There is no new offside rule in force: under the current Laws of the Game, an attacker can be offside when involved in play from an offside position as a teammate plays the ball. FIFA has discussed a proposed change, often called the daylight offside rule, but a proposal or trial is not the same as a rule change.
Here’s what the current law says, how the proposal would work, and who has to approve a change before it reaches major competitions. You’ll also learn why VAR debates do not mean the offside rule itself has changed, and what to watch for in future announcements.
What the current offside rule says
The short answer to will fifa change the offside rule is that a change has been proposed, but the current offside law remains in effect unless the authorized rulemaking process adopts a revision. At present, an attacker is penalized for offside only if they are in an offside position when a teammate plays or touches the ball and then become involved in active play.
An attacker is in an offside position if any part of their head, body, or feet is in the opponents’ half and nearer to the opponents’ goal line than both the ball and the second-last opponent. The halfway line does not count: being level with it is onside. The arms and hands are not counted when judging offside, including for the goalkeeper.
Being in an offside position is not an offense by itself. The player must also affect play, interfere with an opponent, or gain an advantage from a rebound or deflection, as defined by the law. If a player stays out of the action, the assistant referee may correctly allow play to continue even though that player was standing beyond the defense.
When the referee judges the position
The relevant moment is when a teammate plays or touches the ball, not when the receiver controls it. If the passer delays a pass, the receiver’s position is assessed at the later touch. A forward who is onside at that instant can run beyond the defenders and receive the pass legally.
Being level with the second-last opponent is onside. The law does not require the attacker to have a full step of space. This is why close calls can turn on a small difference in the positions of eligible body parts.
When offside does not apply
A player cannot be penalized for receiving the ball directly from a goal kick, throw-in, or corner kick. These exceptions do not mean a player can ignore the rest of the law after the ball has been touched by a teammate. Once play develops, ordinary offside decisions apply.
Why people are asking about a rule change
Many close offside decisions are difficult to accept because a player may be ruled offside when only a small part of an eligible body is beyond the defender. Video review can make that marginal difference visible, but it can also make decisions feel overly precise compared with the flow of a match.
That debate has led to a proposed alternative commonly called daylight offside. It is associated with Arsène Wenger, FIFA’s chief of global football development, who has advocated changing the threshold. The key idea is to give attackers more room rather than treating a very small overlap as offside.
It is important to separate three things: a person proposing a change, a competition testing a change, and a change becoming part of the Laws of the Game. Headlines about a proposal or a trial do not, on their own, change the rules used in professional matches.
How the daylight offside proposal would work
Under the commonly described version of the proposal, an attacker would be offside only when their whole body, or the relevant scoring parts of it, were beyond the second-last opponent when the ball was played. If any eligible part of the attacker remained level with or behind the defender, the attacker would be onside.
That reverses the practical effect of many current marginal calls. Today, an attacker can be offside if a scoring part of their body is beyond the defender, even by a small amount. Under the proposed threshold, the attacker would need to be clearly beyond the defender before being penalized.
The precise wording and application would depend on the version formally approved for testing or adoption. A proposal is not a complete set of match instructions. Referees would need a clear definition of which body parts count, how positions are measured, and how the rule applies to rebounds and other phases of play.
| Question | Current law | Daylight proposal | Practical takeaway |
|---|---|---|---|
| How far beyond a defender must the attacker be? | A qualifying part of the head, body, or feet can be beyond the second-last opponent. | The attacker would need to be entirely beyond the opponent under the commonly described version. | The proposal gives attackers more margin. |
| Is a player penalized just for standing offside? | No. The player must become involved in active play. | The active-involvement requirement would still matter. | Position and involvement are separate tests. |
| Does it remove VAR? | No. VAR may assist with eligible decisions under competition rules. | No. Video review could still be used to assess the changed threshold. | A law change would not automatically end video review. |
| Is it in force in major competitions? | This is the standard rule unless the competition applies an authorized trial. | A proposal or trial is not a universal change. | Check the competition’s official rules before assuming a change applies. |
Who can change the offside law?
