[Football] Possible new football rules

[jcdenton08]

No. Leave the game alone, it's brilliant as it is.

The only "change" I'd like to see is consistent enforcing of the existing laws, particularly clamping down harder on diving and dissent.

 

[drew]

The laws of the game change all the time and FIFA traditionally tests new rules at different levels before making decisions. Not everything turns permanent: to give one example, they tried timeouts at the U16 World Cup in Ecuador 1995 and the FIFA World Cup that same summer. But a lot of rule changes stick if they turn out well in the trials.

Currently they are trying five new rules in youth competitions in various countries:

1. Self-pass. Players can choose to dribble from free-kicks, corner, goal kicks and...
2. Kick-ins. Instead of throw-ins they are trying again (like in the U17 World Cup in Australia 1993) with kick-ins, but this time around you can dribble with the ball and you only have five seconds (unless the ref deems it impossible due to the ball going into the stands or whatever) before the opponent gets it instead.
3. Set amount of time. 60 minutes with the ball in play rather than the 90 now. Would increase the number of minutes with the ball actually in play.
4. Sin bins. Dissent/rude language punished by being sent off for 10 minutes.
5. Unlimited subs.

What do you think of these rules? Personally I wouldnt be surprised to see any of them except for unlimited subs.

1. Worth a try, might speed up the game a little.
2. Don't agree, stick with the throw in.
3. Disagree with the 60 minutes. We'd soon head down the route of quarters (allowing for more adverts). However, would like to see independent time keepers that stop the clock for injuries, substitutions and goal celebrations. Don't need to stop it for free kicks/out of play but stick to 90 minutes. If someone is time wasting ref's should book them straight away, not in the 87th minute when they've done it for the umpteenth time in time.
4. Agree. They've been trialling it here in youth leagues for last 3 odd seasons.
5. Garbage idea. Plays into the hands of rich clubs. Think they should go back to 3 subs.

In addition, if a fouled player rolls around in apparent agony, refs should immediately call on the trainer and therefore the player will have to leave the pitch. Kane goes down easily but at least he doesn't act like he's been shot!! Also need to see more retrospective banning for dives, whether the ref saw it or not.

 

[drew]

For grass roots football someone needs to invent a smart whistle watch combo that stops and starts the clock when blown.

Lee Mason is currently working on a prototype!

 

[Swansman]

Could add that some youth leagues are also trying a version of the old MLS penalty shootout system (you start 25 meters from goal and got 10 seconds to score).

Also the FIFA technical development people are looking for ways to stop dives. One suggestion is that only goal chance preventing actions could result in a penalty, other offenses in the penalty area would just give a free-kick.

 

[beorhthelm]

3. Awful. Stoppage time is an integral part of the game that has produced so many amazing moments, would hate to see it changed.

stoppage time is time for goals, subs, injury, not ball out of play. and is fine to a point (ex. Fergy time not good). this idea is far, far worse, its making it like american football with the clock stopping every for second the ball goes off. then not restarting until team has decided to restart. ball going out of play is part of the game, we dont need no stinking time keeping to get exactly n minutes of ball in play time.

 

[AmexRuislip]

The laws of the game change all the time and FIFA traditionally tests new rules at different levels before making decisions. Not everything turns permanent: to give one example, they tried timeouts at the U16 World Cup in Ecuador 1995 and the FIFA World Cup that same summer. But a lot of rule changes stick if they turn out well in the trials.

Currently they are trying five new rules in youth competitions in various countries:

1. Self-pass. Players can choose to dribble from free-kicks, corner, goal kicks and...
2. Kick-ins. Instead of throw-ins they are trying again (like in the U17 World Cup in Australia 1993) with kick-ins, but this time around you can dribble with the ball and you only have five seconds (unless the ref deems it impossible due to the ball going into the stands or whatever) before the opponent gets it instead.
3. Set amount of time. 60 minutes with the ball in play rather than the 90 now. Would increase the number of minutes with the ball actually in play.
4. Sin bins. Dissent/rude language punished by being sent off for 10 minutes.
5. Unlimited subs.
6. Can only hold onto Subuteo stick for max of 5 secs when taking corners.

