Proposed New Laws

citytillidie

A proposal to scrap 45-minute halves is to be looked at by football's lawmakers to deter time-wasting.

Instead, there could be two periods of 30 minutes with the clock stopped whenever the ball goes out of play.

Lawmaking body the International Football Association Board (Ifab) says matches only see about 60 minutes of "effective playing time" out of 90.

The idea is one of several put forward in a new strategy document designed to address football's "negativities".

Another proposal would see players not being allowed to follow up and score if a penalty is saved - if the spot-kick "is not successful", play would stop and a goal-kick awarded.

Other ideas include a stadium clock linked to a referee's watch and a new rule allowing players to effectively pass to themselves or dribble the ball when taking a free-kick.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/40311889?ns_mchannel=social&ns_campaign=bbc_match_of_the_day&ns_source=facebook&ns_linkname=sport

http://www.play-fair.com/data/Strategy_Paper_EN_150dpi_Doppelseiten.pdf

What do you all think? I mix of NA sport stopping time, to rugby where play can only be end when ball is out of play to hockey were you can take free kicks to your self.

Which ideas are up for discussion?

This is where it gets interesting. One of the proposals would allow being able to dribble straight from a free-kick to "encourage attacking play as the player who is fouled can stop the ball and then immediately continue their dribble/attacking move". Other measures include:

passing to yourself at a free-kick, corner and goal-kick
a stadium clock which stops and starts along with the referee's watch
allowing the goal-kick to be taken even if the ball is moving
a goal-kick being taken on the same side that the ball went out on
a "clearer and more consistent definition" of handball
a player who scores a goal or stops a goal with his hands gets a red card
a keeper who handles a backpass or throw-in from a team-mate concedes a penalty
the referee can award a goal if a player stops a goal being scored by handling on or close to the goal-line
referees can only blow for half-time or full-time when the ball goes out of play
a penalty kick is either scored or missed/saved and players cannot follow up to score to stop encroachment into the penalty area

Dirty Dingus McGee

The thing I like about Soccer as a sport is you know exactly when the game will end unlike Basketball and American football for example.Leave the 45 minute half thing as it is.Time wasting isn't that big an issue and can be easily dealt with within the current rules by proper refereeing.

Nothing wrong with freekicks and penalties being taken as they are right now.The suggestions put forward won't improve anything.

These suggestions have all the hallmarks of a committee coming up with proposals just to justify the existence of the committee and justify their expenses.

Leave the game as it is, the rules of playing the game are not what the sport should be looking to fix.

NukaCola

I dont really think any of those proposed are needed tbh.....theres nothing on that list that I would love to see introduced anyway. Maybe if the referee can award a goal if someone handles on the line, but how often does that happen?

Osmosis Jones

Another proposal would see players not being allowed to follow up and score if a penalty is saved - if the spot-kick "is not successful", play would stop and a goal-kick awarded.

I actually really like this idea, nothing more disheartening than seeing a goalkeeper concede a rebound after making a fantastic save.

Richard Hillman

The amount of time wasted in injury time is infuriating. The refs just don't have the bottle to book players for time wasting. I would like to see the clock taken away from the referee.

I think the clock stoppage will improve the game though. The game needs to be sped up and there will be no incentive for casual slow play and time wasting. It should be at least trialed.

Skylinehead

I like the penalty idea. Handball does need to be clarified. Players already get red for stopping a goal with their hand. The rest, no thanks.

NukaCola

Osmosis Jones wrote: »

I actually really like this idea, nothing more disheartening than seeing a goalkeeper concede a rebound after making a fantastic save.

Unless its in the 2005 CL final :pac:........not a fan of it, I think that law is fine as is....

Beasty

The goalkick proposal is simply reinserting an old rule. Never understood the need to change it in the first place and equally have no idea why they want to change it back. In this day and age there are typically multiple balls used and it's not as if there is not already a rule about time wasting (even if, like the specific time the goalkeeper has to release the ball, it's largely unenforced)

BorneTobyWilde

Only one rule needs changing, that rule that allows a player to block another player that is trying to get to a ball. It's when a player blocking has no interest in ball whatsoever, he only wants to block. How is that not eliminated from game, funny thing is obstruction is already a rule, but it seems it's ok to obstruct a player who plays ball pass last man and for last man to block and block until the ball runs out of play. He completely stops playing and ignores ball and only blocks. How fcukccking annoying, he's clearly buying time to allow ball to go dead. He should be made to deal with situation ,and if he does obstruct it's a free kick.

SEPT 23 1989

Have they nothing better to be doing

WinnyThePoo

mm 30 minutes with the clock stopped? sounds like a way in for advertisments.

Beasty

WinnyThePoo wrote: »

mm 30 minutes with the clock stopped? sounds like a way in for advertisments.

