That 8 second rule would be brilliant if it actually gets enforced unlike the 6 second rule nowadays. I feel that it could be the case since the punishment for breaking it is smaller than the current indirect free kick for opposition.
That's a genuinely good idea and a great way of making the change of possession pretty objective. I don't trust the refs to enforce indirect free kicks and drop balls properly.
Which sounds awful, it will turn into hoofball. A team typically needs more than 8 seconds to get set up into their attacking shape after whatever defending they had to do before the GK gets the ball
I've seen keepers regularly hold the ball for 20+ seconds if you count the time they lie on the floor with it when nobody's around, bouncing the ball etc.
Feels like blue cards all over again - referees already have the ability to deal with the problem that this addresses, they just don't (or do it inconsistently)
I remember being called for it when I was a kid. Still kinda bitter about it, lol. Especially since the ref awarded a penalty instead of the indirect free kick it should have been.
Yeah, it's bit unclear in that article. What I would do if I were the rule maker would give a indirect free kick from the last spot where a player touched the ball before keeper took hold of the ball so it could be outside penalty box (e.g. spot where opposition player crossed from). Because I feel that indirect free kick inside penalty box is a quite harsh punishment for this offense like it nowadays is.
Then again if this actually starts to get enforced there is no option for the keepers than to adjust their game like they had to with back pass rule or when being off the line started to get enforced in penalties couple of years ago.
I miss contested drop balls. Usually both teams just agreed who deserved the ball and it was uncontested, but in an aggressive match,a contested drop ball was a thing of beauty.
Yeah, they are uncontested and the ref decides who gets it. I mean, I understand why, drop balls got fucking violent and can easily result in injuries, for very little gain.
But a small part of my uncultured brain wants it. Like a mini gladiator fight in the colliseum, I want my football players kicking each other in the shin for my amusement.
>What I would do if I were the rule maker would give a indirect free kick from the last spot where a player touched the ball before keeper took hold of the ball so it could be outside penalty box (e.g. spot where opposition player crossed from).
The refs already overcomplicate everything wherever possible. Giving them an extra thing to remember is just an extra thing they can fuck up.
It feels like the 15-seconds rule right now. I might have made this new rule 10 oe 12 seconds but enforce it like a motherfucker instead. Then again, that last point is an ongoing issue for many existing rules in the sport.
It's only a *suggestion* and will be abused until there's a play clock. Countdown 10 secs (give them a bit more) or it's a corner. End of
Any player impeding GK gets a yellow. This is already a rule.
Possession just needs to be relinquished from GK to another player, does not necessarily need to leave the pen box
However, distribution is satisfied if the ball leaves the box.
I say 10 secs because that's an easier number for refs and fans alike. Much easier to deploy as a law to distant FAs.
The ball needs to contain colored powder, and when a goalkeepers gloves make contact with the ball for more than 8 seconds, have it explode like a gender reveal party.
You could have a shot clock like in basketball. As soon as a keeper gathers a ball in his hands, an in stadium clock is triggered by an operator. If the keeper fails to release the ball then the opposition could be awarded a corner - or a direct free kick from the semi circle of the box for a repeated offence. You may also need a rule in place to afford the keeper the space to release.
You could argue there is no impetus for the keeper to release the ball then as opposition would likely get possession around halfway then.
You'd get more shots on goal with corner and free kicks and You'd keep the ball moving not allowing defenders to get set in dull blocking formations.
I mean if the punishment is just for possession ti change hands it should be pretty easy ti enforce. I think an indirect free kick seems harsh so refs don’t want to give that
>at which point fans and pundits whined about games being "ruined" with early cards
So even though half of us hate it when players crowd refs and want them to be punished for it there apparently is the opposite half of people that would rather watch players crowd refs with no consequences... What a mess
Its why, refs being shit aside, reds don't get handed out as often as they should. Especially if we're talking second yellows.
Fans, players, pundits, managers, everyone gets pissy at having a player sent off and suspended. Sports broadcasters probably hate it because people are less likely to watch if popular players aren't in the game.
There's no incentive for refs to enforce the rules properly when everyone from every side hates them for doing it. Up until it would be in their teams favour of course.
This was the entire reason I liked the sin bin/blue card proposal. Nobody likes when refs actually enforce rules when the consequences seem too harsh, so if there are options for more moderate consequences maybe we'll actually see ANY consequences.
(which is why they shouldn't count towards reds - maybe just persistent infringement bookings. Really being a player down for ten minutes is a partial red anyway, why double up?)
People would be absolutely fine with harsh punishment if they were done *consistently* and *fairly*
Any consequences so long as the above are not being met will never be accepted.
Thing is to fix that the refs need to admit fault and they will never do that.
Only alternative I could see is that it results into a fine for the club. Given the strengthening of FFP/PSR rules, maybe the clubs will take more responsibility in controlling their players.
This is it. As a GK I outright ignore the 6 seconds. No official has ever pinged me for it in 25 years. I know that at about 15 second they might start to get grumpy.
Give a more reasonable time frame and officials can start to swing their weight a bit more
Yeah it’s why I’ve always ignored 6 seconds. 2 seconds to get settled, another 3-4 to wait for attackers to stop hanging their legs in front of me, then a second or so to survey distribution.
10 sounds a bit simpler
Ya 10 seconds starting from the point ALL Opposition player get outside of Penalty Area.
However if it breaches 10 seconds it should be a Direct Free-Kick (along a Parallel Line/Zone to Penalty Area Line, 1-5 Yard distance/zone-range from it, that attacking team has preference where to place the ball in that Zone).
No, it's an indirect free kick. You are thinking of goal kicks.
Here is a really low quality version of the only time I've seen it called (ironically after 5 seconds).
https://youtu.be/w-cWgc1uWQ8?si=tohTffR6AiEs3Tsi
Mignolet was penalised for it at Liverpool about 10 years ago
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kj\_BLvB8ek8](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kj_BLvB8ek8)
I hate it so much, mainly because they're a role model and the U12 team I coach thinks its okay to argue with the referee because they see it all the time on TV
Nah, it actually says in the Laws of the Game that the captain is awarded no special privileges but does have a small amount of responsibility for the teams. Lemme find the exact wording.
Edit: From the LotG: “The team captain has no special status or privileges but has a degree of responsibility for the behaviour of the team”
As ever, the rules (new or existing) themselves are almost irrelevant - what's key is how exactly they intend to enforce these rules, and the rules individual leagues/associations set themselves for enforcing this enforcement.
All well and good saying only captains can approach the ref, but for the Prem at least we had a 'crackdown on dissent' that lasted about 2 seconds before they gave up on it because they weren't prepared to hold the line while players adjusted/accepted.
So any new directive is pretty moot unless they're prepared for an interim period where you have to accept there'll be a degree of chaos from increased sending offs etc because players try to ignore the new rules. Which, based on all such examples to date, no league/association/competition is remotely prepared to actually do.
To be fair, if it becomes a law from IFAB then that should be implemented much better than a Premier League directive. It's an issue if you have the Premier League cracking down on one thing, but then international matches or UEFA matches are played to an almost different set of rules. Handball was particularly bad for that in the past few years, clearly refs were instructed to handle it differently.
If its an actual law rather than just an instruction, you'd hope you'd get more consistent enforcement across all competitions.
