Football's law-makers proposed changes

[Guest]

World football’s rule-makers are to consider a proposal to reduce each half of a game to 30 minutes in a bid to prevent time-wasting.

The International Football Association Board (Ifab) has outlined a raft of radical proposed changes to the rules of the game in a new strategy document titled Play Fair! Adopting two halves of 30 minutes with the clock stopped when the ball goes out of play is one of dozens of ideas put forward by Ifab in an attempt to make football more attractive.

Ifab says the Fair Play! document has three aims – to improve player behaviour and increase respect, to increase playing time and to increase fairness and attractiveness. “Many people are very frustrated that a typical 90-minute match has fewer than 60 minutes of effective (actual) playing time (EPT) i.e. when the ball is in play,” Ifab said in the document. “The strategy proposes measures to reduce time-wasting and ‘speed up’ the game.”

Ifab said some of the proposals could be implemented immediately and require no law changes, while some are “ready for testing/experiments” and some are “for discussion”.

Among the ideas up for discussion is that of a player being allowed to pass to themselves at a free-kick, corner and goalkick, a stadium clock which stops and starts along with the referee’s watch, and allowing a goalkick to be taken even if the ball is moving.

Other ideas up “for discussion” include referees blowing for half-time or full-time only when the ball goes out of play, and a penalty kick being either scored or missed/saved, with players not allowed to follow up to score, in order to stop encroachment into the penalty area.

Plans which need no law changes mostly apply to Ifab’s bid to combat time-wasting. The document says match officials should be stricter on the rule which allows goalkeepers to hold the ball for six seconds.

Ifab suggests match officials should be stricter on time-keeping, stopping their watch from a penalty being awarded to the spot-kick being taken, from a goal being scored until the match resumes from the kick-off, and from the signal of a substitution to play restarting.

The proposals already being tested include the idea of only allowing captains to speak to referees to prevent match officials being mobbed. This is being trialled at the Confederations Cup in Russia, which started on Saturday.

Another proposal already being tested is a change to the order of penalty kicks in shootouts, known as ABBA. Instead of teams taking alternate penalties, the new system involves team A taking the first kick, then team B taking two, then team A taking two.

“The ‘first’ kick in kicks from the penalty mark has a built-in advantage primarily because there is greater mental pressure on the second kicker (in each round) who often faces instant elimination if they miss their kick (especially once the first four kicks for each team have been completed),” the document says.

Ifab is made up of world football’s governing body, Fifa, and the four British home football associations and is responsible for making the final decision on law changes. The Play Fair! document will be discussed at various meetings before decisions are taken on whether to develop ideas further or discard them.

[stevieb]

Next thing we will have four quarters to allow for more TV advertising ,  cheer leaders , and change the name to soccer  , games to go on for hours , if they want to make a change put more into grass roots Football , make available more 3g pitches , improve the lower levels be it pitches changing rooms ect , reduce match ticket prices at the top , put a cap on transfer fees , wages , and make the so called fair play  for clubs  to operate in their means . But then again pigs will fly .

[Dave Deacon]

I often wonder why they don't follow rugby and allow the Physio on to treat players while the game keeps going?

That way could well see players not stay down so long! 

[ECPL]

I have thought about this for some time.  The only problem is who is going to be the time keeper.   The game loses at least 15 minutes per half as the ball goes out of play, a delay on taking free kicks, corners, injuries substitutions etc.  Good idea for the top level by cant see it working at our level. 

[Jacob-Englefield]

On 6/19/2017 at 13:21, Willow Tree said:

World football’s rule-makers are to consider a proposal to reduce each half of a game to 30 minutes in a bid to prevent time-wasting.

The International Football Association Board (Ifab) has outlined a raft of radical proposed changes to the rules of the game in a new strategy document titled Play Fair! Adopting two halves of 30 minutes with the clock stopped when the ball goes out of play is one of dozens of ideas put forward by Ifab in an attempt to make football more attractive.