Suspect that's the ultimate intention. Reckon we will end up with timeouts

WinnyThePoo

WinnyThePoo wrote: »

mm 30 minutes with the clock stopped? sounds like a way in for advertisments.

Yeah that's the issue. While I hate time-wasting I would imagine that's what it would end up being used for.

Don't like the penalty idea.

Fine with the goal-kick one, once it's inside the 6 yard box.

The handball thing should be cleared up a bit. Advantage gained = foul. Deliberate = card.

Harry Palmr

FIFA/Ifab want to turn the world game into American football with all that implies. Hell I remember the notion of quarters being floated around the time of USA 94. If that sort of thing looks like gaining traction everyone should just tell them to **** off.

Son Of A Vidic

citytillidie wrote: »

What do you all think?

As a big American Football fan, the last thing I want to see is soccer heading in the same direction in terms of length of half ect. The powers that be might be better served enforcing standing rules rather than inventing new ones. An example would be players virtually wrapping themselves around each other during a corner kick. There was some token efforts to stop it in the PL, but refs apparent lack of balls to clamp down on it means it still persists. Blatant obstruction is against the rules of the game, so I'm baffled why it has become tolerated in recent years. These for me are the little things that need to be sorted out and not some bullsh1t 30 minute half proposal.

~Rebel~

The only one of those I kind of like, is being allowed to do whatever you want from a dead ball... lamp in a cross, or take it on yourself. Could make things quite interesting, as some defenders will have to come cover the man, and leave a bit more space in the box.

Son Of A Vidic

Son Of A Vidic wrote: »

As a big American Football fan, the last thing I want to see is soccer heading in the same direction in terms of length of half ect. The powers that be might be better served enforcing standing rules rather than inventing new ones. An example would be players virtually wrapping themselves around each other during a corner kick. There was some token efforts to stop it in the PL, but refs apparent lack of balls to clamp down on it means it still persists. Blatant obstruction is against the rules of the game, so I'm baffled why it has become tolerated in recent years. These for me are the little things that need to be sorted out and not some bullsh1t 30 minute half proposal.

Definitely. Same with "shielding" the ball. I know the way it's written, you can shield it if you're close enough to play the ball but I would've thought playing the ball meant you could swing your foot and get it. But no, it apparently means within a couple of yards. It leads to time wasting and conflict and needless cards. Along with the corners/free kicks thing it's something that would be sorted easily with some balls.

BorneTobyWilde

Penalty shoot outs need sorting too. Typically 5 against 5, seems silly not to allow everyone a chance , let them all take a penalty. Best of ten.
Or another approach would be to take players off until there is a goal. Take 2 players off every 10 minutes in extra time then play until one team scores.

SuperTortoise

~Rebel~ wrote: »

The only one of those I kind of like, is being allowed to do whatever you want from a dead ball... lamp in a cross, or take it on yourself. Could make things quite interesting, as some defenders will have to come cover the man, and leave a bit more space in the box.

Exactly, and i'd go one further, when a free kick is given the players should be allowed to take it immediately if he chooses.
How many times do we see a free kick awarded and the ref stops the game for 5 minutes so the defending team can organise themselves and set up a wall? It negates any advantage in a lot of cases.

Turtyturd

BorneTobyWilde wrote: »

Penalty shoot outs need sorting too. Typically 5 against 5, seems silly not to allow everyone a chance , let them all take a penalty. Best of ten.
Or another approach would be to take players off until there is a goal. Take 2 players off every 10 minutes in extra time then play until one team scores.

I'd also suggest that the goals get bigger every 5 minutes the game goes further into injury times, and one player from each team has to compete in a wheelchair.

Gbear

There really should be no difficulty in sorting out timewasting by giving officials better tools.

First of all they need to clamp down on pissing all over the timekeeping rules.
The reason they don't is that it sounds like a lot of busywork, which it is.

So automate it.

Have an electronic component to the whistle.
It sends a signal that starts a countdown.
Once the countdown ends, if the keeper hasn't taken his kickout, the throw hasn't been taken or whatever, the ref gets a little message that tells him to reverse the set piece, award an indirect free or whatever.

Worse comes to worst the system doesn't work and they can use conventional timekeeping practices.

FIFA are ****ing apalling at instituting ridiculously easy changes to make the game run more smoothly.
We could've sorted out offsides, timewasting, goaline tech and whether or not the ball is in play 15 years ago but they're a shower of ****ing dinosaurs and are seemingly too lazy to put the minimal effort in.

You don't even need to get into TMOs and stuff. The uncontroversial low-hanging fruit still hasn't been addressed.

Ferris_Bueller

Gbear wrote: »

There really should be no difficulty in sorting out timewasting by giving officials better tools.