FIFA has a major role in international soccer, but it does not change the Laws of the Game on its own. The International Football Association Board, usually called IFAB, is responsible for maintaining and amending those Laws. Its members include FIFA and the four British football associations.
A proposed change can be discussed, developed, and tested before it is considered for wider adoption. IFAB may authorize trials to see how an alternative works in real matches. Trial results can inform later decisions, but a trial applies only to the competitions and conditions specified for it.
For a rule change to become part of the Laws, IFAB must approve it through its formal process. Competitions then apply the updated law according to the implementation arrangements. So, a FIFA announcement about research or a test should not be treated as proof that every league will immediately use a new offside standard.
Would a new rule make VAR decisions easier?
It might reduce the number of calls decided by a tiny attacker-defender overlap, but it would not make every decision simple. Officials would still have to identify the moment a teammate played the ball, locate the second-last opponent, assess involvement, and determine whether the player gained an advantage from a rebound or deflection.
VAR is a review method, not the offside law itself. Video officials use available camera views and competition procedures to assist with certain decisions. If the law’s threshold changed, video officials would apply the new threshold; the presence of VAR would not decide what the law should be.
Another common misconception is that VAR draws a line from a player’s feet in every case. The offside judgment concerns the eligible parts of the attacker and opponent, not the arm. The technology and graphics used to illustrate a decision can differ by competition, and a broadcast image may not show every detail considered by officials.
What would change for players, coaches, and fans?
If a daylight-style rule were adopted, attackers would likely have more freedom to time forward runs close to the defensive line. Defenders might need to hold a deeper line or adjust how they coordinate movement, because a narrow gap between an attacker and defender would no longer necessarily produce an offside decision.
Coaches would also need to update training examples. Under the current law, players are taught to keep an eligible body part level with the second-last opponent at the moment the pass is made. Under a different threshold, the timing and positioning cues could change. The exact coaching advice would depend on the final law text.
For fans, the main adjustment would be learning that an attacker who appears just ahead of a defender may still be onside under a wider margin. Clear communication would matter. If a trial or revision is introduced, officials and leagues would need to explain the rule and its start date to avoid confusion.
How to tell whether a change is actually in force
Use the official status, not a headline, as your guide. A story may report that FIFA is considering an idea, that IFAB has approved an experiment, or that one competition is testing a version. Those are different stages and do not necessarily alter the standard rule used elsewhere.
- Look for formal approval. Check whether IFAB has announced an amendment to the Laws, rather than a discussion or proposal.
- Check the scope. If an announcement describes a trial, find out which competitions and age groups it covers.
- Confirm the start date. An approved change may take effect at a specified point, rather than immediately in every match.
- Read the actual wording. A short description such as daylight offside may simplify details that matter to referees and players.
This check is especially useful when watching competitions in different countries or age groups. A trial can coexist with the standard law elsewhere, so seeing one unusual decision does not prove that soccer has adopted a global change.
What remains unchanged unless a revision is approved
Until an authorized amendment applies, the basic process remains the same: judge the attacker’s position when a teammate plays or touches the ball, then decide whether the attacker becomes involved in active play. A player level with the second-last opponent is onside, and the arms and hands are not used to judge the position.
Also remember that the goalkeeper is not automatically the last opponent for offside purposes. The relevant reference is the second-last opponent, whoever that happens to be. If the goalkeeper has moved forward, another defender may be the final opponent closest to the goal line.
The practical point many explanations miss is that a close position does not automatically mean a flag should be raised. The assistant referee must consider involvement as well as position, and in some competitions the referee may allow an attack to continue while a possible offside is reviewed. A still image of a player near the defense may not show the decisive moment or the later involvement.
For now, the current offside law remains the standard: position is judged when a teammate plays the ball, and an offside-positioned player must become involved before an offense occurs. The daylight proposal would give attackers more room, but discussion or testing is not the same as a universal rule change.
Before relying on a claim that the rule has changed, check for formal IFAB approval and confirm which competitions and dates it covers. That simple step helps separate an active rule from a proposal or a limited trial.