Ifab says the Fair Play! document has three aims – to improve player behaviour and increase respect, to increase playing time and to increase fairness and attractiveness. “Many people are very frustrated that a typical 90-minute match has fewer than 60 minutes of effective (actual) playing time (EPT) i.e. when the ball is in play,” Ifab said in the document. “The strategy proposes measures to reduce time-wasting and ‘speed up’ the game.”

Ifab said some of the proposals could be implemented immediately and require no law changes, while some are “ready for testing/experiments” and some are “for discussion”.

Among the ideas up for discussion is that of a player being allowed to pass to themselves at a free-kick, corner and goalkick, a stadium clock which stops and starts along with the referee’s watch, and allowing a goalkick to be taken even if the ball is moving.

Other ideas up “for discussion” include referees blowing for half-time or full-time only when the ball goes out of play, and a penalty kick being either scored or missed/saved, with players not allowed to follow up to score, in order to stop encroachment into the penalty area.

Plans which need no law changes mostly apply to Ifab’s bid to combat time-wasting. The document says match officials should be stricter on the rule which allows goalkeepers to hold the ball for six seconds.

Ifab suggests match officials should be stricter on time-keeping, stopping their watch from a penalty being awarded to the spot-kick being taken, from a goal being scored until the match resumes from the kick-off, and from the signal of a substitution to play restarting.

The proposals already being tested include the idea of only allowing captains to speak to referees to prevent match officials being mobbed. This is being trialled at the Confederations Cup in Russia, which started on Saturday.

Another proposal already being tested is a change to the order of penalty kicks in shootouts, known as ABBA. Instead of teams taking alternate penalties, the new system involves team A taking the first kick, then team B taking two, then team A taking two.

“The ‘first’ kick in kicks from the penalty mark has a built-in advantage primarily because there is greater mental pressure on the second kicker (in each round) who often faces instant elimination if they miss their kick (especially once the first four kicks for each team have been completed),” the document says.

Ifab is made up of world football’s governing body, Fifa, and the four British home football associations and is responsible for making the final decision on law changes. The Play Fair! document will be discussed at various meetings before decisions are taken on whether to develop ideas further or discard them.

IFAB's new proposal regarding cutting the length of a football game is just ridiculous. Can't believe it's something they are even considering to be honest. That would ruin the game. And I'm sure it would turn people away. Is that really what they want?

I'm unsure about the new law allowing players to pass to themselves at set pieces. Surely that would just take some of the fun out of football? As for a goal kick allowed to be taken whilst the ball is moving, I don't have a problem with it. This 'moving ball' thing is a load of rubbish. Needlessly stopping the game from potentially being fast paced and more entertaining.

I definitely think match officials need to be stricter on time wasting. They need to either hand out punishments to the player(s) involved, add the appropriate time on, or both. Too many times I've watched games and the correct amount of time hasn't been added on. Sometimes it's less than what it should be. In some cases, I've seen far too much time added on. Time keeping is occasionally slack at the top end of the game.

Not a fan of the change to penalty shootouts. This new system that could come in place isn't needed. The current system works, so why change it?

Definitely agree with it being that only captains should speak to the referees. It would stop the crowding of a referee, relieve a little pressure off those in the middle and make their decisions a little easier. The way we've let the game get in terms of players crowding the referee is disgraceful. It needs to be stopped.

[gingerninja]

I really don't see the problem with using a stopping clock to reduce the game time down. We very rarely get a game when the balls in play for 60 minutes as it is due to time wasting, this would get rid of it, plus get rid of the stupidly annoyed subs in the last 5 minutes that take ages as they sub the play off from the far side of the pitch who strolls over to the dugout to be subbed off. However, possibly reduce it down to 40 minutes each half like rugby? Not a fan of self dribble from set pieces, could lead to all sorts of problems. The ball going out of play to end a game wouldn't work, as the ball goes out of play far too often, unlike rugby where you can get a sustained amount of time without the ball going dead. One thing I'd love to see is sin bins being brought in, instead of the 'take one for the team' challenges that annoy fans. The spectrum for a booking is too far and wide, and bringing a different card, I.e a blue card, to signal 10 minutes in the bin would really work for cynical fouls that don't warrant a sending off

[TheolderIgetthebetterIwas]

Yup ...sin bins ...good idea.