First of all they need to clamp down on pissing all over the timekeeping rules.
The reason they don't is that it sounds like a lot of busywork, which it is.

So automate it.

Have an electronic component to the whistle.
It sends a signal that starts a countdown.
Once the countdown ends, if the keeper hasn't taken his kickout, the throw hasn't been taken or whatever, the ref gets a little message that tells him to reverse the set piece, award an indirect free or whatever.

Yeah that would be much better to be honest, definitely don't want to see it shortened to 30 mins a half.

I would think some of the changes they have suggested might be worth implementing but none of them are exactly groundbreaking.

Keepers can take goal kicks when the ball is moving - worth bringing in, anything to speed up the game a bit more.

Not allowed to score penalty rebounds - agree that it is agonising when you see a keeper pull off a great save and then someone taps in the rebound.

Can dribble from a free kick - should make it more difficult to defend against and give more of an advantage to the attacking team and ultimately discourage fouling a bit more.

Referee can only blow for HT/FT when ball is out of play - I think this works well in Rugby, I would have this rule in place alongside injury time so if the referee signals 4 mins added time he can only blow it up when the ball goes out of play after the 94th minute.

Gbear

Ferris_Bueller wrote: »

Can dribble from a free kick - should make it more difficult to defend against and give more of an advantage to the attacking team and ultimately discourage fouling a bit more.

Referee can only blow for HT/FT when ball is out of play - I think this works well in Rugby, I would have this rule in place alongside injury time so if the referee signals 4 mins added time he can only blow it up when the ball goes out of play after the 94th minute.

You can pretty much already dribble from set pieces with a touch and go.

Most decent teams do that in the first 2/3 of the pitch.
Taking one player away and getting to dribble from the get go doesn't do much IMO.

Rugby is very set piece oriented. Even in open play, there's a pseudo-setpiece in the ruck that resets play. That kind of broken play lends itself more to blowing the whistle when the ball goes dead.
There's also far more challenge in holding on to the ball in that you have to go into contact at some stage and can't just starve the opposition of possession (unless you've extremely good discipline and rucking).

It's also easier to be boot the ball out of play. One funny thing is it might allow teams to hold on to possession after the clock goes dead if the game is going into extra time to tire a team out. That'd be even more true if there's a man advantage or a player is off injured.
Don't think it works or makes sense with football.

AdamD

WinnyThePoo wrote: »

mm 30 minutes with the clock stopped? sounds like a way in for advertisments.

Hasn't happened in rugby.

Not sure of the need for any of these changes, particularly the dribbling one. Clock stopping is the only one that should be looked at IMO but not sure if this is the correct solution.

Buford T. Justice XIX

Gbear wrote: »

There really should be no difficulty in sorting out timewasting by giving officials better tools.

First of all they need to clamp down on pissing all over the timekeeping rules.
The reason they don't is that it sounds like a lot of busywork, which it is.

So automate it.

Have an electronic component to the whistle.
It sends a signal that starts a countdown.
Once the countdown ends, if the keeper hasn't taken his kickout, the throw hasn't been taken or whatever, the ref gets a little message that tells him to reverse the set piece, award an indirect free or whatever.

Worse comes to worst the system doesn't work and they can use conventional timekeeping practices.

FIFA are ****ing apalling at instituting ridiculously easy changes to make the game run more smoothly.
We could've sorted out offsides, timewasting, goaline tech and whether or not the ball is in play 15 years ago but they're a shower of ****ing dinosaurs and are seemingly too lazy to put the minimal effort in.

You don't even need to get into TMOs and stuff. The uncontroversial low-hanging fruit still hasn't been addressed.

I'd be totally against that, Gbear.

One of the beauties of the game for me is the ability for a few lads to get a ball and kick around under the exact same rules as the major leagues. From the wealthiest streets to the slums, whether on grass, concrete, tarmac or sand, the rules are the exact same and all you need are a few lads and refs are optional.

Bringing in special equipment to play the game would take it further from it's basic attraction, imo.

764dak

Buford T. Justice V wrote: »

Gbear wrote: »

There really should be no difficulty in sorting out timewasting by giving officials better tools.

First of all they need to clamp down on pissing all over the timekeeping rules.
The reason they don't is that it sounds like a lot of busywork, which it is.

So automate it.

Have an electronic component to the whistle.
It sends a signal that starts a countdown.
Once the countdown ends, if the keeper hasn't taken his kickout, the throw hasn't been taken or whatever, the ref gets a little message that tells him to reverse the set piece, award an indirect free or whatever.

Worse comes to worst the system doesn't work and they can use conventional timekeeping practices.