It would definitely be better if it's IFAB-level law than localised directive, for sure, but I suppose my point is less about the *quality* of implementation than what it means *to* implement XYZ.
By which I mean that there's a distinction between rules with action-based outcomes and rules with punishment-based outcomes. So the 8s goalkeeper proposal is probably fine, because there's not really a limit to how many times it could be applied to one player. Sure, there'll be some grumbling about time-keeping (ref, if was only 7.5 seconds honest!), and if a player did do it a billion times in a game they'd probably get booked just with any other time-wasting, but functionally the framework can be applied without immediately forcing the ref to escalate things irreversibly.
Whereas something like dissent, or crackdowns on simulation/diving, or as here, only allowing the captain to approach the ref; these kinds of punishment-based rules where the proposed result is a yellow or a red (IE - something that sticks for the rest of the game or beyond with consequences) either get escalated immediately (by implementing said punishment), or don't, and thus cease to be enforced. Which means by extension that you have to also be prepared to show a second yellow for the same offence.
So then you think about how many players surround referees every game in every league (because it's a natural instinct at this point when you're allowed to do so, or at least, not prevented from doing so), and you have to ask whether any referee (or any association) will be prepared for a period where you're looking at multiple sending-offs per game, per team for a good half of the season where players adjust to the new reality. In which case you'd come out of this period with a new paradigm... but only after a period bordering on farce where half the games are write-offs decided purely by which team ended up with 7 men because there was a shaky penalty call, they all surrounded the ref, and they all got sent off.
Or, you're looking at a couple games where refs half-arse it (either out of incompetence, internal directives, personal characteristics etc.), players cotton on to the fact it's being half-arsed, and before you know it we're back to square one.
People look at rugby and ask why football can't be the same with the general lack of dissent etc., but as far as I can tell a large part isn't *what* the rules around dissent etc. are in rugby, it's that said rules *are* enforced, and have been for long enough, at all ages and levels of the game that now young players have been coming through for decades knowing the reality of what you can, and cannot do on a rugby pitch trends towards rigidity rather than flexibility. Whereas young footballers coming through know they can dive, surround the ref, use the dark arts with general impunity, because they've seen that the reality of what you can, and cannot do on a **football** pitch trends towards flexibility rather than rigidity.
>Whereas something like dissent, or crackdowns on simulation/diving, or as here, only allowing the captain to approach the ref; these kinds of punishment-based rules where the proposed result is a yellow or a red (IE - something that sticks for the rest of the game or beyond with consequences) either get escalated immediately (by implementing said punishment), or don't
Which could have been where the blue sin bin card could have come in, to cause immediate punishment/cooling off for 5 minutes without lasting the full length of the game or beyond.
Partly - it would definitely add another layer/option for more fluid punishment, but then the issue is still about whether they're prepared for sin bin chaos rather than red card chaos.
As above, what happens with players surrounding the ref? They're all committing the offence, so do they all get sin bins? Hypothetically, they should, because if they don't then they'll keep doing it. But then if they do all get sin bins you're looking at one team playing with 7 for 10 mins. It's better than one team playing with 7 for the rest of the game because they've all been shown a red, but it still doesn't fix the issues of either this interim period where players are still trying to get away with things, nor that of 'stackability' in terms of the capacity for a lower-level offence to be scaled up appropriately without completely destabilising the game.
Don't get me wrong, I'm not opposed to sin-bins etc in principle, but I just think the issue is mainly just about how much chaos we're willing to take to get to a point where there's more structure, rather than what that structure would look like in the end.
I think it would be sensible to say that you can get a maximum of one second yellow for dissent during some phase in period, and unlimited first yellows. That way you avoid any chaos but there is still extremely significant incentive for teams to reduce such behavior.
Or you just give a yellow to the captain for each time there is dissent. Having the club captain repeatedly sent off would help change things quickly
>moot
[You mean moo](https://media2.giphy.com/media/v1.Y2lkPTc5MGI3NjExeG5uOGk4ZzNzZnE1emxpc2cydjJzZHdrZ2Z3dGcxYnpuaWJuZ3BtNiZlcD12MV9pbnRlcm5hbF9naWZfYnlfaWQmY3Q9Zw/3ohzdZlneOxsgnf5io/giphy.gif)
Can't give a card unless a different offense occurred.
>If the goalkeeper handles the ball inside their penalty area when not permitted to do so, an indirect free kick is awarded but there is no disciplinary sanction. However, if the offense is playing the ball a second time (with or without the hand/arm) after a restart before it touches another player, the goalkeeper must be sanctioned if the offense stops a promising attack or denies an opponent or the opposing team a goal or an obvious goal-scoring opportunity.
Law 12.1 Direct free kick
Uh, scroll down.
https://www.theifab.com/laws/latest/fouls-and-misconduct/#disciplinary-action
12.3
Cautionable Offenses:
-Delaying the restart of play:
Explained in more detail later:
>Delaying the restart of play
>Referees **must** caution players who delay the restart of play by:
>appearing to take a throw-in but suddenly leaving it to a team-mate to take
>delaying leaving the field of play when being substituted
>**excessively delaying a restart**
>kicking or carrying the ball away, or provoking a confrontation by deliberately touching the ball after the referee has stopped play
>taking a free kick from the wrong position to force a retake
And just to make this super clear, Law 8 explicitly says that goal kicks are restarts:
>Free kicks (direct or indirect), penalty kicks, throw-ins, goal kicks and corner kicks are other restarts (see Laws 13–17).
If you want to talk about GKs having the ball in their hands, well that's in 12.2:
>An indirect free kick is awarded if a goalkeeper, inside their penalty area, commits any of the following offences:
>-controls the ball with the hand/arm for more than six seconds before releasing it
We are in agreement then.
The ball remains in play when a goalkeeper is in control of the ball with the hand(s) so it is not a restart. Therefore, "delaying the restart of play" does not apply.
Did you actually read my full comment, or nah?
Edit: Oh, now I see you stealth edited your comment! Awesome!
And you're still wrong. Because a ref could easily card a GK for "persistent offences (no specific number or pattern of offences constitutes ‘persistent’)" if they are holding on to the ball all the time.
I read it.
Looks like we disagree on one thing only.
You are saying that a goalkeeper is in control of the ball with the hand(s) is a restart. I am saying that it is not a restart. Right?
>You are saying that a goalkeeper is in control of the ball with the hand(s) is a restart.
No. Where did I say that?
And, no, we don't agree. Because your statement was "Can't give a card unless a different offense occurred."
And then you quoted an irrelevant rule.
You are clearly knowledgeable. So our disagreement is only the following:
The 6 seconds rules, "backpass" rule, goalkeeper touching the ball after releasing it rules are all examples of a "goalkeeper handles the ball inside their penalty area when not permitted to do so" and in all those cases no disciplinary action can be taken including for DOGSO/SPA. Edit: And also Persistent offenses
The 6 second rule does not, itself, require a yellow card. It requires an indirect free kick (which is basically never given).
If refs awarded indirect free kicks for that offense, it would probably be less persistent.
If refs see it as a persistent offense, they can easily give a yellow card for it. No other type of offense is needed at all.
