The self-pass rule

[Easy 10]

Amongst several ideas mooted by David Elleray, I see the hockey self-pass rule has been floated to incorporate into football.

In essence, it simply means that when a free kick is awarded, a player doesn’t have to pass the ball to someone, or shoot. He can simply start dribbling with the ball, immediately if he likes. Or he can still wait for the 10 yards and then either pass/shoot as before, or start dribbling with it. But if an opponent is within 10 yards of the ball and deliberately tackles the self-pass, he gets carded. I’m struggling to see the downside to this.

1. It keeps the game flowing. No more arguing the toss with the ref over the free kick, because the defence will immediately have to retreat in preparation of the fouled played running at them.

2. It gives a distinct advantage to the fouled side, enabling a more immediate attacking threat, and diminishing the benefit of those cynical deliberate fouls that just allow everyone to get back and get organised.

3. It sounds like fun.

The only possible complication is the 10 yard rule where you’re not allowed to tackle someone who’s decided to dribble the ball. That’s almost a free run on goal if the foul happened on the edge of the box. But maybe that’s just the price you pay ? Or maybe it should just be 5 yards before you're allowed to tackle. I’d love to see this trialled in the noddy leagues or in the Caramel Cup (or whatever its called this season). I think it could be ACE.

Thoughts ?

 

[hans kraay fan club]

But if an opponent is within 10 yards of the ball and deliberately tackles the self-pass, he gets carded.1.


The only possible complication is the 10 yard rule where you’re not allowed to tackle someone who’s decided to dribble the ball. That’s almost a free run on goal if the foul happened on the edge of the box. But maybe that’s just the price you pay ? Or maybe it should just be 5 yards before you're allowed to tackle.

Thoughts ?

My thoughts are that you've probably misunderstood that 10 yard rule.

It wouldn't be that tackling within 10 yards of the offence was prohibited. It would be that a player stood within 10 yards when the kick is taken, is prohibited from tackling.

i.e. a player stood 11 yards away when the taker taps it to himself would be free to fly in and tackle him a couple of yards from where it was taken, if he's quick enough.

 

[Captain Sensible]

Next, throw in to self? Nah it's not for me. You can just put another player to knock it an inch to the dribbler anyway as the rules currently are. What's the point in messing about with when you can and can't tackle.

 

[MattBackHome]

I like the concept, particularly in the case of 'tactical' fouling to protect a lead later in matches. For example:

Late in the game the team in a losing position breaks and their attacker is brought down. Current rules dictate that the offending player can stand over the ball while the rest of his team regroup. In this new world the attacker can simply fall on the ball, stand back up and start running again and the defender can't do SHIT. I like this idea.

 

[Mr Bridger]

Already been played for years at under 7's, none of the little blighters pass

 

[essbee1]

Something has to change. I'm fed up with the time I spend waiting and waiting for ref to sort out........delaying and basic cheating.

 

[Easy 10]

My thoughts are that you've probably misunderstood that 10 yard rule.

It wouldn't be that tackling within 10 yards of the offence was prohibited. It would be that a player stood within 10 yards when the kick is taken, is prohibited from tackling.

i.e. a player stood 11 yards away when the taker taps it to himself would be free to fly in and tackle him a couple of yards from where it was taken, if he's quick enough.

Yup, you're right.

In which case, I like it even more. Its the players choice if he decides to run with the ball rather than wait and take a free kick. You just need to enforce a law to clamp down on defenders leaping in from point blank, or encroaching, to stop it being taken quickly

 

[mejonaNO12 aka riskit]

Any of the ideas compared to VAR look BRILLIANT.

 

[hans kraay fan club]

I like the concept, particularly in the case of 'tactical' fouling to protect a lead later in matches. For example:

Late in the game the team in a losing position breaks and their attacker is brought down. Current rules dictate that the offending player can stand over the ball while the rest of his team regroup. In this new world the attacker can simply fall on the ball, stand back up and start running again and the defender can't do SHIT. I like this idea.

The rule does nothing to change that though? Under the current rules that player preventing the kick being taken, would be yellow carded - which is exactly what the proposed rule suggests for a tackle.

 

[MattBackHome]

The rule does nothing to change that though? Under the current rules that player preventing the kick being taken, would be yellow carded - which is exactly what the proposed rule suggests for a tackle.

If the offending player is standing over the ball, and the fouled player starts dribblling the ball away from him, and he can't touch him?

I'll freely admit I haven't looked at the rules, and am relying on whats in the OP.

 

[clarkey]

Next, throw in to self? Nah it's not for me. You can just put another player to knock it an inch to the dribbler anyway as the rules currently are. What's the point in messing about with when you can and can't tackle.

Not really - as the rules currently are, you usually have to wait for the ref's whistle. You wouldn't have to do this anymore, you can just go as soon as the foul is called.

Interesting theoretical one - a cynical foul is made, certain yellow card. But the attacker wants to dribble straight away - does he have to wait for the yellow card to be dished out, or can the ref play an advantage until the next break in play?