[Dave Bartlam]

We will soon see if we have been selected to trial the Temporary Dismissals here in Cornwall. I hope we are personally because I believe it will be a useful tool.

There's a few things that I Think could be done differently; for example, a blue card isn't used to indicate a temporary dismissal, a yellow card is. That can lead to confusion as it will mean a player can be awarded three yellow cards before being sent off.

As soon as an announcement is made regarding whether we have been selected or not, I'll put some more information on here as to how it will work.

Cornwall FA will of course create a training system for those involved across the county in due course (if selected), I would advise people to attend this session to learn about the system as there are certain elements which can be a misunderstood/confusing.

[Jacob-Englefield]

On ‎26‎/‎06‎/‎2017 at 23:21, gingerninja said:

I really don't see the problem with using a stopping clock to reduce the game time down. We very rarely get a game when the balls in play for 60 minutes as it is due to time wasting, this would get rid of it, plus get rid of the stupidly annoyed subs in the last 5 minutes that take ages as they sub the play off from the far side of the pitch who strolls over to the dugout to be subbed off. However, possibly reduce it down to 40 minutes each half like rugby? Not a fan of self dribble from set pieces, could lead to all sorts of problems. The ball going out of play to end a game wouldn't work, as the ball goes out of play far too often, unlike rugby where you can get a sustained amount of time without the ball going dead. One thing I'd love to see is sin bins being brought in, instead of the 'take one for the team' challenges that annoy fans. The spectrum for a booking is too far and wide, and bringing a different card, I.e a blue card, to signal 10 minutes in the bin would really work for cynical fouls that don't warrant a sending off

I wouldn't mind as much if the time was reduced to 40 minutes each way. However, 30 minutes is just ridiculous. It would make the game boring. I agree when you say the pointless substitutions in the last 5 minutes are boring. For me they are a complete waste of time, and needless. Although to be honest I don't think anything can be done to stop it. Teams are free to make changes as and when they are needed and through choice.

These 'take one for the team' challenges are so frustrating. If you gave them (offending player) an automatic red card then you'd think that would stop it. However, that'll never happen. And to be fair you'd be giving out red cards left, right and centre. So much so there wouldn't be any players left on the pitch.

8 hours ago, B_D said:

We will soon see if we have been selected to trial the Temporary Dismissals here in Cornwall. I hope we are personally because I believe it will be a useful tool.

There's a few things that I Think could be done differently; for example, a blue card isn't used to indicate a temporary dismissal, a yellow card is. That can lead to confusion as it will mean a player can be awarded three yellow cards before being sent off.

As soon as an announcement is made regarding whether we have been selected or not, I'll put some more information on here as to how it will work.

Cornwall FA will of course create a training system for those involved across the county in due course (if selected), I would advise people to attend this session to learn about the system as there are certain elements which can be a misunderstood/confusing.

Dave, I think that blue cards should be used for these temporary dismissals. It could become far too confusing if a player needed 3 yellow cards to eventually be sent off. A blue card would be much easier to understand.

[Dave Deacon]

13 hours ago, B_D said:

We will soon see if we have been selected to trial the Temporary Dismissals here in Cornwall. I hope we are personally because I believe it will be a useful tool.

It's only being introduced for dissent isn't it? 

[Dave Bartlam]

Yeah Dave. Well, the IFAB have introduced two new additions to the law book; Temporary Dismissals for all cautionable offences, or for selected offences. The FA however have taken the scheme on to trial it for dissent only.

Depending on how the trial goes across the country this season, it'll be interesting to see whether they open it up for all offences or/and take the scheme higher up the ladder.