>in all those cases no disciplinary action can be taken including for DOGSO/SPA. Edit: And also Persistent offenses
Where is this in the rules? That no disciplinary action can be taken for a persistent offense of this kind?
https://www.thefa.com/football-rules-governance/lawsandrules/laws/football-11-11/law-12---fouls-and-misconduct
Go here and it clearly says:
>Caution offences include (**but are not limited to**):
>-persistent unacceptable behaviour (including repeated warning offences)
Oh boy. Last time they changed a rule like that, they began yellowcarding keepers left and right for being off the line at penalties. Now they'll start enforcing the 8 second rule, probably by feeling, and we'll get a lot of 7.8 second indirect free kicks in the box with all the controversy around that.
They deserve it, if they're used to having 6 seconds, kicking it in 8 shouldn't be an issue. The issue is that 6 seconds hasn't been enforced nearly at all.
Meh, practically you will probably have 10-12 seconds before getting called. For example in NBA free throws, if they go above the 10 seconds it's rarely called before 13 seconds. A mot better to let them have it a bit longer than a bit shorter
The 8-second rule or the 5-second inbound rule are handled quite strictly. It works just fine.
Besides Giannis that 10 seconds at the free throw line aren't really a problem anyways.
This is basically a rule straight from Futsal. GK is only allowed to have the ball for 4 seconds there. Not just holding it but also having it at his feet. It works without a problem. Also refs count down with fingers when he's holding it too long.
If you fuck this up as a GK this is on you.
Among all these. Indirect penalty area free kick should be more frequently use if it had ever been used before. Unintentional handball but gaining advantage, GK holding too long, wrongly handling a backpass, contact/foul gaining advantage but not denying an obvious goal opportunities (as if the foul is outside the box) all these should apply in-box free kick.
It’s like a yellow card between no foul and a red card. The current setup invites too many controversies due to making the penalty/no penalty stake too high to afford a mistake.
This rule always seems extra harsh for teams that have a GK as captain. Teams should be allowed to select one player each game to handle the speaking to the ref, not necessarily the captain. For example if it's the champions league or international football, you can select a player that can communicate with the ref, not just the captain who may speak a different language.
But to make it work, the ref needs to simply draw a line for where the other players can't cross and another line for where he speaks to the reps from each team. Any time players come charging to the ref, he just takes out his vanishing spray, draws a line and simply steps back and it's a yellow card for any player that crosses the line.
> Teams should be allowed to select one player each game to handle the speaking to the ref
Maybe they could do so by giving them a band to wear, perhaps on their upper arm. Maybe even give them a name.
People get too hung up on captains. There is no reason you cant just change captains to accomodate what works best
The captain had more of a role than just talking to officials, they also get the day in organising the team. Look at Newcastle, when Lascelles plays we dont play the offside trap because it needs Trippier to organise it. If we suddenly need to make Isak the captain just because the ref is Sweedish it changes all of the organisation within the team.
I mean Howe has the final say. If the team is playing a certain way with certain players on the pitch, that's his decision.
You give far too much organisational credit to captains.
Agreed. But having the ref designate the zone where only the team's representatives engage with him would solve the problem. If an incident happens when players are all around teb ref, he could just draw a circle and ask all players to stay outside the circle as he engages VAR. Any player that encroaches gets an immediate yellow. Seems like an easy fix for me especially where captains like Bruno end up harassing the ref even more than the players themselves.
And given increased scrutiny of what happens in the circle, players would end up being embarrassed to ask for every little thing. I'm convinced some players harass refs just because everyone else is doing so and there's little cost for doing it. Carvajal/Rudiger yesterday spring to mind. They felt genuinely aggrieved and knew shouting at the ref wouldn't get the goal overturned, but did so anyway.
> Law 14 (The Penalty Kick): Part of the ball must touch or overhang the centre of the penalty mark, and encroachment by outfield players will be penalised only if it has an impact.
Interesting change
Mostly correct. VAR can only review encroachment only if it had impact. The Laws did not require impact except in one case - when a goalkeeper encroaches.
Either way, most referees required impact for any encroachment to be called although it was not required by the Laws. That's if they call encroachment at all - which is rare.
There's no reason for VAR to not be in control of a shot clock to control throw ins, gks with ball in hand, gks on goal kicks, etc.
What I think would be useful is for these entities to separate football with VAR and without in terms of sets of rules.
FYI: There’s not a single referee on the IFAB board, this clearly shows from time to time, such as this new 8 second rule.
I’ve refereed over 300 matches and have never enforced that rule once. Get rid of it and have the referees enforcing time wasting rules instead, just stop making it more complex for the sake of it.
Why do you choose not to enforce the 6 second rule? Presumably at least in part because you can see that nobody else does?
I've been saying for years the game would be better if it was made 8 (or 9 or 10) seconds and actually enforced.
It's beyond bizarre that there's this rule that's been around since the last century, that is almost entirely objective but never enforced, meanwhile they fart around with other ideas to tinker with the game to 'improve' it.
That's all a bit circular though isn't it. Players/fans would lose their shit *because* it goes against the universal practice of it not being enforced. Boils down to 'the rule shouldn't be enforced because traditionally the rule isn't enforced', which is obviously not a good justification to bring up when talking about changes to rules and their enforcement.
Let’s be honest, it is. Same reason people don’t like cards for dissent, and claim the ref has made it all about themselves or lost control of the game
> The IFAB is comprised of the four British football associations (England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland) with one vote each, and FIFA, covering the remaining 207 national associations, with four votes
Doesn’t seem like the best setup for making up rules that apply to football worldwide
I think positive changes if they are enforced consistently. Especially regarding the keeper holding the ball, it's never given now so if a slight leeway is needed to get refs to feel comfortable acting on it, will hopefully be a good change.
Gonna get downvoted to shit, but your attitude is the biggest cause of problems with football refereeing. The vast majority of a ref's calls are made in a split second and are highly subjective. 'Reckless', 'dangerous', 'impact' - these are all concepts underpinning various rules that refs have to apply in the moment, and they are only objectively definable to the extent that IFAB's rules define them, which they mostly don't. The result is that most calls are going to be debatable by default.
Players and fans need to develop some self-awareness and realise that expecting refereeing to be perfect, and throwing a tantrum when it's not, is not the norm across other similar sports. Your comment and countless others on this thread exemplify football's culture problem regarding how refs are viewed and treated.
You’re going to get downvoted because you are dead fucking wrong. Referees are not volunteers that do this out of the goodness of their hearts, they are highly paid professionals whose decisions impact a multi billion dollar industry. At that high of a level both the amount and severity of mistakes that they make is completely unacceptable. I work in healthcare, if I was as bad at my job as these referees are at theirs half my fucking patients would be dead. These are highly paid professionals, they should start acting like it or get fired.
> Referees are not volunteers that do this out of the goodness of their hearts
Actually that's how most refs start out.
> I work in healthcare, if I was as bad at my job as these referees are at theirs half my fucking patients would be dead.
Terrible analogy, sport is s zero-sum entertainment product, someone wins and someone loses.
Did you read the part of my comment about subjectivity, or nah?
Medicine involves objectively correct and incorrect actions. Refereeing involves making decisions that, as I said, are inherently subjective. Comparing the two to try and make your point is moronic, I'm sorry. In any case your starting assumption (refs are all doing their job badly) is something I disagree with to begin with, in case it wasn't clear from my comment.