What do you think of these rules? Personally I wouldnt be surprised to see any of them except for unlimited subs.

Corrected for you

 

[Swansman]

the point of throw-ins is suppose to be simply a way to restart play. making it a free kick would be disproportionate.

But you could also say that ending up in a situation where you have a less than 50/50 chance of retaining the ball is a weird punishment when your opponents kicks the ball out of play.

 

[GT49er]

Would like to see the trial on 3

This with knobs on. Big clocks visible to bith players and spectators. Fourth official to click 'stop' the second the ball goes out of play or when play is stopped; doesn't click 'start' until the free kick, goal kick, throw in or whatever is taken. Would render 2 totally unnecessary.

 

[Machiavelli]

What do people have against kick/dribble-ins?

Throw-ins more often than not punishes the team that gets them. In more than 50% of the cases, the opponent gets the ball within three seconds after the throw, meaning that just kicking the ball over the sideline is a decent strategy. I think throw-ins, much like back passes or tackles from behind, wouldnt be missed once gone.

I would like to see it trialled. As you say, the team taking the throw-in, corner, free kick are at a disadvantage, because they have one less player than their opposition.

 

[macbeth]

are there? so another official, another technology, another rule applied to professional tier not to lower tiers.

Yes, they exist in ice hockey. I also don't see why it just couldn't be part of the 4th official's job

 

[studio150]

1. Maybe, however should there be a time limit to take the kick (as suggested under 2). Against Denmark, England took 46 seconds to take an attacking free kick after the foul was given. Obviously 5 seconds is too short but maybe something like 20 seconds.
2. Not sure whether you can only dribble the ball back in, or pass to a player or launch a free kick. Maybe if this goes forward it should be limited to throws in own half, otherwise too much of an advantage may be given.
3. Would not be necessary if time wasting was clamped down on and/or appropriate added time was actually added on. Very often particularly in the 1st half of games a minute is added regardless of what actually has occurred in respect of stoppages.
4. Not sure, preferred the advancing the free kick which was in place for a short period of time. Also is it just off the field for ten minutes and no disciplinary points.
5. No


I quite liked one of Wenger's suggestions that the ball is still in play when it crosses a line until it hits the ground or is touched by a player who is touching the ground. This would mean that corners that go out and come back in, would still be live.

 

[Braggfan]

Are these amazing moments because of stoppage time itself though? Or is it just because its the dying minutes of a game, which is something that wouldnt change with a new system. I think more about the opposite: that you can make every free kick, throw in, corner and goal kick take 30+ seconds when you are 1-0 up is something that prevented a lot of amazing moments.

Man Utd winning the Champions league in added time in 1999 was different to just winning it in the last few minutes.. The excitment and amazingness of it was definitely increased by the fact that 90 mins had expired. Scoring twice in injury time definitely added to drama, anticipation and legendary status of the win.

 

[Swansman]

Man Utd winning the Champions league in added time in 1999 was different to just winning it in the last few minutes.. The excitment and amazingness of it was definitely increased by the fact that 90 mins had expired. Scoring twice in injury time definitely added to drama, anticipation and legendary status of the win.

Not sure scoring the winning goal with 43 seconds left on the injury time is that much different from scoring a goal with 43 seconds left until the final whistle but maybe I'm just more into exciting last minute finishes than I am into match clocks.

 

[Baldseagull]

I've long been a fan of the self-pass rule. Works brilliantly in hockey, it would be just as good in football.

There is literally no downside to it.

I wonder how it would apply to an indirect free kick? Two touches, or two touches with the ball travelling a minimum of its own circumference between them, or some other weirdness?

 

[Guinness Boy]

Not sure scoring the winning goal with 43 seconds left on the injury time is that much different from scoring a goal with 43 seconds left until the final whistle but maybe I'm just more into exciting last minute finishes than I am into match clocks.

