push for Reform

Blindsided: Lachie Schultz, AFL Concussion Policy, and the Gap Between Rule and Reality