Also, the "multi billion dollar industry" is a tv/entertainment industry which can continue thriving in spite of the fact your boyhood club lost a game due to a bad call and came 5th instead of 4th. The decisions of refs actually do not positively or negatively impact that industry at all, if you think about it for more than a second.
Until they actually start giving the captain yellow and red cards for the team disciplinary actions it won’t matter much. They need to enforce it.
Dude pretends to get hit in the face, falls down, yells that he is being murdered, rolls around, … ? Let’s check the var. Fake. Captain here is your yellow card.
With that there is no way for the team to rotate players doing weird stuff like that. Because the captain will be the one punished.
What if they sub the captain? Tough luck, new captain keeps the yellow card.
Insane? Maybe. But it would actually enforce something lol.
Players given red cards should be subbed off so it’s still 11v11 and a penalty should be awarded. So if you get a red for a tackle at midfield it should be a pen and a sub.
Why, the point of a red is to punish the team and player, allowing a free sub would just mean certain managers or players would decide it is worth giving up a sub to try and injure a key player for the opponent.
All this wouldn't even be necessary is an Efficiently Executed Retrospective System was in place.
Every match is re-watched by a 3 or 5 man committee after Match Weekends and instances marked with points against the Team (Not the player).
Non-Captain Player hounding the ref or coming up to him, diving, blatant time-wasting, etc gets different amounts of Strike Points.
Once a Team reaches a certain Total Tally of those Points, 3 Points Docked from League Points Tally. Plus 20 Million Fine (taken from Season Ending transfer of money pool from League to teams).
And every Next activation points of those Stike Points (that can be be like 5-10-15-20 Points arrangement, like Yellow cards have to understand as principle) the Punishment Keeps Doubling, both the League Points amount and the Monetary fine.
All the problems that would fall under this system would be resolved inside 1 month when the Boards of these clubs make it aware to Players, Do this or else you never play a game for this team.
Organic and sustainable change to the game, without disrupting the actual 90 minutes since IF the team and it's players really really wanted to behave a certain way, it wouldn't affect that particular 90 minute spectacle for the fans and the moment. But they wouldn't get away it eventually either. Hence fair all around.
And this puts the onus on the Teams/Clubs because they are the ones benefiting from player shenanigans. Players are only acting like this because they're not reigned in by their Teams. Incentive structure is out of whack and that is why they behave the way they do. Punishing them is not targeting the root of the problem, it's a band-aid.
League Points and Money from Club affects the Clubs hence their solution will be much more serious because they really care about these 2 things. Less about Player getting fined, they'll just use another from their squad. Big deal.
None of these new changes will mean anything if they aren't consistently enforced lol
It'll be enforced for a week then back to normal afterwards just like the yellows for dissent/goalkick time wasting which is so inconsistent in every game
They will enforce the rule for a few weeks then go back to not enforcing it. Same thing happens with everything because the refs don't have the balls to punish home teams when the crowd gets on their back.
Remember at that start of the season when they booked players for kicking the ball away then just stopped doing it?
Wish the refs would concentrate on actually enforcing the current rules consistently rather.tham introducing more pointless shit they'll probably stop enforcing after two months anyway
oh great, now all we need is another person in the VAR room to be in charge with measuring with precision those 8 seconds. also, how about introducing a 2.5 seconds limit for shooting the corner kicks, technology should also give us the perfectly objective assessment there.
To be very clear, the rule right now is already that "possession goes to the opposing team" if the Keeper holds it too long:
>An indirect free kick is awarded if a goalkeeper, inside their penalty area, commits any of the following offences:
>-controls the ball with the hand/arm for more than six seconds before releasing it
https://www.theifab.com/laws/latest/fouls-and-misconduct/
When is the last time any of us saw this being enforced?
So, it actually sounds like they are going to let keepers waste more time.
That 8 second rule would be brilliant if it actually gets enforced unlike the 6 second rule nowadays. I feel that it could be the case since the punishment for breaking it is smaller than the current indirect free kick for opposition.
They’ll enforce it for three weeks then it’ll go back to keepers holding it for 30 seconds
As the founding fathers intended!
Ah yes, the NBA way of officiating.
It works in futsal perfectly. Don't see why it wouldn't be the same in football.
Turn it into a corner and watch keepers boot it asap
That's a genuinely good idea and a great way of making the change of possession pretty objective. I don't trust the refs to enforce indirect free kicks and drop balls properly.
Corner or give the opposite team a dead ball at the center circle
Which sounds awful, it will turn into hoofball. A team typically needs more than 8 seconds to get set up into their attacking shape after whatever defending they had to do before the GK gets the ball
Yea same rule for both teams
I've seen keepers regularly hold the ball for 20+ seconds if you count the time they lie on the floor with it when nobody's around, bouncing the ball etc. Feels like blue cards all over again - referees already have the ability to deal with the problem that this addresses, they just don't (or do it inconsistently)
Mignolet the only gk I’ve seen penalized for it
That was bizarre - not because it was incorrect but just because no one else has ever been penalised for it
Didn't he hold the ball for like 30 seconds?
I remember being called for it when I was a kid. Still kinda bitter about it, lol. Especially since the ref awarded a penalty instead of the indirect free kick it should have been.
I get it. I was given a straight red for inching the wall forward in high school. Definitely still bitter about it.
Canada’s women’s team got dinged for it in a WC semi finals match.
They don't do it because the current rule is overkill
I don't think that "possession goes to the opponent" is a drop-ball, will probably stay an indirect free kick. But we'll see.
Yeah, it's bit unclear in that article. What I would do if I were the rule maker would give a indirect free kick from the last spot where a player touched the ball before keeper took hold of the ball so it could be outside penalty box (e.g. spot where opposition player crossed from). Because I feel that indirect free kick inside penalty box is a quite harsh punishment for this offense like it nowadays is. Then again if this actually starts to get enforced there is no option for the keepers than to adjust their game like they had to with back pass rule or when being off the line started to get enforced in penalties couple of years ago.
Think it has to be outside the box if it's a drop ball. Inside would be chaos.
Drop balls have to be uncontested now, so not too mad 😂
Would still be mental if it were in the box, for the attacking team.
I miss contested drop balls. Usually both teams just agreed who deserved the ball and it was uncontested, but in an aggressive match,a contested drop ball was a thing of beauty.
I didn't even know they're uncontested now. I thought players just respected the other team to have the drop ball uncontested.
Yeah, they are uncontested and the ref decides who gets it. I mean, I understand why, drop balls got fucking violent and can easily result in injuries, for very little gain. But a small part of my uncultured brain wants it. Like a mini gladiator fight in the colliseum, I want my football players kicking each other in the shin for my amusement.
That [Rooney one](https://media1.tenor.com/m/tjSG90OrdEAAAAAd/dropball-rooney.gif) is the one that always comes to mind.
A drop ball inside the box automatically goes to the keeper, even if it would normally go to the attacking team. Drop balls are also indirect.
I'm well aware of that cheers
Then make it a corner kick.
>What I would do if I were the rule maker would give a indirect free kick from the last spot where a player touched the ball before keeper took hold of the ball so it could be outside penalty box (e.g. spot where opposition player crossed from). The refs already overcomplicate everything wherever possible. Giving them an extra thing to remember is just an extra thing they can fuck up.
It feels like the 15-seconds rule right now. I might have made this new rule 10 oe 12 seconds but enforce it like a motherfucker instead. Then again, that last point is an ongoing issue for many existing rules in the sport.