Stopping the clock is an appalling idea. Football has always been a continuous game with tactical breaks. All that the 60 minute idea does is to open the door to NFL style stoppages where a game that used to last about 95 minutes plus half time now takes three hours to complete because you can now sell advertising when the ball goes out of play and you've just enabled time outs and drinks breaks by default.

It's the stupidest idea of the lot and also the most money oriented so I expect it to be the one that comes in.

 

[nickbrighton]

before more tinkering of the rules and regs, how about they just implement the ones they have properly and see what effect that has.
yellows for dissent, diving , time wasting, agree a definition for hand ball and off side and implement it for all teams equally regardless of league position or big club status

A lot of issues go away if the existing rules were applied fairly and universally, and if we got refs of the same standard we have seen at the Euros, applying a bit of common sense, with tackles, shoulder challenges, hand balls and off sides.

If that was done, most of the need for the suggested changes are simply done away with

 

[Algernon]

1. Self-pass.
No problem with this. Give it a go.
2. Kick-ins.
No problem with this. It won't be much of an advantage when a player is legally standing within 2 metres of the "taker" and they only have 5 seconds to get the ball in play. Throwing the ball in seems just an arbitrary use of the arms and hands. Why shouldn't players use their feet? Perhaps allow either, kick or throw.
3. Set amount of time.
Too grid-iron, and I can only think someone has done the maths and realised those poor footballers won't have to run for as much time despite what they are trying to tell us.
4. Sin bins.
Why not? At the moment Managers seem happy to ignore or perhaps? condone giving grief to the officials. When goals are conceded during sin bin time they may start changing their minds.
5. Unlimited subs.
As stated above, this gives an unfair advantage to the richer clubs. Might as well let them have 13 players on the pitch. At least the bias would be obvious.

Anything relying on a referee's measurement of time e.g 5 seconds, is bound to fail. They can't even get that correct now.

3-1 to England!

 

[Swansman]

Stopping the clock is an appalling idea. Football has always been a continuous game with tactical breaks. All that the 60 minute idea does is to open the door to NFL style stoppages where a game that used to last about 95 minutes plus half time now takes three hours to complete because you can now sell advertising when the ball goes out of play and you've just enabled time outs and drinks breaks by default.

It's the stupidest idea of the lot and also the most money oriented so I expect it to be the one that comes in.

In the typical NFL game the ball is in play for 11 minutes because of "tactical breaks" eating pretty much all the game time. If football takes a cynical u-turn in the sports science age and we'll have two Stoke City facing eachother in all games, there would be 40 minutes of effective game time and while watching one Stoke wannabe beat another Stoke wannabe with 1-0 while wasting the rest of the game taking 45 seconds per throw-in would perhaps not matter to those more interested in scoreboards than football, I definitely wouldnt like it. But its a real possibility that it will be trend some day.

Effective game time doesnt automatically lead to time outs and drink breaks. Thats another set of rules. If done properly, the only effects from effective game time is that you get to watch more football and that there is no reason to try to waste time.

 

[Braggfan]

Not sure scoring the winning goal with 43 seconds left on the injury time is that much different from scoring a goal with 43 seconds left until the final whistle but maybe I'm just more into exciting last minute finishes than I am into match clocks.

I think this might be the fundamental diffrence between people in favour and those who aren't.

I understand why people don't think there's a difference between the situations, but. A match clock makes it more clinical in my opinion. The not knowing exactly how long is left adds to the excitement and drama.

As mentioned, the 1999 Champions League final was dramatic because time had expired. You woun't get that with a match clock, although you will obviously get the count down.

In fact another good example is the '66 world cup final. "Some people are on the pitch, they think its all over", wouldn't have the same ring as "Some people are on the pitch, they're waiting for the match clock to run down."

 

[Berty23]

Self pass is a no brainer. I coach hockey and it revolutionised the game. It makes it so quick. It stops arguing with officials too because if someone argues then the fouled player is gone. It seems bizarre that when a team gets a free kick they are effectively a man down ie you don’t need to mark the person taking the free kick because they can’t take it to themselves. Anyone who gets in the way of self pass should go to the sin bin for 5 or ten mins. It soon stops it.