 

[hans kraay fan club]

If the offending player is standing over the ball, and the fouled player starts dribblling the ball away from him, and he can't touch him?

Well, he still CAN, can't he? But he'll get booked.

Just as a player currently preventing a free kick from being taken, could (should) get booked.

 

[Easy 10]

The rule does nothing to change that though? Under the current rules that player preventing the kick being taken, would be yellow carded - which is exactly what the proposed rule suggests for a tackle.

But if that tool of a player blocks a dribble or pass, the attacking team can still carry on. They don't have to wait for the ref to haul everything back and deal with it.

Player gets fouled, whistle goes. Player gets up, self-passes and gets blocked. Whistle goes (card pending). Gets up, self-passes again and on you go. If there's some dickhead continuously blocking, then when the player decides NOT to self-pass, the game stops, and the ref dishes the cards. A red if its the same one who blocks twice.

Works for me.

 

[MattBackHome]

Well, he still CAN, can't he? But he'll get booked.

Just as a player currently preventing a free kick from being taken, could (should) get booked.

Ah got ya. I suppose I'd like to see it in action first to get my head around it.

Maybe they could trial it in the lower leagues and only after it's been tested on guinea pig minnows like Leeds, Villa, Sunderland, Boro, Norwich et al then we could give it a bash.

 

[Captain Sensible]

My thoughts are that you've probably misunderstood that 10 yard rule.

It wouldn't be that tackling within 10 yards of the offence was prohibited. It would be that a player stood within 10 yards when the kick is taken, is prohibited from tackling.

i.e. a player stood 11 yards away when the taker taps it to himself would be free to fly in and tackle him a couple of yards from where it was taken, if he's quick enough.

Can you imagine it, yellow card given, 'but I was 11 yards away not 10'. There would be no time for spray as the kick can be taken immediately. It's all a bit of an uneccessary rule change.

 

[hans kraay fan club]

But if that tool of a player blocks a dribble or pass, the attacking team can still carry on. They don't have to wait for the ref to haul everything back and deal with it.

Player gets fouled, whistle goes. Player gets up, self-passes and gets blocked. Whistle goes (card pending). Gets up, self-passes again and on you go. If there's some dickhead continuously blocking, then when the player decides NOT to self-pass, the game stops, and the ref dishes the cards. A red if its the same one who blocks twice.

Works for me.

Wouldn't happen like that though, unless the offending player was massively THICK as well as cynical. If you are going to take a tactical yellow to prevent a quick break, by blocking the self pass, you'd make damn sure you 'blocked it' 30 yards away.

 

[hans kraay fan club]

Can you imagine it, yellow card given, 'but I was 11 yards away not 10'. There would be no time for spray as the kick can be taken immediately. It's all a bit of an uneccessary rule change.

Indeed. Would be a shambles.

 

[Easy 10]

Wouldn't happen like that though, unless the offending player was massively THICK as well as cynical. If you are going to take a tactical yellow to prevent a quick break, by blocking the self pass, you'd make damn sure you 'blocked it' 30 yards away.

Maybe. But its still an OPPORTUNITY for the fouled side to make hay.

At the moment, there's no downside to the team that cheats (aside from at worst a yellow). They stop the attack, and get the chance to filter back and regroup in preparation for a free kick. And waste a LOAD of time in the process.

Sometimes a self-pass won't work out, that's just the nature of it. Its a risk the attacking team may take in order to seek an advantage. Its not always going to come off, but its another option that's there if the situation looks advantageous. And it eliminates at a stroke players getting in the refs face at the award of a free kick, because their FIRST thought has to be "I need to get back in case he runs at us".

Works in hockey. Why not football ? The sports are not all that far removed from each other.

 

[Pavilionaire]

1. I agree that, in principal, this "play to self" proposal would be beneficial to the game. The 'tap and go' rule in rugby union is similar and gives the attacking team another option whilst keeping the defence on their toes.

2. One of the things hampering the development of the game is trialling the changes. I've long been an advocate of FIFA paying an annual fee to a national league in exchange for that league trialling changes to the game, i.e someone like the League of Wales could get £10million per annum from FIFA to test these changes over the course of a season.

Everyone's a winner - the money would go straight to the clubs with strings attached so both players and fans could benefit, it would create some global interest in that League because of the trials, FIFA would get proper, decent data over the full length of the season so all weathers and there would be a degree of certainty as to the consequences of changes brought in bigger leagues awash with cash.

 

[Berty23]

I used to play and now coach hockey. The self pass rule is ace. Some doubted it would work for the points raised above but it does.

Football could mess around with the rules once within a certain distance of goal. For example in hockey once in the 23 no one from either side can be within five yards. Plus the ball cant be hit into the D unless someone other than the taker has touched the ball or it has travelled 5 yards. It would not be hard to come up with a sensible rule in football to stop clear run on goal.

Should definitely be tried I reckon.