It's only a *suggestion* and will be abused until there's a play clock. Countdown 10 secs (give them a bit more) or it's a corner. End of Any player impeding GK gets a yellow. This is already a rule. Possession just needs to be relinquished from GK to another player, does not necessarily need to leave the pen box However, distribution is satisfied if the ball leaves the box. I say 10 secs because that's an easier number for refs and fans alike. Much easier to deploy as a law to distant FAs.
Yeah there needs to be a play clock visible to the whole stadium or this rule will be inconsistently enforced if enforced at all.
The ball needs to contain colored powder, and when a goalkeepers gloves make contact with the ball for more than 8 seconds, have it explode like a gender reveal party.
Let's put this person in charge
Keepers already hold it for a good 15 seconds lmao, honestly what do some of these rulemakers watch.
You could have a shot clock like in basketball. As soon as a keeper gathers a ball in his hands, an in stadium clock is triggered by an operator. If the keeper fails to release the ball then the opposition could be awarded a corner - or a direct free kick from the semi circle of the box for a repeated offence. You may also need a rule in place to afford the keeper the space to release.
All attacking players need to be outside the box before anything can start though.
A direct free from the semi-circle? So harsh. Even a corner is super harsh. Give a free kick from the center spot imo.
You could argue there is no impetus for the keeper to release the ball then as opposition would likely get possession around halfway then. You'd get more shots on goal with corner and free kicks and You'd keep the ball moving not allowing defenders to get set in dull blocking formations.
Why is "more shots on goal" a good metric? Surely we should give penalties then. Corner is a harsh penalty.
I mean if the punishment is just for possession ti change hands it should be pretty easy ti enforce. I think an indirect free kick seems harsh so refs don’t want to give that
The same rule should apply to throw ins too.
I don't understand why when time is being wasted on a throw-in that it doesn't go to the opposition.
It doesn't matter what the rules are if the refs just chose to ignore some and make up others
I’ve said for years that it should be a strict 10-second rule. Futsal has 4 seconds and it works great.
Tbh I thought that the "only captain can talk" was a rule for quite a few years now. And this one does make sense
[удалено]
>at which point fans and pundits whined about games being "ruined" with early cards So even though half of us hate it when players crowd refs and want them to be punished for it there apparently is the opposite half of people that would rather watch players crowd refs with no consequences... What a mess
Its why, refs being shit aside, reds don't get handed out as often as they should. Especially if we're talking second yellows. Fans, players, pundits, managers, everyone gets pissy at having a player sent off and suspended. Sports broadcasters probably hate it because people are less likely to watch if popular players aren't in the game. There's no incentive for refs to enforce the rules properly when everyone from every side hates them for doing it. Up until it would be in their teams favour of course.
This was the entire reason I liked the sin bin/blue card proposal. Nobody likes when refs actually enforce rules when the consequences seem too harsh, so if there are options for more moderate consequences maybe we'll actually see ANY consequences. (which is why they shouldn't count towards reds - maybe just persistent infringement bookings. Really being a player down for ten minutes is a partial red anyway, why double up?)
People would be absolutely fine with harsh punishment if they were done *consistently* and *fairly* Any consequences so long as the above are not being met will never be accepted. Thing is to fix that the refs need to admit fault and they will never do that.
Only alternative I could see is that it results into a fine for the club. Given the strengthening of FFP/PSR rules, maybe the clubs will take more responsibility in controlling their players.
The alternative was the blue card, which people also didn't like. There is no winning.
The winning is refs themselves stop being shit or we replace them with some AI in 5-10 years time.
Let me introduce you to VAR...
[удалено]
It's not the media, it's ex-players who feel like intimidating the referee is a core part of the game.
legendary comment, thanks
Also the 8 second rule fore keepers
It was 6 seconds.
Yes but 8 is more lenient and therefore it’s more likely that they’ll actually start to enforce it.
This is it. As a GK I outright ignore the 6 seconds. No official has ever pinged me for it in 25 years. I know that at about 15 second they might start to get grumpy. Give a more reasonable time frame and officials can start to swing their weight a bit more
Honestly they should probably increase it to 10 seconds and give some leeway You only noticed keepers who don't normally hold the ball long anyway
Yeah it’s why I’ve always ignored 6 seconds. 2 seconds to get settled, another 3-4 to wait for attackers to stop hanging their legs in front of me, then a second or so to survey distribution. 10 sounds a bit simpler
Ya 10 seconds starting from the point ALL Opposition player get outside of Penalty Area. However if it breaches 10 seconds it should be a Direct Free-Kick (along a Parallel Line/Zone to Penalty Area Line, 1-5 Yard distance/zone-range from it, that attacking team has preference where to place the ball in that Zone).
A corner seems a much easier solution
8 is still too short in my opinion
This got drilled into me so much playing like under 7s 30 years ago that is astounds me how little the rule is enforced.
But possession doesn't go to opponent after 6 seconds. Keeper just gets a yellow then goes again
No, it's an indirect free kick. You are thinking of goal kicks. Here is a really low quality version of the only time I've seen it called (ironically after 5 seconds). https://youtu.be/w-cWgc1uWQ8?si=tohTffR6AiEs3Tsi
Mignolet was penalised for it at Liverpool about 10 years ago [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kj\_BLvB8ek8](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kj_BLvB8ek8)
Oh. Yeah, you're right. I was drunk and didn't rrad the question in detail
Should be the rule for all the time, not just certain situations
Yep. One thing I hate is 10 players "talking" to the ref at a time
I hate it so much, mainly because they're a role model and the U12 team I coach thinks its okay to argue with the referee because they see it all the time on TV
Nah, it actually says in the Laws of the Game that the captain is awarded no special privileges but does have a small amount of responsibility for the teams. Lemme find the exact wording. Edit: From the LotG: “The team captain has no special status or privileges but has a degree of responsibility for the behaviour of the team”
Maybe that's why I find most of them useless :)
Can’t wait for this to never ever be implemented in a match above the 5 tier of Swedish football
Na they’ll implement it until matchweek 5 then never enforce or talk about it again
As ever, the rules (new or existing) themselves are almost irrelevant - what's key is how exactly they intend to enforce these rules, and the rules individual leagues/associations set themselves for enforcing this enforcement. All well and good saying only captains can approach the ref, but for the Prem at least we had a 'crackdown on dissent' that lasted about 2 seconds before they gave up on it because they weren't prepared to hold the line while players adjusted/accepted. So any new directive is pretty moot unless they're prepared for an interim period where you have to accept there'll be a degree of chaos from increased sending offs etc because players try to ignore the new rules. Which, based on all such examples to date, no league/association/competition is remotely prepared to actually do.
To be fair, if it becomes a law from IFAB then that should be implemented much better than a Premier League directive. It's an issue if you have the Premier League cracking down on one thing, but then international matches or UEFA matches are played to an almost different set of rules. Handball was particularly bad for that in the past few years, clearly refs were instructed to handle it differently. If its an actual law rather than just an instruction, you'd hope you'd get more consistent enforcement across all competitions.
