> In the case originally mentioned, the attacking player was clearly on-side
> as dictated by the LOTG. No discretion is given to the referee in calling
> this - the LOTG are clear on the issue. Calling off-side is not applying the
> SOTG, rather is is breaking the LOTG.
Yes, I think we're on the same page, however ask yourself why
there is no specific section in LOTG dealing with a legitimately
injured player keeping an opponent onside. Is it because IFAB
(a) have considerd this case and deliberately want the injured
player to be counted as a defender, or (b) because they try to
keep everything brief and not go into all possible rare situations,
in the expectation that the referee will apply SOTG over LOTG when
the situation warrants?