FIFA are ****ing apalling at instituting ridiculously easy changes to make the game run more smoothly.
We could've sorted out offsides, timewasting, goaline tech and whether or not the ball is in play 15 years ago but they're a shower of ****ing dinosaurs and are seemingly too lazy to put the minimal effort in.

You don't even need to get into TMOs and stuff. The uncontroversial low-hanging fruit still hasn't been addressed.

I'd be totally against that, Gbear.

One of the beauties of the game for me is the ability for a few lads to get a ball and kick around under the exact same rules as the major leagues. From the wealthiest streets to the slums, whether on grass, concrete, tarmac or sand, the rules are the exact same and all you need are a few lads and refs are optional.

Bringing in special equipment to play the game would take it further from it's basic attraction, imo.

Basketball gets played a lot by amateurs and the major leagues have special equipment.

Gbear

Buford T. Justice V wrote: »

I'd be totally against that, Gbear.

One of the beauties of the game for me is the ability for a few lads to get a ball and kick around under the exact same rules as the major leagues. From the wealthiest streets to the slums, whether on grass, concrete, tarmac or sand, the rules are the exact same and all you need are a few lads and refs are optional.

Bringing in special equipment to play the game would take it further from it's basic attraction, imo.

It doesn't have any impact on everyone else playing the game. It just makes the reffing decisions more accurate.

If it changed the game fundamentally I'd agree with you (like using hover balls, or making all shots automatically swerve towards the goal to increase the number of goals or something) but all I'm proposing is to allow refs to put the theory of reffing into play more accurately. Ideally it'd be done like that already. Sometimes the officials do get all their decisions right.

When you're looking at serial timewasting not being punished though, and offsides being a 50/50 about whether they'll be the right call (which is absolutely an amazing feat for a human in itself), the game isn't following it's own rules.

The game isn't about the refs. They're to facilitate the players. The less impact they have the better.

garra

Chile have had a goal ruled out for offside by the video ref, watching the replays you can see the defender and attacker in line when the ball is played.

Instead of Chile walking off at half time with a deserved lead, they trudge off questioning the ref and the fans are bewildered. Leave the bloody game alone I say, there is nothing wrong with it.

bennyl10

garra wrote: »

Chile have had a goal ruled out for offside by the video ref, watching the replays you can see the defender and attacker in line when the ball is played.

Instead of Chile walking off at half time with a deserved lead, they trudge off questioning the ref and the fans are bewildered. Leave the bloody game alone I say, there is nothing wrong with it.

Until the picture used by VAR emerges and it was actually the correct call?...

Video, when used right, could be a terrific addition

764dak

garra wrote: »

Chile have had a goal ruled out for offside by the video ref, watching the replays you can see the defender and attacker in line when the ball is played.

Instead of Chile walking off at half time with a deserved lead, they trudge off questioning the ref and the fans are bewildered.  Leave the bloody game alone I say, there is nothing wrong with it.

Vargas was offside.

s3rtvdbwfj81ch

The one about being able to pass to yourself from a free kick would lead to a glut of those awesome "chip it up and volley it" free kicks, or the "between the legs flick of the ball and the other player volleys it" routines, so I'm 100% in favour of that change.

Going from 45 to 30 minutes and sorting out the timekeeping, or staying at 45 and sorting out the timekeeping amount to the same thing.

i don't like the rule about play stopping if the keeper saves a pen, or the goalframe is hit, total nonsense imo, just police encroachment correctly.

LuckyLloyd

Regarding time wasting, it can't be tackled within the bounds of the current law because the reality is that the ball is in play for an average of 60mins a game. For referees to actually tack on the time being wasted in the last half hour would significantly extend the game.

As such, this proposal, while this may seem radical it's actually a way of creating transparency and consistency around the time of each game without massively extending beyond the current ~1:45min window it takes for a football match from kickoff to final whistle.

BionicRasher

citytillidie wrote: »

This is where it gets interesting. One of the proposals would allow being able to dribble straight from a free-kick to "encourage attacking play as the player who is fouled can stop the ball and then immediately continue their dribble/attacking move". Other measures include:

passing to yourself at a free-kick, corner and goal-kick

The self pass works very well in Hockey. It has made the game a lot quicker and not so stop start. Also harder to defend against if you take a quick tap and go to yourself.
I think it would be great in soccer. Might make for more goals and deter people fouling just to break up the play to let their defence get in place
Only downside is that hockey is now much quicker and even with rolling substitutes players can still run 6 to 8 km in a 70 min game. Would soccer speed up that much where a average player would be expected to cover 10-12 km in a 90 minute game.
Soccer has become very boring. Too much time wasting and rolling around the ground. If the ball is only in play for average 60 mins then I think the self pass would increase ball in play by 10 or 15 mins per 90. Therefore in my opinion making it more exciting to watch.