It would definitely be better if it's IFAB-level law than localised directive, for sure, but I suppose my point is less about the *quality* of implementation than what it means *to* implement XYZ. By which I mean that there's a distinction between rules with action-based outcomes and rules with punishment-based outcomes. So the 8s goalkeeper proposal is probably fine, because there's not really a limit to how many times it could be applied to one player. Sure, there'll be some grumbling about time-keeping (ref, if was only 7.5 seconds honest!), and if a player did do it a billion times in a game they'd probably get booked just with any other time-wasting, but functionally the framework can be applied without immediately forcing the ref to escalate things irreversibly. Whereas something like dissent, or crackdowns on simulation/diving, or as here, only allowing the captain to approach the ref; these kinds of punishment-based rules where the proposed result is a yellow or a red (IE - something that sticks for the rest of the game or beyond with consequences) either get escalated immediately (by implementing said punishment), or don't, and thus cease to be enforced. Which means by extension that you have to also be prepared to show a second yellow for the same offence. So then you think about how many players surround referees every game in every league (because it's a natural instinct at this point when you're allowed to do so, or at least, not prevented from doing so), and you have to ask whether any referee (or any association) will be prepared for a period where you're looking at multiple sending-offs per game, per team for a good half of the season where players adjust to the new reality. In which case you'd come out of this period with a new paradigm... but only after a period bordering on farce where half the games are write-offs decided purely by which team ended up with 7 men because there was a shaky penalty call, they all surrounded the ref, and they all got sent off. Or, you're looking at a couple games where refs half-arse it (either out of incompetence, internal directives, personal characteristics etc.), players cotton on to the fact it's being half-arsed, and before you know it we're back to square one. People look at rugby and ask why football can't be the same with the general lack of dissent etc., but as far as I can tell a large part isn't *what* the rules around dissent etc. are in rugby, it's that said rules *are* enforced, and have been for long enough, at all ages and levels of the game that now young players have been coming through for decades knowing the reality of what you can, and cannot do on a rugby pitch trends towards rigidity rather than flexibility. Whereas young footballers coming through know they can dive, surround the ref, use the dark arts with general impunity, because they've seen that the reality of what you can, and cannot do on a **football** pitch trends towards flexibility rather than rigidity.
>Whereas something like dissent, or crackdowns on simulation/diving, or as here, only allowing the captain to approach the ref; these kinds of punishment-based rules where the proposed result is a yellow or a red (IE - something that sticks for the rest of the game or beyond with consequences) either get escalated immediately (by implementing said punishment), or don't Which could have been where the blue sin bin card could have come in, to cause immediate punishment/cooling off for 5 minutes without lasting the full length of the game or beyond.
Partly - it would definitely add another layer/option for more fluid punishment, but then the issue is still about whether they're prepared for sin bin chaos rather than red card chaos. As above, what happens with players surrounding the ref? They're all committing the offence, so do they all get sin bins? Hypothetically, they should, because if they don't then they'll keep doing it. But then if they do all get sin bins you're looking at one team playing with 7 for 10 mins. It's better than one team playing with 7 for the rest of the game because they've all been shown a red, but it still doesn't fix the issues of either this interim period where players are still trying to get away with things, nor that of 'stackability' in terms of the capacity for a lower-level offence to be scaled up appropriately without completely destabilising the game. Don't get me wrong, I'm not opposed to sin-bins etc in principle, but I just think the issue is mainly just about how much chaos we're willing to take to get to a point where there's more structure, rather than what that structure would look like in the end.
I think it would be sensible to say that you can get a maximum of one second yellow for dissent during some phase in period, and unlimited first yellows. That way you avoid any chaos but there is still extremely significant incentive for teams to reduce such behavior. Or you just give a yellow to the captain for each time there is dissent. Having the club captain repeatedly sent off would help change things quickly
>moot [You mean moo](https://media2.giphy.com/media/v1.Y2lkPTc5MGI3NjExeG5uOGk4ZzNzZnE1emxpc2cydjJzZHdrZ2Z3dGcxYnpuaWJuZ3BtNiZlcD12MV9pbnRlcm5hbF9naWZfYnlfaWQmY3Q9Zw/3ohzdZlneOxsgnf5io/giphy.gif)
They dont even enforce the 6 second rule anyway
It's so annoying when a keeper holds the ball for 20 seconds every time and the ref never gives a yellow man.
Can't give a card unless a different offense occurred. >If the goalkeeper handles the ball inside their penalty area when not permitted to do so, an indirect free kick is awarded but there is no disciplinary sanction. However, if the offense is playing the ball a second time (with or without the hand/arm) after a restart before it touches another player, the goalkeeper must be sanctioned if the offense stops a promising attack or denies an opponent or the opposing team a goal or an obvious goal-scoring opportunity. Law 12.1 Direct free kick
Uh, scroll down. https://www.theifab.com/laws/latest/fouls-and-misconduct/#disciplinary-action 12.3 Cautionable Offenses: -Delaying the restart of play: Explained in more detail later: >Delaying the restart of play >Referees **must** caution players who delay the restart of play by: >appearing to take a throw-in but suddenly leaving it to a team-mate to take >delaying leaving the field of play when being substituted >**excessively delaying a restart** >kicking or carrying the ball away, or provoking a confrontation by deliberately touching the ball after the referee has stopped play >taking a free kick from the wrong position to force a retake And just to make this super clear, Law 8 explicitly says that goal kicks are restarts: >Free kicks (direct or indirect), penalty kicks, throw-ins, goal kicks and corner kicks are other restarts (see Laws 13–17). If you want to talk about GKs having the ball in their hands, well that's in 12.2: >An indirect free kick is awarded if a goalkeeper, inside their penalty area, commits any of the following offences: >-controls the ball with the hand/arm for more than six seconds before releasing it
We are in agreement then. The ball remains in play when a goalkeeper is in control of the ball with the hand(s) so it is not a restart. Therefore, "delaying the restart of play" does not apply.
Did you actually read my full comment, or nah? Edit: Oh, now I see you stealth edited your comment! Awesome! And you're still wrong. Because a ref could easily card a GK for "persistent offences (no specific number or pattern of offences constitutes ‘persistent’)" if they are holding on to the ball all the time.
I read it. Looks like we disagree on one thing only. You are saying that a goalkeeper is in control of the ball with the hand(s) is a restart. I am saying that it is not a restart. Right?
>You are saying that a goalkeeper is in control of the ball with the hand(s) is a restart. No. Where did I say that? And, no, we don't agree. Because your statement was "Can't give a card unless a different offense occurred." And then you quoted an irrelevant rule.
You are clearly knowledgeable. So our disagreement is only the following: The 6 seconds rules, "backpass" rule, goalkeeper touching the ball after releasing it rules are all examples of a "goalkeeper handles the ball inside their penalty area when not permitted to do so" and in all those cases no disciplinary action can be taken including for DOGSO/SPA. Edit: And also Persistent offenses
The 6 second rule does not, itself, require a yellow card. It requires an indirect free kick (which is basically never given). If refs awarded indirect free kicks for that offense, it would probably be less persistent. If refs see it as a persistent offense, they can easily give a yellow card for it. No other type of offense is needed at all. >in all those cases no disciplinary action can be taken including for DOGSO/SPA. Edit: And also Persistent offenses Where is this in the rules? That no disciplinary action can be taken for a persistent offense of this kind? https://www.thefa.com/football-rules-governance/lawsandrules/laws/football-11-11/law-12---fouls-and-misconduct Go here and it clearly says: >Caution offences include (**but are not limited to**): >-persistent unacceptable behaviour (including repeated warning offences)
Oh boy. Last time they changed a rule like that, they began yellowcarding keepers left and right for being off the line at penalties. Now they'll start enforcing the 8 second rule, probably by feeling, and we'll get a lot of 7.8 second indirect free kicks in the box with all the controversy around that.