 

@Jacob-Englefield I agree also. A blue card would be much more appropriate in my opinion. The FA's will of course gather opinions and ideas as the trial progresses. I've got quite a lot of information on it. I personally think it has the potential to be a success. There are a few areas which concern me and I feel could be done differently, all of which I will push up through the appropriate channels when required. I am sure that once the training and briefing to the football community has been carried out, many will have the same opinions as i do. I think it will work  

[Dave Deacon]

I wonder how easy it would be for the CCFA to reveal how many of the yellow cards produced last season were for dissent?

[Dave Bartlam]

Okay, I'll throw a few stats down for you now that I've dragged my arse out of bed. Just be aware that should we be successful in our application to trial TD's, there will of course be training for all clubs, referees etc. I'm part of that training group with Cornwall FA so I will pass on what I know and learn when I can. The best way to understand it though is to attend one of the training sessions.

Don't get too worked up on it until we have been confirmed by the FA. At this moment in time, we have not been selected to partake in the trial.

The facts (which are subject to change):

• This scheme is for dissent only.
• 132 Leagues across the country have volunteered to trial the scheme - around a quarter of those will be selected.
• There were 69,000 cautions for dissent in the season ending 2015/2016. That is 24% of all cautions.
• The scheme is intended to deal with misconduct on the day, so there will be no administration fee to the clubs if a player is temporarily dismissed.
• The length of the TD will be ten minutes in a 90 minute game. 8 minutes in games which last under 90 minutes.
• Only players can be dismissed temporarily - substitutes would be cautioned.
• If a TD player commits another cautionable offence or receives a red card during his period on the sidelines, the player can take no further part in the game and can not be substituted.
• A temporarily dismissed player can not be substituted until the end of the temporarydismissal period (but not if the team has used all its permitted substitutes).
• If a temporailry dismissal period has not been completed at the end of the first half (or the end of the second half when extra time is to be played) the remaining part of the temporary dismissal period is served from the start of the second half (start of extra time)
• A player who is still serving a temporary dismissal at the end of the match is permitted to take part in Kicks from the Penalty Mark (penalties)
• A player who receives a second temporary dismissal in the same match will serve the temporary dismissal and then takes no further part in the match. The player may be replaced by a substitute at the end of the second temporary dismissal period if the player’s team has not used its maximum number of substitutes

 

There's a few bits in there. I'm happy to answer any other questions if you have them. Again, we have not yet been selected down here in Cornwall so I am giving this information to you based on the national system which is being adopted by the FA. All of this information is freely available on the IFAB's website.
 

 

 

[Dave Deacon]

Will the sin binned players have a designated area to wait in?

[Dave Bartlam]

No Dave. They are free to roam around. Straight away that will trigger thoughts in your mind about possible conduct on the sidelines... Bare in mind that if a player commits another offence whilst being TD'd, he plays no further part in the game and can-not be substituted.

[Tom Blewett]

What happened to a good old fashion game of football. Just as well take the football away and everyone run around with a handbag as that's how soft football is getting with all these rule proposals.

[Jacob-Englefield]

15 hours ago, B_D said:

 

@Jacob-Englefield I agree also. A blue card would be much more appropriate in my opinion. The FA's will of course gather opinions and ideas as the trial progresses. I've got quite a lot of information on it. I personally think it has the potential to be a success. There are a few areas which concern me and I feel could be done differently, all of which I will push up through the appropriate channels when required. I am sure that once the training and briefing to the football community has been carried out, many will have the same opinions as i do. I think it will work  

A blue card wouldn't be anywhere near as confusing. It definitely has the potential to be a success. For me I think it'll go one of two ways. Either the referees will needlessly hand out far too many cards, or they won't enforce this new trial and let players get away with it. It happens far too much at the moment and not much seems to be done about it. So I do think the referees need to be stricter with it, just as long as they don't go too far with it.

[stevieb]

On 2017-6-27 at 23:23, TheolderIgetthebetterIwas said:

Yup ...sin bins ...good idea.

In your case Older more like the dog house 

[TheolderIgetthebetterIwas]

3 hours ago, stevieb said:

In your case Older more like the dog house 

LOL - all the time buddy