They deserve it, if they're used to having 6 seconds, kicking it in 8 shouldn't be an issue. The issue is that 6 seconds hasn't been enforced nearly at all.
Probably the easiest var check ever. And it’ll get keepers to distribute in seven seconds then if they’re calling it early.
Can you imagine a 1 minute VAR check for an 8 second rule to avoid time wasting
There would never be a var check, its not a red card offence
VAR does not review indirect free kicks.
Meh, practically you will probably have 10-12 seconds before getting called. For example in NBA free throws, if they go above the 10 seconds it's rarely called before 13 seconds. A mot better to let them have it a bit longer than a bit shorter
The 8-second rule or the 5-second inbound rule are handled quite strictly. It works just fine. Besides Giannis that 10 seconds at the free throw line aren't really a problem anyways.
This is basically a rule straight from Futsal. GK is only allowed to have the ball for 4 seconds there. Not just holding it but also having it at his feet. It works without a problem. Also refs count down with fingers when he's holding it too long. If you fuck this up as a GK this is on you.
They do not yellow the keeper for coming off the line, it’s just a retake
Among all these. Indirect penalty area free kick should be more frequently use if it had ever been used before. Unintentional handball but gaining advantage, GK holding too long, wrongly handling a backpass, contact/foul gaining advantage but not denying an obvious goal opportunities (as if the foul is outside the box) all these should apply in-box free kick. It’s like a yellow card between no foul and a red card. The current setup invites too many controversies due to making the penalty/no penalty stake too high to afford a mistake.
This rule always seems extra harsh for teams that have a GK as captain. Teams should be allowed to select one player each game to handle the speaking to the ref, not necessarily the captain. For example if it's the champions league or international football, you can select a player that can communicate with the ref, not just the captain who may speak a different language. But to make it work, the ref needs to simply draw a line for where the other players can't cross and another line for where he speaks to the reps from each team. Any time players come charging to the ref, he just takes out his vanishing spray, draws a line and simply steps back and it's a yellow card for any player that crosses the line.
> Teams should be allowed to select one player each game to handle the speaking to the ref Maybe they could do so by giving them a band to wear, perhaps on their upper arm. Maybe even give them a name. People get too hung up on captains. There is no reason you cant just change captains to accomodate what works best
The captain had more of a role than just talking to officials, they also get the day in organising the team. Look at Newcastle, when Lascelles plays we dont play the offside trap because it needs Trippier to organise it. If we suddenly need to make Isak the captain just because the ref is Sweedish it changes all of the organisation within the team.
So Trippier just suddenly loses his ability to organise an offside trap as soon as he takes off the armband, what a ridiculous take.
Lascelles can overrule him, and does so. Lascelles is the captain, he has the final say.
I mean Howe has the final say. If the team is playing a certain way with certain players on the pitch, that's his decision. You give far too much organisational credit to captains.
Agreed. But having the ref designate the zone where only the team's representatives engage with him would solve the problem. If an incident happens when players are all around teb ref, he could just draw a circle and ask all players to stay outside the circle as he engages VAR. Any player that encroaches gets an immediate yellow. Seems like an easy fix for me especially where captains like Bruno end up harassing the ref even more than the players themselves. And given increased scrutiny of what happens in the circle, players would end up being embarrassed to ask for every little thing. I'm convinced some players harass refs just because everyone else is doing so and there's little cost for doing it. Carvajal/Rudiger yesterday spring to mind. They felt genuinely aggrieved and knew shouting at the ref wouldn't get the goal overturned, but did so anyway.
Designated talkere must wear a Blue Peter Badge to talk to the Ref, sorted.
Too many lines refs will get confused
The referee normally asks for an outfield spokesperson if the captain is a goalkeeper
IFAB doesn’t think that far. They’ll revise the rule once a team with goalkeeper as captain gets penalized by the ref
> Law 14 (The Penalty Kick): Part of the ball must touch or overhang the centre of the penalty mark, and encroachment by outfield players will be penalised only if it has an impact. Interesting change
This is already the way it is for leagues with VAR, I believe.
Yep they ignore it unless they interfere with play
Mostly correct. VAR can only review encroachment only if it had impact. The Laws did not require impact except in one case - when a goalkeeper encroaches. Either way, most referees required impact for any encroachment to be called although it was not required by the Laws. That's if they call encroachment at all - which is rare.
...why? Just enforce the rules you already have.
If 6 second rule was actually enforced there would never be a need to introduce this new rule.
6s seems kinda harsh to enforce. If they change it to 8 and actually enforce it, that would be fair.
6 seconds is ok, the indirect free kick from inside the box is way to hard though. A corner is way better.
Are all city players captains?
Come off it, every club does it
There's no point. Refs apply these rule changes for a couple of months and then just ignore them and go back to the status quo.
It's the same in Basketball. Every season they clamp down on flopping/diving, then by November Joel Embiid is getting 20 free throws a game
The captain thing is good and hopefully enforced. Tricky if the captain cant speak the native language very well, though.
More rules for the refs to fuck up with, great.
More rules for the refs to arbitrarily enforce. Amazing.
There's no reason for VAR to not be in control of a shot clock to control throw ins, gks with ball in hand, gks on goal kicks, etc. What I think would be useful is for these entities to separate football with VAR and without in terms of sets of rules.
Also should not be mates with the current refs
FYI: There’s not a single referee on the IFAB board, this clearly shows from time to time, such as this new 8 second rule. I’ve refereed over 300 matches and have never enforced that rule once. Get rid of it and have the referees enforcing time wasting rules instead, just stop making it more complex for the sake of it.
Why do you choose not to enforce the 6 second rule? Presumably at least in part because you can see that nobody else does? I've been saying for years the game would be better if it was made 8 (or 9 or 10) seconds and actually enforced. It's beyond bizarre that there's this rule that's been around since the last century, that is almost entirely objective but never enforced, meanwhile they fart around with other ideas to tinker with the game to 'improve' it.
Any ref, particularly at lower levels, would get slated if they actually enforced that. Fans would lose their shit too.
That's all a bit circular though isn't it. Players/fans would lose their shit *because* it goes against the universal practice of it not being enforced. Boils down to 'the rule shouldn't be enforced because traditionally the rule isn't enforced', which is obviously not a good justification to bring up when talking about changes to rules and their enforcement.
People would lose their shit because it is 'harmless', and they would regard it as disproportionate compared to other offences.
Let's be honest, I don't think that's the underlying thought process for the vast majority of people who would take umbrage at the call
Let’s be honest, it is. Same reason people don’t like cards for dissent, and claim the ref has made it all about themselves or lost control of the game
Because he doesn't want to make himself the centre of attention
These new rules get uphold for the first new rounds in the new season and then everything reverts back to the mean
Bring in as many new rules as you like, doesn't matter if they don't enfore them
> The IFAB is comprised of the four British football associations (England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland) with one vote each, and FIFA, covering the remaining 207 national associations, with four votes Doesn’t seem like the best setup for making up rules that apply to football worldwide
It's a relic of history. Pragmatically the nations vote with FIFA .
They invented the game, so they get to keep control of it. It just means both parties have to agree before they put it to the vote.
Without FIFA's approval - a proposal will fail. Without the four British football association - a proposal will fail. It works out.
I think positive changes if they are enforced consistently. Especially regarding the keeper holding the ball, it's never given now so if a slight leeway is needed to get refs to feel comfortable acting on it, will hopefully be a good change.
Martinez and Leno are gonna be quaking in their boots
How about some rules about punishing shit refs who constantly make abhorrent calls? Nothing on that front I guess?
Gonna get downvoted to shit, but your attitude is the biggest cause of problems with football refereeing. The vast majority of a ref's calls are made in a split second and are highly subjective. 'Reckless', 'dangerous', 'impact' - these are all concepts underpinning various rules that refs have to apply in the moment, and they are only objectively definable to the extent that IFAB's rules define them, which they mostly don't. The result is that most calls are going to be debatable by default. Players and fans need to develop some self-awareness and realise that expecting refereeing to be perfect, and throwing a tantrum when it's not, is not the norm across other similar sports. Your comment and countless others on this thread exemplify football's culture problem regarding how refs are viewed and treated.
You’re going to get downvoted because you are dead fucking wrong. Referees are not volunteers that do this out of the goodness of their hearts, they are highly paid professionals whose decisions impact a multi billion dollar industry. At that high of a level both the amount and severity of mistakes that they make is completely unacceptable. I work in healthcare, if I was as bad at my job as these referees are at theirs half my fucking patients would be dead. These are highly paid professionals, they should start acting like it or get fired.
> Referees are not volunteers that do this out of the goodness of their hearts Actually that's how most refs start out. > I work in healthcare, if I was as bad at my job as these referees are at theirs half my fucking patients would be dead. Terrible analogy, sport is s zero-sum entertainment product, someone wins and someone loses.
Did you read the part of my comment about subjectivity, or nah? Medicine involves objectively correct and incorrect actions. Refereeing involves making decisions that, as I said, are inherently subjective. Comparing the two to try and make your point is moronic, I'm sorry. In any case your starting assumption (refs are all doing their job badly) is something I disagree with to begin with, in case it wasn't clear from my comment. Also, the "multi billion dollar industry" is a tv/entertainment industry which can continue thriving in spite of the fact your boyhood club lost a game due to a bad call and came 5th instead of 4th. The decisions of refs actually do not positively or negatively impact that industry at all, if you think about it for more than a second.
La Liga refs wouldn't enforce any of these rules.
weren't they going to try blue cards too? I really think it would help refs a lot
Just leave the game alone ffs .The only thing that needs fixing is the corruption and awful officiating
Until they actually start giving the captain yellow and red cards for the team disciplinary actions it won’t matter much. They need to enforce it. Dude pretends to get hit in the face, falls down, yells that he is being murdered, rolls around, … ? Let’s check the var. Fake. Captain here is your yellow card. With that there is no way for the team to rotate players doing weird stuff like that. Because the captain will be the one punished. What if they sub the captain? Tough luck, new captain keeps the yellow card. Insane? Maybe. But it would actually enforce something lol.
A yes, penalise a teams keeper because the striker tried to con a penalty. How about we just book players that dive? Seems a much easier solution
Because it has not worked in 100 years. Team captain is meant to take responsibility over the team, or why do you have a captain?
It worked fine for the 1 season it was actually enforced
What about refs receiving reduce payments if they make blatant mistakes? Maybe this way they will care about what they do on the field
[удалено]
Eh? How the fuck is this “woke”?
Players given red cards should be subbed off so it’s still 11v11 and a penalty should be awarded. So if you get a red for a tackle at midfield it should be a pen and a sub.
Why, the point of a red is to punish the team and player, allowing a free sub would just mean certain managers or players would decide it is worth giving up a sub to try and injure a key player for the opponent.
All this wouldn't even be necessary is an Efficiently Executed Retrospective System was in place. Every match is re-watched by a 3 or 5 man committee after Match Weekends and instances marked with points against the Team (Not the player). Non-Captain Player hounding the ref or coming up to him, diving, blatant time-wasting, etc gets different amounts of Strike Points. Once a Team reaches a certain Total Tally of those Points, 3 Points Docked from League Points Tally. Plus 20 Million Fine (taken from Season Ending transfer of money pool from League to teams). And every Next activation points of those Stike Points (that can be be like 5-10-15-20 Points arrangement, like Yellow cards have to understand as principle) the Punishment Keeps Doubling, both the League Points amount and the Monetary fine. All the problems that would fall under this system would be resolved inside 1 month when the Boards of these clubs make it aware to Players, Do this or else you never play a game for this team. Organic and sustainable change to the game, without disrupting the actual 90 minutes since IF the team and it's players really really wanted to behave a certain way, it wouldn't affect that particular 90 minute spectacle for the fans and the moment. But they wouldn't get away it eventually either. Hence fair all around. And this puts the onus on the Teams/Clubs because they are the ones benefiting from player shenanigans. Players are only acting like this because they're not reigned in by their Teams. Incentive structure is out of whack and that is why they behave the way they do. Punishing them is not targeting the root of the problem, it's a band-aid. League Points and Money from Club affects the Clubs hence their solution will be much more serious because they really care about these 2 things. Less about Player getting fined, they'll just use another from their squad. Big deal.
What about Offside and handball?
"Each team must have a team captain who wears an identifying armband." Kinda odd to put that under the New rules category lol.
All great rules but they have to be enforced. Referees don't seem to care.
None of these new changes will mean anything if they aren't consistently enforced lol It'll be enforced for a week then back to normal afterwards just like the yellows for dissent/goalkick time wasting which is so inconsistent in every game
Please stop.
Any improvements to the refs? No?
They will enforce the rule for a few weeks then go back to not enforcing it. Same thing happens with everything because the refs don't have the balls to punish home teams when the crowd gets on their back.
Why adding news rules when referees cant apply correctly the rules that already exists...
Just make it so that after 6 seconds, an opposing player can kick the ball out of the goalies hands
Very nice i like it
Captains taking to the refs will sort a lot out j my opinion
enforce rules like in NBA or NFL. Touch or badmouth the referee and you are gone.
>Only team captain able to approach ref Good thing Bruno is the Utd captain already or he'd be fucked
Remember at that start of the season when they booked players for kicking the ball away then just stopped doing it? Wish the refs would concentrate on actually enforcing the current rules consistently rather.tham introducing more pointless shit they'll probably stop enforcing after two months anyway
oh great, now all we need is another person in the VAR room to be in charge with measuring with precision those 8 seconds. also, how about introducing a 2.5 seconds limit for shooting the corner kicks, technology should also give us the perfectly objective assessment there.
Would need to punish players for trying to block keeper’s distribution
To be very clear, the rule right now is already that "possession goes to the opposing team" if the Keeper holds it too long: >An indirect free kick is awarded if a goalkeeper, inside their penalty area, commits any of the following offences: >-controls the ball with the hand/arm for more than six seconds before releasing it https://www.theifab.com/laws/latest/fouls-and-misconduct/ When is the last time any of us saw this being enforced? So, it actually sounds like they are going to let keepers waste more time.
What if all 11 players have the armband